User talk:Túrelio/Archive6

{{Talkarchive}}

Talkpage archive from 2011

Seasons Greetings

Happy News Year to you and all of you.

My first question to start with in 2011: Is the file from Rafel Schächter available on commons ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 10:39, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. RE: The Rafel Schächter photo. The current image on :en is per se not usable for Commons as it is tagged as fair-use. As the same photography is abundant on the web, even in a color/sepia version, a thorough study/evaluation of its authorship status and consequently its copyright status may result in finding it being PD already. However, this would require quite some investigative work. You are invited ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 14:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Weingarten Wappen

Hallo,

ich komme nicht so ganz zurecht mit der Bedienung von wikimedia commons. Die Datei http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wappen_weingarten_baden.jpg ist mit dem silbernen Grund die richtige, welche Änderungen muss ich noch machen, damit das Wappen erhalten bleibt?

Danke Wengerder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wengerder (talk • contribs) 01:52, 8. Jan. 2011 (UTC)

Wow, das bezieht sich auf meinen Hinweis vom 23. September 2010. Wenn nicht ein unbekannter die Lizenzvorlage ersetzt hätte[1], wäre die Datei längst weg gewesen, da fair-use auf Commons ein no-go ist. Momentan ist an der Datei nichts mehr zu tun. Du solltest aber versuchen, einen Beleg/Evidenz dafür zu bringen, dass es sich bei diesem Wappen tatsächlich um ein amtliches Werk handelt und somit die aktuelle Lizenz (PD-COA-Germany) gerechtfertigt ist. Im Zweifelsfall per Email-Nachfrage beim Webmaster der Website, von wo du es entnommen hast. Gruß. --Túrelio (talk) 08:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Do NOT delete categories without redirecting please...

... e.g. this Category:Universität Karlsruhe is still being used in w:Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. Then users would immediately be redirected and have a better experience. Thanks, ----Erkan Yilmaz 14:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

fixed now at WP: [2], ----Erkan Yilmaz 14:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. The speedy-request said "This Category was replaced with Category:Karlsruhe Institute of Technology." which obviously hadn't been done completely. Thanks for fixing it. --Túrelio (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of File:GanymedesSchenkerDerGoden-citaat.jpg

I would ask you to reconsider deleting this image. The file is a quotation from an image. According to Dutch law quotations of images may be used (or even a whole image if applicable). The quotation does not display the whole image. It is applicable to the topic, since Johan Dijkstra was the author, and the article is his biography. Furthermore it applies to the book 'Ganymedes' which is mentioned in the text. I now see I should have filled in the description page of the image sooner. Sorry. How do I go about this? Deerntje (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Deerntje,

I am not accustomed with specialties of Dutch copyright law. I can undelete the image and then open a regular deletion request, which allows for a full discussion with expert input, and may well result in a "keep" decision. --Túrelio (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Dutch copyright here is the same as in other countries: The artist died 1978, the work is not free untill 2049, of course you can use a part of the work in an educational context under quotation rights, you can however not use it in Wikimedia Commons since the above described rational of en:Right_to_quote is similar to the concept of fair use in US law and fair use isnt allowed here. This is a free content project with content available for commercial reuse, offering media for commercial reuse is not what the right to quote includes. --Martin H. (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion

Hallo

You deleted File:Steenbergenluchtfoto.jpg. But didn't delete File:Steenbergen2.jpg which is an exact copy of this file (only without the black border). Also this image was part of a bigger nomination of around 75 images here. Maybe you can look into that as well.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

AW: File:Paris 2010Feb 218.jpg

Hallo, was ist genau das Problem? Geht's um FoP? Wieso gibt es dann so viele andere Bilder über den Eiffel Tower? Bin etwas verwirrt. Wenn es sein muss, dann weg damit, aber nach dem ich so viele Bilder übers Objekt gesehen habe, habe ich mich mit den Einzelheiten vom FoP in Frankreich nicht beschäftigt. Viele Grüsse, Poco a poco (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Poco a poco, überraschend dass du deutsch sprichst. Das Problem ist der nachts erleuchtete Eiffelturm. Das Urheberrecht daran gehört der Firma, die die Beleuchtung entwickelt hat, wie franz. Gerichte bestätigt haben. Eine franz. Idiotie, die wir aber nicht ändern können, und in Frankreich gibt es kein brauchbares FoP. Du kannst versuchen, das allerbeste deiner Eiffelturm-bei-Nacht-Fotos lokal auf :de hochzuladen. Aber schau vorher, ob es wirklich so gut ist wie die dort ggf. vorhandenen. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Überrascht? Wir sind doch Europäer :) Nun im Ernst, bin Spanier, aber lebe in M. Bezüglich dem von dir beschriebenen Problem, habe ich nur ein Wort dafür: Wahnsinn. Ich habe ein paar hochgeladen, einfach löschen. Vive la France! :) Poco a poco (talk) 22:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the naming, sorry, you are right. I am usually more careful with these aspects, but just forgot to divide the Paris pics per subject. Will not occur again. Regards, Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Prima. Hasta luego. --Túrelio (talk) 22:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyright image exception...

Hi, User Pages Cgomez there were some recent image deletions of 2 images which you stated there were copyright 2011, now regarding the images used, there was a note in the original site witch states the following "*The above image is available as content for fan pages, press kit or any respectable promotional purpose." here, request images to be undeleted if available thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgomez007 (talk • contribs) 9. Januar 2011, 00:43 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Cgomez007, I had read that before I deleted the images. The above mentioned "permission" is clearly not enough for Commons. We require uploads to be free for any purpose, including commercial use. --Túrelio (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Regarding the "permission" that you stated it does specify any promotional (informational witch applies) purpose, under a fair use rationale, in "Step 3. Supply a description and a "fair use" rationale." it does give the possibility to upload this type of content, I may have omitted some of that information. Now you did state that Commons required free images, including for commercial use. In File copyright tags/Non-free, does say it can be used provided a "A well-written use rationale" {{Non-free use rationale}} In the website it does say copyright 2011 but does give the Fair use of the images source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgomez007 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 9. Jan. 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cgomez007, oh, the old problem, :en-wikipedia does allow fair-use content, but Commons does not. Therefore the above linked "Non-free use rationale" template produces a speedy-deletion message. So, fair-use is a no-go on Commons. But, if you want to use these images only on :en, you may try to upload them locally on :en under a fair-use rationale. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks... for the help Túrelio,,, i'll figure that in a few days. Thanks again --Cgomez007 (talk) 08:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

File:FIFA World Cup 2010 Uruguay Netherlands.jpg

Could you please explain why you have deleted this file and not File:FIFA World Cup 2010 Netherlands Uruguay.jpg, because the match was officially URU-NED and not NED-URU. I have explained this on the image page. If you don't want to undelete, at least complete the information, as File:FIFA World Cup 2010 Uruguay Netherlands.jpg had a way more detailed description and more precise as well (the photo could not be taken at 1 July 2010, 00:00). Thanks — NickK (talk) 01:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

You are right. I've undeleted it. However, as the CommonsDelinker is sleeping since >24 hours, the substitution may take some time. --Túrelio (talk) 08:21, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Robert A Foster

Hi, Ref the Photo of Robert A Foster. Robert & Isabel Foster hold full copy rights to this photo as when it was taken the right where bought to all photo taken at the time. Please can you remove the tag from it. Thank you Icequeen05 (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

The problem is not whether Robert & Isabel Foster hold the full rights, the unanswered question is whether they allowed you to upload it under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Well yes because this photo was taken as part of a promotional photos shoot for them to be use to promote them and Amie who knew that. These photo are on Spotlight, IMBD, www.robertandisabel.com and many other websites. We always give Amie credit for taking the photo's which is the correct way of doing it even when you own the copyrights.Icequeen05 (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

This "smells" clearly as fair-use, which is o.k. on :en-Wikipedia, but definitively not on Commons. In general, promotional photos are not free in the meaning of free licenses, including making derivatives and commercial use. And that an image is also used somewhere else has little significance for Commons. Finally, you have to provide a written permission by the photographer or, if the Foster parents have the full rights, by them to OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Trust me they cost a lot to have done and I am the parent, I have added code but not sure if i've done it correct and sent off form. Just don't want the photo removed? Icequeen05 (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

No, I don't want the photo have removed, why should I? But, as an admin, I have to take care that all images uploaded to Commons, are correctly licensed and don't result in problems for re-users. Our communication would have been easier if you had said in the beginning that you are the boys mother or father. Though, the permission would have been required anyway. And, yes, you have added the correct template, which will prevent deletion until our OTRS volunteers have checked the permission and then put an o.k.-ticket on the page. --Túrelio (talk) 19:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know that i've added the correct template, i'm still new to this.Icequeen05 (talk) 19:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hi! could include this request in User:CommonsDelinker/commands?

Thank you for your attention. --HélioVL ^(talk) 23:29, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this seems to have been done already. Or do you want the redirects removed? --Túrelio (talk) 06:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I prefer to remove the redirects. Are unnecessary now. --HélioVL ^(talk) 12:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Danke

Danke für diesen Hinweis, den Google mir zuverlässig geliefert hat. Ich habe mich mal registriert und die Dateibeschreibung klargestellt. Raymond 18:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Gern geschehn. Dein Bild war noch das "harmloseste". Wenn man die hiesige Situation kennt, braucht man sich nicht zu wundern, dass anderso ähnliche Probleme auftreten. --Túrelio (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleted paintings of Anna Staniszewska

The paintings of Anna Staniszewska you deleted are painted by my Mother, and she gave me rights to put her works into internet. Pictures of paintings are done by me own. I didn't know, how to show my rights to Wikimedia, and I don't know what to do with that.

Vallenty (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow, this was 2 years ago! Besides, I did not delete these files, I did only notify you about the impending deletion. They were be deleted by another admin. Anyway, in order to have them here on Commons, you need to sent a permission to OTRS, because the original artist, your mother, also holds the copyright of your photos. Assuming that you prefer polish language, copy the "Pozwolenie na zamieszczenie pliku na wolnej licencji" from Commons:Pozwolenia, enter the filenames of the images plus the name of the choosen license, and then ask your mother to sign and date it and to sent it to permissions-pl@wikimedia.org. Thereafter, you may notify me about the un-deletion of the images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Smileys

Re:Commons:Deletion requests/File:SmileyOriginal.jpg, you stated that "fair use is not allowed" in your deletion summary, but that wasn't image being used under fair use as the Smiley face logos cannot be copyrighted. They entered the public domain in the '60s and besides they do not have sufficient originality, e.g. see [3] - copyright and trademark are not the same. For what it's worth, User:Yann agreed with this when I asked him about the deletion (I thought he had deleted it initially). It's a pity to see the word of an editor with a probable COI taken at face value like that. Could you undelete the file, please? Fences and windows (talk) 20:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I deleted this file because it was so requested by the uploader Drinas himself, who - in addition - had added a fair-use equivalent tag (non-fee logo) to the description page. As he might feel bad to be attached to this file, why not upload it again from the source www.smileycompany.com? --Túrelio (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Undeleting

Hi! Re this, did you know that you can just view the deleted version from Special:Undelete/File:Luismesa10.jpg without actually undeleting the file? :) Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 08:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, yes, thanks, I somehow forgot. --Túrelio (talk) 08:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Dear Túrelio,

I am currently "godfathering" the new user Ghislain118 (see his gallery).
When checking his uploads of Thymus species, I have revised and updated the category Thymus according to the Kew World Checklist.
Thank you for your appreciated help (delete of wrong categories).

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 17:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Dear Réginald, I was off Commons for 50 hours, therefore somebody else may have deleted the wrong cats already. Anyway, your "godfathering" ;-) is a very valuable work. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Uploading (regarding deleted tacodoritosfront.jpg)

Hi Túrelio.... I was attempting an upload of 2 images regarding the recent return of taco-flavored Doritos chips. The pictures I was attempting to upload would help clarify an edit of the Doritos article I was about to do, as it is a return of a popular flavor not available in the US for many years. Earlier in the article, there is mention of many consumers who liked the taco flavor and had wanted it to return. The back of the bag (that I would have uploaded just after the front picture) explains the "limited edition" nature of the bag, which uses a style not seen in US stores in many years. The back also shows a very small image of bag of Taco Doritos using the current style bag, and goes on to say that the Taco flavor is returning soon using the new/current packaging style. Anyway, I tried to emulate the uploading style used by the person who uploaded Nacho-Cheese-Doritos-Bag-Small.jpg, which appears in the infobox of the Doritos Wikipedia article. I may not have done it correctly. I was only trying to offer proof by photo of the return of Taco Doritos, the limited edition bag, and the instance of a Doritos logo which existed previously but is no longer used. As the image Nacho-Cheese-Doritos-Bag-Small.jpg was accepted, what can I do to get my pictures accepted (without being hurriedly deleted first) ? Thanx for your time, Túrelio. Awtribute (talk) 23:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Awtribute,

w:File:Nacho-Cheese-Doritos-Bag-Small.jpg was uploaded to :en (not to Commons!) under fair-use, likely as the logo is considered copyrighted. The problem is that fair-use, which is a specialty of US copyright law, is per policy allowed on :en-Wikipedia, but also per policy not allowed on Commons. Therefore, your upload had to be deleted. If you want to use your images only on :en, you should try to upload them locally on :en, claiming fair-use. --Túrelio (talk) 23:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Not free photos?

Hi, today I found this. I thought that this kind of stuffs were not allowed in Commons. Are they? Thanks. --Andrea (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Andrea, what made you assume "that this kind of stuffs were ..."? Independant of that, the cited image was uploaded in 2005 and may have slipped through our scrutiny, if there is really a problem. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean with "if there is really a problem". Does it means that is it valid to upload images GNU 1.2 and ask for contact with the author for "negotiate the terms for another licence"? Tell me yes, I start to change my photos licence now. --Andrea (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I checked and he has self - retired from Commons because of his problems of licences, but still his contributions remains, wich are a lot. --Andrea (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't look for that, because you didn't give me any hint in that direction and my main work is to detect copyvios, where the uploader even hasn't any right over the image. And my comment above referred to that kind of problems. As this case merits some discussion, I would recommend you to open a regular deletion request. I assume your "change my photos licence now" was meant ironically, as you cannot restrict the license once you have released an image. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. I didn´t know about your job. I though that as admin you could do it. Tell me how I open the request, please. Thanks. --Andrea (talk) 21:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC) PS: Now I know who ask about a CR file ;)

Anyone can (is authorized) to file a regular DR. It is done like that: you put {{delete|<here you write the reason for the deletion>}} into the description page and press enter; then a message windows appears up. You click on the line of text (content varies with language) directly below the part with the red background and then perform the first three steps (it's just 3 times copy and paste); see File:Charging bull.JPG as an example. --Túrelio (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but I´m affraid is not so simple. He used to be an admin an uploaded 2.500 files. I tagged one and add his contribution list, but I´m affraid that´s not enough. Also, one of his files was promotred to deletion earlier but was kept because the deadminship process, but when it finish I found no resolution about it. I made a mass request anyway, but I'm not sure it will be sucessfull. Chears. --Andrea (talk) 23:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Die IP

Hi!
Bist du dir sicher, dass es nach dem Log nur drei Tage sein sollen? Wenn du nichts dagegen hast, würde ich die Schule gerne deutlich länger vom Netz nehmen. Grüße, abf «Cabale!» 13:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Nix dagegen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank! Die Kinder dürften nu' erst 'mal nicht mehr nerven. ;) abf «Cabale!» 13:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

File:LubosMarek.JPG

--Túrelio (diskuse) 15:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC) You cannot simply copy images from a website. --Túrelio (diskuse) 15:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am an emploee of the university, the pictures of our Dean and vice-deans are our property (copyright and all...), I was delegated by the board of faculty to upload it to wiki commons under public domain and use it to create Wikipedia atricles about our faculty and its management http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fakulta_informatiky_a_statistiky_Vysok%C3%A9_%C5%A1koly_ekonomick%C3%A9. That is why I actually CAN "simply copy images from a website" ... it is the website I am a webmaster of ... If in doubt, please contact me on my work email: antonin.pavlicek@vse.cz If I was wrong and filled some of your entries incorrectly, I am sorry. Lets change it accordingly, however, do NOT DELETE the files. Let them be, they are ours and we totally agree to publish it under public domain.

A. P. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavlant (talk • contribs) 18. Januar 2011, 10:44 Uhr (UTC)

Hi A.P.,

if your university has the full rights (from the photographer) over all these images, then the responsible body/person should sent a written permission to OTRS. Go to Commons:Email templates (or your language version), take the "Declaration of consent for all enquiries" (or the equivalent), enter the filenames (or full URLs) of all images to be covered, and enter the name of the license and mail it all to the person who is authorized to issue such a permission. He/She should then date and sign it with his/her real name and mail it back to the email address shown on the page OTRS. After doing that, you should put on all the image pages {{OTRS pending}}. --Túrelio (talk) 09:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

In between somebody else has deleted the image. So, after you get the o.k. from your university for the permission, post the filenames on my talkpage. I will then restore them and tag them with OTRS-pending. --Túrelio (talk) 16:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl-hreben.jpg, File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl.jpg

Well, these files "survived" on wiki commons for almost five years without any notice, and you delete it in about five hours? I dont even get a chance to delare, that the "Non-profit" exclusion can be changed to general public domain? You know what? You can either change it yourself to the status whichever suits the wikipedia, or levave it deleted. However I am not uploadig it again. Your loss, if you delete it. --Tony (talk) 10:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

It was indeed strange that these 2 images survived that long despite clearly violating Commons policy. Now, the problem with changing the license is that only File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl-hreben.jpg was credited to "Antonín Pavlíček", but File:Mexico-Iztaccihuatl.jpg had been credited to "Jakub Hejtmánek" by you. If you are the author of the first one, I can un-delete it, so that you could change the license to whatever complies with our policy. However, the second one? --Túrelio (talk) 10:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

After undeleting the first image, I found that the author name had been changed[4] to "R. Espinoza", by an IP very similar to aother IP which later requested deletion[5]. I assume it was vandalism, but could you comment on that if you have an idea. --Túrelio (talk) 10:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

No, I dont know any Espinoza, it is nonsense ... the pictures were taken by ME and my friend Jakub Hejtmanek. Hard to say, which one of us held the camera which time, we travelled together and took the pictures on one camera, so dont ask me about precise "authorship", the only thing I know for sure, it WASNT some R. Espinoza.

To conclude ... thank you for helping, however I am quite busy at the moment for trying find out how to tackle wikipedia and its copyright policies ... so, I delegate on you all my rights to adapt any necessary changes to keep my pictures on-line ... however I am not in the position to do it myself. Best regards --146.102.64.134 14:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Anna Staniszewska pictures

Thanks for the answer, I will try to download it once more

Vallenty (talk) 08:39, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 19:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Delete redirect

Hi, Túrelio! Could you delete this redirect? I need to load an image with the same name.

--HélioVL ^(talk) 18:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Give Up

Hi - I did not get why you deleted (Journal des suppressions de page) ; 16:12 . . Túrelio (discuter | contributions) a supprimé « File:Give-Up-Munich.jpg » (Does not allow for commercial use and/or derivative works: Speedydelete). The image is explicitly for non-commercial use, the context described is everything but commercial. Please reinstate picture. al_ashton 2011 01 22 18:32

Ok, seems you are new here. Commons requires per its policy that all uploads have to be free for any kind of use, including commercial use. File:Give-Up-Munich.jpg is at its source[6] licensed as NC, i.e. restricted to non-commercial use, thereby it violates Commons' policy. It cannot be uploaded to Commons. If you convince the author to lift this restriction, then it could be uploaded. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(OTRS) K129 wreck.png

Please delete this NOW, as it was a {{speedy}} from the very first moment. Asav (talk) 03:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I deleted it four hours ago. Wknight94 ^talk 03:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I would still like to know on what grounds this was downgraded from Speedy to AfD, as I can't see any reason for it. Asav (talk) 04:34, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

See my comment at COM:AN. --Túrelio (talk) 08:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

User Acreana and Luna123

Thanks for deleting images uploaded by Acreana. Could you also check files uploaded by User:Luna123? They are already tagged with npd, but have photos copied from the same website. Ednei amaral (talk) 17:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 17:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

As you can see I am godfathering a new user (user:Ghislain118), who is uploading a wonderful portfolio of pictures of plants. As yet he has already uploaded some 1,800 of them. I the meantime I am also reviewing some of the categories in which those pictures are uploaded.
Thank you for deleting so promptly the mispelled pages or category I am asking for deletion. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 17:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome and again thanks for your valuable work with user:Ghislain118. By the way: I don't know how far or near from Aachen/Aken you are located, but next saturday evening we have "wikipedia meeting" in Aachen, see [7], in case you are interested. --Túrelio (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

maroilles

réalisée en 1982 par M. Leplus. --Chatsam (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Merci. The problem I see with this photography is that it may violate the copyright of "M. Leplus". It may depend on whether we have to consider it a work of art or not. --Túrelio (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Help!

Dear Túrelio,

I have a problem. User:Ghislain118 has put a new version of File:Glaucium flavum aurantiacum 1.jpg and File:Glaucium flavum aurantiacum 2.jpg. Doing so he has replaced pictures taken by User:Stan Shebs at the University of California Botanical Garden. Ghislain's pictures are of the "true" var. aurantiacum. That of Stan Shebs are clearly of the "common" var. flavum. I have tried to solve this issue for File:Glaucium flavum aurantiacum 2.jpg, but I am missing the rights to do it. Is there any possibility to revert Stan Shebs' picture and to save them in separate files, e.g, "Glaucium flavum 3.JPG" and "Glaucium flavum 4.JPG"? Or do we let it as it currently is?

Thank you for your appreciated help, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:19, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Réginald,

first tell Ghislain never to overwrite other users images.

As Stan Shebs' pictures were uploaded already in 2006, I would like to preserve them with their upload log, for forensic reasons (in case he needs to prove to a court the date when he published his images). The would require that Ghislain has to re-upload his overwriting-uploads. But to solve the filename problem, I could revert to Stan Shebs' original version and then rename them as you requested. Thereafter, Ghislain could re-upload his images under the ideal/preferred filename. However, for the above mentioned forensic reasons Ghislain should not use an 100% identical filename as the Shebs images have. Would that be O.k.? --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

It is OK so. I will tell Ghislain to re-upload these two pictures under another name. As you now he is is stil a "young" user. I will ask him to never overwrite uploads of other users, even when the uploads of the other user are clearly incorrectly identified. Thank you again for your appreciated help. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I've done the required steps until the renaming. However, as Stan Shebs was online already this year, would you mind to notify him about the taxonomic "change" of his images, just to avoid that he gets surprised or upset. --Túrelio (talk) 10:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Ähemm, should the new name for the Shebs images be File:Glaucium flavum x.JPG or File:Glaucium flavum flavum x.JPG or File:Glaucium flavum var flavum x.JPG ? --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of duplicates

Hello,

I am rather surprised to suddenly find File:Sunset in Dubai desert 17.jpg and File:Desert of Dubai 5.jpg deleted as duplicates, without any notification or warning at all. In fact I wouldn't have known had I not placed my uploads on my watchlist. There were a lot of photos that looked similar to each other that I uploaded in sequence - but they were not duplicates and there were subtle differences. There is the small possibility I made a mistake and uploaded one twice, but because of the nature of how I upload that is unlikely. Please restore them, at least temporarily so I can check them. CT Cooper · talk 10:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done. They had been tagged by another user. I performed the substitution and deletion, as they seemed to be rather "identical". --Túrelio (talk) 10:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for your quick response. They do look very similar, and I can understand why someone would tag them as a duplicate. However, they are not duplicates - there are differences between the photos, which are explained in my edit summary reason for removing the tags, and are significant from photography point of view. CT Cooper · talk 10:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

A little puzzled.

Hi. Is there something fishy with the upload history of this? Or is it just a matter of recycling a file name? Not being an admin, I can't figure it out. thanks. --Moros y Christianos 14:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your second guess (recycling a file name) was right. An image with that name had been originally uploaded by Dougjj. Some months later it was renamed (copied) to File:Blue Ground Dove female.jpg and thereafter deleted as duplicate of the copy. 16 months later an unrelated user used the same filename for his upload of an image of the same bird species. --Túrelio (talk) 15:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Moros y Christianos 16:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

RVed deletion request

Hi there Túrelio, I guess you meant it well but your RV of my request to delete File:Charles Stewart Parnell in 1885.jpg is not ok, because it genuinely does not open on my screen for some technical reason (the advise from the Desk on my Talk page did not help). I then uploaded a similar image with File:Charles Stewart Parnell, portrait 1885.jpg which opens fine (for me). Therefore please understand I do not want a blank image in my gallery. Kindly reinstate my request for speedy deletion for said reasons. Thank you for being understanding, and Greetings. Osioni (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I have put the now deleted original version through the jpg-optimizing function of IrfanView (a superb freeware) and uploaded it as other version to your new upload and thereafter reverted to "your" version. I did that in order 1) not to loose slightly larger image, and 2) that you could test whether the old display problem is still true for this "cleaned" version. --Túrelio (talk) 19:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Good work Túrelio, cleaned version works fine. I down-loaded it, and re-uploaded to have it re-appear in MY Gallery (it had moved to yours!). Copying all this to my Talk page. Thanks a million, Osioni (talk) 11:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Pleaae remove the deletion tag

and check the link again

http://postimage.org/image/1o3co01vo/

--Ranatalwar (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but you seem not to understand the problem. http://postimage.org/image/1o3co01vo/ ist totally useless as source, because it has no information about license, authorship and anything. If this image was shot by the person you said to be the author, then you need to provide either a proven release of this image under a free license by its author. Photographies are per law copyrighted by the author until 70 years after his/her death. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

For the other image

http://postimage.org/image/zttgxs2s/

--Ranatalwar (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

War going on

Hi Túrelio. Could you have a look at the file history of this? To me it looks like a valid file, but there is some serious war going on there. Maybe the two opponents have to be cautioned or the file protected? cheers. --Moros y Christianos 06:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. I've full-protected the file. But there is more with this user. He did the same with his other images. --Túrelio (talk) 07:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Mediaset logo(s) - Deletion tags

Hi Tùrelio, yes, the file Tgcom logo.png can be copyright infrangement for the background colors, and for me it can be deleted now. But Mediaset extra logo.PNG has a very simple text and isn't (actually) a registered trademark. I think that it can hosted by Commons without "problems" (also it has many differences between the real logo (see "Mediaset Extra in Google images). Thank you, good work! --Jack21 (talk) 13:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

That's fine for me. Actually I hadn't speedy-tagged them. I had only found them in the cat for speedy-deletions and found also that you hadn't been notified, which I then did. But, as I wasn't sure about it for myself, I didn't delete them, but choose to wait-and-see strategy. --Túrelio (talk) 13:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thank you very much! --Jack21 (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio's

Please check and nuke the uploads of User:Praveenicox..

1. File:Thee-011213347264.jpg
2. File:Namitha.jpg

++ many more More--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

++ This user User:Hemayet files under fair use......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Image you deleted for me that I re-uploaded

Hi, thanks for doing that earlier. I was wondering if it's possible for me to upload the image again and the old revision just be deleted? I know this can be done on Wikipedia so I assume it can be done here as well. I think this would be easier as it would save having to add all the categories and things again. If you can do this I'll re-upload all the pictures and then let you know which ones so you can delete the original revisions. Is that ok? I just don't really want my name coming up in Google results. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I was offline until now and therefore couldn't answer earlier. We should try your proposal with 1 image and if it works well we can do it with all. --Túrelio (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hi! I want to know if I can nominate these 2 pictures to SD, because they´re not longer in use, any other version has been created in 4 years, they´re out of scope, and at least one seems to be copied from somewhere and retag in an awful way. Or maybe I should ask for a DR? Thanks. Cheers. --Andrea (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Last reason for its keep is to redraw and upload...If the new version is available please nominate for DR, Not using is not the DR reason....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:48, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

There's no reason to redraw because the section where it was using was an add of a medical procedure, wich actually no longer exist and will be no replace. Not using is not the DR reason, but the out of scope, yes. And I see no reason for waist time redrawing an add, not clear even for an spanish-speaker like me. Cheers. --Andrea (talk) 10:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Andrea, you should choose a regular DR, as out-of-scope is officially not a speedy reason, and as File:Jjstt.jpg seems to be used on 1 project. Regards. --Túrelio (talk) 10:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok. But Jjstt.jpg it's a redirection to "Profirinas"... and as I already says, the only article mention as linked, es:Efecto fotoelectrico en porfirinas no longer use it, because has been fusionated with es:Porfirinas and the promotional content has been removed. Cheers. --Andrea (talk) 12:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Only use category redirects where necessary

Your thoughts may be helpful at Commons_talk:Only_use_category_redirects_where_necessary#Changes needed to turn this into a guideline. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:30, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Godfathering

Dear Túrelio,

For your info: The last three weeks I have "godfathered" User:Ghislain118 who was uploading a wonderful collection of more than 3,000 pictures of plants (mostly rock and Mediterranean plants). I have verified and classified all these plants, and as last identified an additional batch of 60 plants he could not identify. In the meantime I have put some order in categories in which these plants had to be put. This work is now fulfilled.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:11, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Removing of emptied categories

Please be more carefull when removing emptied categories. Don't remove them before you make sure who and why emptied them. Recently, you removed the category Category:Praha-Smíchov (train station) and several its subcategories which were moved from the correct names to incorrect names by the trolling user W.Rebel. --ŠJů (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but when an additional "categories for/under discussion"-tag is missing, it's hard to find out whether the speedy-tagging was legitimate or nor.

In addition, if User:W.Rebel is clearly vandalizing cats, he should be blocked. --Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Regrettably, we have no utility for logging of a category content history. --ŠJů (talk) 09:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

As it seems in the discussion, he didn't want to vandalise these categories, but he was confused with the incorrect name at the station board and he was wrongly interpreted and applied the manual of the Institute for Czech Language and headlong moved categories without discussion and regardless of sister categories. But it's clear and demonstrable what form of the station name is correct. --ŠJů (talk) 09:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

versions to be deleted

Hello, can you clean File:Bessuejouls eglise autel.jpg by deleting the two latest versions, including that test version. --Havang(nl) (talk) 13:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the "test" version. Before I can remove the latest version, I would have to do the same that User:Jayawardana12 has done, reverting to your version, because the currently displayed version cannot be deleted (except all is deleted). So, if you want to have your username in the upload-log for the latest/then-current version, you have to revert to your own version. Thereafter I could delete the then 2nd and 3rd version. Enough confusion? ;-) --Túrelio (talk) 14:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

OKE as it is. Thanks--Havang(nl) (talk) 15:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

File:VLC media player Easter egg.png

Hi, Túrelio. Author request or not, I think that is copyvio since it is a Windows interface screenshot. But am not sure... Rehman 16:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that myself. Anyway, I've asked the uploader and speedy-tagger why he wants it deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 13:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

sorry & thanks

Hi Túrelio,

I'm aware of violating copyrights :) Normally I check images before uploading but this time I was too lazy... sigh, will not happen again (at least I hope so...) Rbrausse (talk) 09:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Überhaupt kein Problem, zumal das auf der Quelle ja nicht erkennbar war. Ich hatte zu spät registriert, dass du den LA selbst gestellt hattest. --Túrelio (talk) 10:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Nacktmull

Hallo! Das Tierchen ist - bzw. war zum Zeitpunkt der Aufnahme - ein höchst lebendiges, wie der Fotograf (den ich persönlich gut kenne) hier bestätigt: [8]. Das Bild dürfte so beliebt sein, dass offenbar auch gewerbliche Nachnutzer Interesse daran gefunden haben - und leider "vergessen", die Lizenzbedingungen zu beachten... -- Herby (Vienna) (talk) 12:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, danke für die Klärung. Hab den Urheber inzwischen auf die SZ-Nutzung hingewiesen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Botany Barnstar

Thank you, Túrelio, for this reconnaissance. It is an important boost to sustain my collaboration to the botanical projects of the wikimedia foundation.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Mother Teresa

Túrelio, I've seen that you made a photograph of Mother Teresa when she was in Bonn, Germany, in 1986. Do you have more photographs of this event - I was on stage with her that day and would like to have a memento. --84.144.254.249 00:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi unknown, so far I have published two images, File:MotherTeresa 090.jpg and File:MotherTeresa 094.jpg. Of course, I have shot more images at this event, though not all of them have been digitalized. You may contact me via my email account (see link in the tool box to the left). --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy-deletion requests by Anso os

Hi Túrelio, oki this my image which are remove despite free license. That explain may be oki. anso_os (talk) 07:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Anso os, sorry, but no, this is not a sufficient rationale to delete images that have been uploaded under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

But why this my image - I can not change my view?! anso_os (talk) 07:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Because releasing an image under a free license is a binding legal act. Immediately before you uploaded your image, you were told that you cannot withdraw this release. Despite this clear legal situation, we do sometimes courtesy deletion on request by the uploader if there is a reasonable cause/rationale. --Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

oki read better a free license - my mistake that i did not read anso_os (talk) 07:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

So, do I understand you correct, that despite your "..my mistakes" tagging, there is no serious need to remove these images, right? We have no intention to give our contributors problems or to damage them. --Túrelio (talk)

but, i do not use them, unimportant, oki i understand what you want me to say anso_os (talk) 07:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC) the end talks

File:Vaginaland Coat of Arms.PNG

Not reverting your edit, but there are actually a fair number of images in Category:Coats of arms of micronations ... -- AnonMoos (talk) 19:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I know. Before tagging them, I have actually done a (somewhat disgusting) Google word + image search for that "country", which yielded nothing related to these uploads. May have been uploaded for "fun" or to "illustrate" a hoax article (there was already a dea link to :en). --Túrelio (talk) 19:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I responded on my talk page, but a bot can unlink them if they're still in use. They're old and outdated and I am requesting their deletion. Moulder (talk) 09:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

C. Kennedy Garrett

How are you authorized to publish and distribute these photographs from C. Kennedy Garrett? The nine prints listed under your User name should be deleted from general distribution. From the original flickr site, all photographs of C. Kennedy Garrett's are blocked from private use- copying, saving, distribution and printing. You do not have the license to include these images in your downloads, and making them available for others to download as well directly impedes her rights as an artist. Please remove them from your posts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.33.83.107 (talk • contribs)

Hi TwoWings,

I just wanted to notify you that an IP has tagged quite some uploads from Flickr that had been initiated by you, for alleged copyvio. However, all file that I checked were still under the original CC-BY license. Any idea what's going on here? --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Licences were checked by a bot and licences are not revokable. So there's no problem. The IP is just unaware of licence rules. I reverted him. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Kuppel St. Lorenz

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe gesehen, dass du hier geschrieben hast, dass das Bild in einem Magazin verwendet wurde. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn du mir einen Scan davon schicken könntest. :) Vielen Dank! Beste Grüße, alofok* 12:17, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Mal sehen, ob ich am Wochenende dazu komme. --Túrelio (talk) 16:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Es eilt nicht, bloß will ich es mal sehen. ;) alofok* 17:19, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Just a question about blocking user 93.93.222.212

Just for curiosity a question. Why did you block now this [user] for 1 week? The latest "contribution" was on 10-09-2010 for which I gave a warning. Thanks, Wouter (talk) 16:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

If you are authorized look at this. If you are not: today created a spree of 6 pages with demeaning statements about other people, likely other pupils in his class. --Túrelio (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I did not know of that as I am not authorized to look at it. Wouter (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Replace a .tif file with a .jpg file to comply with “Commons:File types” ?

Hi Túrelio. I wanted to replace a .tif file with a .jpg file to comply with “Commons:File types”. But I let you see which file is the more appropriate or if it is better to leave both, Ang%C3%A9lique_B%C3%A8gue.tif and Angélique Bègue Portrait.jpg. Thank you Cquoi 08:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Túrelio, for having already converted my .tif file into a .jpg file in a higher resolution than my previous one. Sorry for the work ! Cquoi 08:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem, you are welcome. By the way, as to my knowledge TIFF format is now acceptable and can be displayed directly, at least on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, Thanks a lot Cquoi 09:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Entradaalaiglesiadegazolaz.JPG

It's a forged flickrvio. The file was uploaded to Flickr only on 2011-01-29, likely for sole purpose to delete the file here as copyvio. Trycatch (talk) 10:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow. There seems to be no limit to the criminal energy of some people. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 23:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Löschung Jahreskats

Hallo Túlerio, guckst du mal hier. Ich finde die Löschung mit der Begründung "Anachronismus" falsch, weil per se für alle möglichen Zeiten die heutigen räumlichen Zuordnungen verwendet werden sollten. Es wäre quatsch, Kategorien wie Category:1735 in Heiliges Römisches Reich o.ä. anzulegen. Gruß--Leit (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Leit, ich habe zwar eine Reihe dieser cat-Löschungen ausgeführt, sofern die cats leer waren, weil mir die Löschbegründung grundsätzlich plausibel erschien. Aber das hindert nicht daran, dass diese cats, zumal es sich ja um eine Menge handelt, mal grundsätzlich diskutiert werden sollten, um individuellen Streit unter Usern zu vermeiden. Dafür würde ich an deiner Stelle aber nicht eine Benutzer-Disku wählen, sondern, da es sich anscheinend nur um deutschsprachige cats handelt, COM:FORUM oder halt Commons:Categories for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 15:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Die Kats waren ja nur leer, weil sie vorher geleert wurden. Zu einer grundsätzlichen Diskussion sah ich bisher keinen Anlass, da niemand einen Löschantrag gestellt hatte und das bisherige Katsystem in Frage stellte. Ich werde erstmal abwarten, was BlackIceNRW dazu sagt.--Leit (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Die Notwendigkeit einer "grundsätzlichen Diskussion" sehe ich nicht wegen der Existenz dieser cats (die mir zuvor unbekannt waren), sondern wegen der massenhaften Löschanträge. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Guty Cárdenas.jpg

Hi. Thanks. What did I do wrong on the deletion request, because I have another one. --Yodigo (talk) 23:50, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

You did nothing really wrong. However, the image in question has a 350x467 pixel resolution on the alleged source website, but our version has 600x800 pixel. Therefore, the former is unlikely the source of the latter. and because of that I decided that this case "might merit some discussion", as I wrote in the new DR. --Túrelio (talk) 00:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Killerpilze-Pressefoto.jpg

Hallo,

für obiges Bild war die Rechtelage unklar und ich habe den Fotografen auf deinen Wunsch hin nun eine Genehmigung verschicken lassen, dass das Bild genutzt werden darf. Nun wurde es aber gelöscht und nicht genehmigt. Kannst du mir sagen wo da der Fehler lag?

Vielen Dank und viele Grüße --79.227.221.147 13:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Sebhe?,

Cecil hat es am 2.2. gelöscht, weil ich es bereits am 23.1. als no-permission markiert hatte. Ich habe es jetzt ent-löscht und mit OTRS-pending markiert, wodurch es vor Löschung geschützt ist bis die eingereichte Genehmigung vom OTRS-Team geprüft wurde. --Túrelio (talk) 14:19, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

OTRS check

Hi, i saw you at recent changes and can you check this picture's otrs? --Aşkım da değişebilir gerçeklerim de (talk) 20:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, seems to be o.k. to me, as an OTRS-ticket (permission checked by our OTRS volunteers) has been added[9]. However, as I have no OTRS access, I can't check the ticket by myself. If you have doubt, you should ask at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. --Túrelio (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at Martin H.'s talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File:Labaro (Rome) - S. Alfonso M. de Liguori 12.JPG

Purtroppo non parlo inglese (je ne parle pas l'anglais). Je ne comprend pas (Non capisco perché) cette photo et l'autre aussi (File:Labaro (Rome) - S. Alfonso M. de Liguori 13.JPG) sont menacées d'être effacées. Non capisco perché si vuole cancellare queste due foto. Qui a décidé que ces photos son des oeuvres d'arts? Con quali criteri si è deciso che sono opere d'arte coperte da copyright? Solo perché sono belle e moderne? Une photo peut violer le copyright? Una fotografia può violare il copyright? Les permissions (licenza) données sont liées aux photos, non à l'oeuvre-d'art en soi. In ogni caso è una battaglia persa, tanto le foto le cancellate comunque.--Croberto68 (talk) 11:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Croberto68,

though I don't fully understand what you are saying, I think, you are asking why File:Labaro (Rome) - S. Alfonso M. de Liguori 12.JPG has been tagged with "no permission". This photo reproduces a station of a Via Crucis, which seems to consists in a 3-dimensional colored sculpture. This sculpture is a work of art and was likely made by another artist. If this artist is dead since >70 years, everything is fine and you can take as many photos of it as you want. But, if the artist is not dead since >70 years, he (or his heirs) still hold the copyright over this sculpture and any reproduction, including photographies. So, you should find out the artist who created this sculpture and whether he/she is still living or already dead and since when.

Per capire questo, utilizzare il traduttore di Google o chiedere di User:Trixt, che parla italiano. (Google translation) --Túrelio 14:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Baumberge (talk · contribs)

Hallo Túrelio,

du hattest geschrieben:

---

Hallo Baumberge, du hattest bei File:Havixbeck-huelshoff-drostebueste.jpg nachträglich die Lizenz von GFDL/CC-BY-SA auf die restriktivere CC-NC-ND-Lizenz umgeändert, so jedenfalls verstehe ich diesen Edit. Das geht so nicht, zumal es auch dem anderen Lizenz-Baustein widersprechen würde. Ich habe mir deshalb erlaubt, deinen Edit rückgängig zu machen. --Túrelio (Diskussion) 12:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Ich möchte genau das und noch einen Schritt weiter gehen. Da ich keine Antwort bislang bekommen habe kannst du vielleicht helfen: Ich will meinen Account hier in Wikimedia sowie alle Beiträge von mir löschen bzw. löschen lassen. Wie mache ich das bzw. an wen muss ich mich wenden und wie kann das möglichst einfach schnell und ohne große Diskussion gemacht werden? Baumberge

Keine Antwort? Ich hatte dir gestern binnen 1/2 h auf deine Frage auf COM:AN geantwortet und mir sogar einige Mühe gegeben statt dich mit einem kurzen "Geht nicht" abzufertigen.

Und die Antwort auf das obige "Ich möchte genau das" findest du letztlich auch dort. Wenn du nach dem Lesen meiner ausführlichen Antwort auf COM:AN noch Fragen zu deinem generellen Anliegen hast, kannst du sie gerne stellen; dann aber besser auf COM:AN, damit sich die Diskussion nicht überall verteilt. --Túrelio 13:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, I'm new to Wikipedia, and I could use a few guidelines... I'm an active editor at Wikia, so I understand the importance of licensing copyrighted images, but the licensing is so confusing for me, and differs highly from what I'm used to at Wikia. Basically, I want to contribute a few images, some of Print Screens from a video game, other that I took myself with a camera. How exactly would I license these? And how would I fill out the general information forms? You help is appreciated. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 03:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Video games are copyrighted, and photograph of that games will be considered as derivative work. Before uploading just go through this......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 07:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi SSDGFCTCT9,

beyond of what Captainofhope already explained, a practical guide is here. --Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Flickreview

Sorry, I had no idea of this. Thank you! --Duuk-Tsarith (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Lyes L

Dear Túrelio,

I am contacting you concerning the problematic contributions of this user. He has uploaded two new pictures that have been taken from the Internet. Despite several messages on his discussion page, he does not seem to understand the issue. I would suggest to block his account to avoid loosing more time monitoring his contributions for more copyvios. Regards, Moumou82 (talk) 10:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of. Thanks for notifying. However, COM:AN is the more appropriate location, as more admins are watching it. --Túrelio (talk) 11:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Memphis, Tennessee

Memphis, Tennessee I'd like to improve and expand on the page. I don't understrand why it was deleted. Evrik (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The speedy rationale by User:DoxTxob was "all photos here are in the top category or sub cats. all international wikilinks have been transfered to the top cat Memphis, Tennessee", which seemed plausible to me. However, as there was no copyvio or similar, the gallery could easily be restored. --Túrelio (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

• Would you please? Evrik (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Danke hierfür

- wird wohl Zeit für heute Schluß zu machen. ;-) Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Gern geschehn. Sehr gelungene Fotos! --Túrelio (talk) 22:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Nicht nur die Tiere haben den heutigen sonnigen Vorfrühlingstag genossen und es mir leicht gemacht. Danke für das Kompliment und gute Nacht! --4028mdk09 (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

File:VT-6.jpg

Ave. Leider hast Du die obige Datei nicht rausgeschmissen. Beide Bilder sind das US Navy Foto "80-G-41686", einmal in schlechter Qualität von hier [10]/[11] und in besserer Qualität ohne Geschreibsel von hier [12]/[13], Noch besser ist die Qualität dieses Fotos File:TBDs on USS Enterprise (CV-6) during Battle of Midway.jpg, auf dem allerdings die USS Pensacola rechts fehlt. Macht es Sinn die schlechte Datei mit dem Geschreibsel zu belassen, wenn es zwei wesentlich bessere Versionen gibt? Ich meine nicht. Vielleicht magst Du es Dir ja noch einmal überlegen. Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 11:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Ich hatte mir vor meiner Entscheidung beide Versionen angeschaut und fand die bildliche Wiedergabe auf der momentan belassenen Datei sogar besser, weil man die Flugzeuge besser erkennen kann. Sicher könnte man auch bei der technisch besseren anderen Datei das Bild etwas aufhellen, um den gleichen Effekt zu erzielen. Bislang hat das aber keiner gemacht. Ansonsten kannst du es gerne nochmal nominieren; vielleicht entscheidet ein anderer admin anders. --Túrelio (talk) 12:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Stuttgart,_Wilhelma,_Übersichtsplan,_Standort_des_Terrakottafrieses.jpg

Hallo, kannst Du mir sagen, wo hier die Copyright-Verletzung liegen soll? Und warum wird das nicht sachlich begründet, sondern nur pauschal? -- Gerd Leibrock (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Die speedy-Begründung von Rosenzweig war "Uses a map that is protected by copyright" und schien mir glaubhaft.

"warum wird das ..." - Bei URVs hat das Recht des Urhebers und damit die Löschung zeitlich Vorrang vor einer weiteren Diskussion, die sich ja immer anschließen kann, zumal eine Ent-Löschung sehr einfach ist. Wenn jemand eine Datei zur Schnelllöschung markiert hat, dauert es erfahrungsgemäß doch noch etwas bis die Löschung erfolgt; bei deiner Datei waren es ca. 3 Stunden. Ich nehme im Jahr ca. 20-30.000 Löschungen vor, bei einigen meiner Kollegen dürfte es ähnlich sein. Wir haben einfach nicht die Zeit, auch noch die detaillierte Löschbegründung auf die User-Disku zu setzen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of template

Hi Turelio, I noticed you deleted Title:Der Mönch am Meer which I created. Although I should have documented it more clearly, this was actually a template which was in use. I've restored it. Dcoetzee (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Seems I didn't recognize the "Title:" prefix and deleted it as empty gallery. --Túrelio (talk) 10:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

No worries, that's my fault, I made up the Title prefix :-) Dcoetzee (talk) 10:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Identification of plants

Dear Túrelio,

As you have suggested to D. Villafruela, I have easily identified the plants File:Béziers-Jardin médiéval 07.jpg and File:Béziers-Jardin médiéval 08.jpg as Lychnis chalcedonica and Salvia sclarea - two classical plant of medieval gardens.
Consequently I have categorised them accordingly and removed the request for deletion.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I knew you would do it ;-). Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 10:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

CEIT pictures

Hello Túrelio!

This is ODS40 to confirm that I have spoken to CEIT following your request re Wikimedia Commons images http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Javier-gil-sevillano.jpg ALEJO-AVELLO.JPG ALEJO.jpg et al and they have in turn confirmed that they have sent a permission email granting release of pictures in their website (www.ceit.es) under a "CC Attribution Licence 3.0". I have modified the files accordingly. Thank you so much for your help. 13:10 GMT, 14 February 2011

Great. The permission email should be send or forwarded to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I have added {{OTRS pending}} to the images to prevent premature deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 13:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

That's right, they have sent the standard template granting permission under CC-By at 11:53 GMT Thanks for the {{OTRS pending}} ODS40 (talk) 13:27 GMT 14 February 2011

@ODS40, the easiest way to produce a time-stamp with your username signature is to use: --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 13:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

ODS40(talk) Thanks I know, it's just habit :-) 13:35, 14 February 2011 GMT

File:Chow Yun-Fat 2008.jpg

so what is your decision? --Алый Король (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I'm very sorry to hear this. I was very happy when I managed to make its licence changed to CC-BY-SA on Flickr. Of course, if it is problematic, cancel it, just inform me, please. Thanks. - RepliCarter (talk) 17:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I checked it with Tineye and I found only one result, but it is smaller version. So I don't know it this photo is really a copyrighted one or not... Make your decision. - RepliCarter (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Hochreines Titan (99.999) mit sichtbarer Kristallstruktur.jpg

Hallo Túrelio,

danke für deinen Hinweis bezüglich der Lizenz. Da Alchemist-hp auch die angesprochene Lizenz verwendet dachte ich, dass es möglich ist, diese Lizenz zu verwenden. Die Lizenz habe ich aus 2 Gründen eingeschränkt:

1. Meines Erachtens haben sich die zuvor von mir angegebenen Lizenzen widersprochen (ich habe mich hier zugegebenermaßen an Alchemist-hp orientiert)

Ein Widerspruch war dadurch gegeben, dass durch die ArtLibris Lizenz ein copyleft stattfindet, hingegen ich durch die NC-ND ein widersprechliches copyrigth Einfluss nimmt.

2. Ich würde die Bilde gerne vor kommerzieller Verwendung schützen, sodass das Bild nicht eines Tages in einem Werbekatalog erscheint, da ich das Bild nur für Bildungszwecke bzw. privaten Gebrauch freigeben möchte

Siehst du eine Möglichkeit, eine andere Lizenz zu verwenden, um das Bild vor kommerziellem Missbrauch zu schützen?

Grüße, --Metalle-w (talk) 09:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Metalle-w,

nicht wirklich. Früher haben wir unwilligen Bildspendern (also bei Bildern, die man nicht selbst gemacht hatte, sondern von jemand eine Erlaubnis haben wollte) vorgeschlagen sie nur unter die GFDL zu stellen (weil deren Nutzung den Abdruck des gesamten Lizenztextes verlangt, der kaum auf ein T-Shirt oder eine Tasse passt) und gleichzeitig nur in online-geeigneter Auflösung hochzuladen. Auf diese Weise habe ich das einzige freie Portrait des ermordeten Theo van Gogh beschaffen können. Dann kam aber vor 2 Jahren die große (mehr oder weniger zwangsweise) Um- bzw. Zusatzlizensierung aller nur-GFDL-Inhalte auf CC-BY-SA, womit die ursprüngliche Absicht hintertrieben wurde. Inzwischen sind nur-GFDL-Uploads m.W. auch nicht mehr erlaubt (kann mich aber irren); anscheinend doch noch Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. Dazu könntest du mal User:Ralf Roletschek ansprechen, da er auch eher restriktiv lizensiert. Vor kommerziellem "Missbrauch", i.S. unlizensierter Nutzung, kannst du dich zwar kaum proaktiv schützen. Wenn er eintritt, kannst du aber zumindest im deutschsprachigen Raum durchaus erfolgreich dagegen vorgehen. Das tue ich auch. --Túrelio (talk) 09:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Ich habe die Lizenz nun geändert und trotzdem ist das File noch gelöscht - wer hat die Löschung initiiert? --Metalle-w (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Nee, ist nicht gelöscht, sondern das ist ein anderes Problem, was mir auch schon aufgefallen ist. Es könnte systembedingt sein, weil heute die mediawiki-Software aktualisiert wurde, es könnte aber auch der neue Dateiname mit dem %-Zeichen sein. Mach dir keine Sorge deswegen, da kümmern wir uns schon drum. --Túrelio (talk) 16:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Danke dass du dich darum kümmerst! Das Bild ist derzeit nämlich auch ein KEB, und wenn es nicht angezeigt wird wirkt sich das vermutlich negativ auf die Abstimmung aus... --Metalle-w (talk) 16:53, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hab umbenannt und siehe da, es wird wieder sichtbar. Die Nutzungen auf :de und :en habe ich manuell angepasst. --Túrelio (talk) 19:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Mahakumbh Shivers.jpg

I have seen that you have deleted & restored the imge, just after i insert the no-permission tag, is there any particular reason for that, so that i can remove the tag.....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 15:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Only after my deletion, I discovered that the uploader put "author=[[User:Prtrinitas|Udit Kulshrestha]]" in all but one of his uploads. My overall impression is that it is credible. Of course, if you have evidence to the contrary, go ahead. --Túrelio (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Great_Isaiah_Scroll.jpg

You mentioned on my talk page that there's a copyright claim on a derivative of this file. However, is this not a faithful photographic reproduction of an ancient two-dimensional work of art? If so, does that not make any such claims irrelevant? Before uploading I have carefully considered if this criterium was met (about the copyright status of the original work can of course be no doubt). There seem to be no distinguishable 3-dimensional features of the scroll apparent in the image and it looks like a faithful copy without any creative contributions. This is, I think, in line with other pictures of ancient manuscripts on Wimimedia, which have the same licence. Lindert (talk) 00:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

You don't need to explain that to a Commons' admin ;-). I only notified you as the uploader about the existing claim, though you are not the real cause of the problem. The problem is that Wikimedia's position is understandibly not so easy to accept for people who put a lot of work or money in such reproductions. --Túrelio (talk) 08:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for clearing that up. Lindert (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you delete this files

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PGE_Arena_gda%C5%84sk14022011_budowa.JPG

because author has not consented to the use of files--Muffi (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

thanks

W.Rebel and PetrS.

Would you please take a look at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Copyright_violation? I'm tired of the two of them warring. Thanks,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:52, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm tired too. May need an interaction ban. --Túrelio (talk) 21:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Image permission

the person from whom I obtained the license, turned out not to be their author, sorry :( So you can delete,this:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:7.11.2010_Tricolor_building_moscow.jpg
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:National_Silesia_Stadium_Marek_Borys.JPG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mercury_City_Tower_by_Jugi.jpg

but for this i have permission, so ask the author to send a license

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:National_Silesian_Stadium_by_Marek_Borys.jpg

--Muffi (talk) 22:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 23:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

thank you, i'm sorry :'( --Muffi (talk) 23:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Problemi con l'immagine: File:Roberto Lawley ritratto.jpg

Ciao, l'autore della foto (Simone Casati) ha inviato una mail di autorizzazione all'indirizzo: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org --Luca Oddone (talk) 08:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Grazie, I've changed the tag accordingly. --Túrelio (talk) 13:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Ticket reported that the image cannot be licensed under a free licence so must be deleted on commons, can only be used in it.wiki with a copyright tag. --Abisys (talk) 13:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. --Túrelio (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

New set of identified pictures

Dear Túrelio,

As you probaly have seen, Ghislain118 heve put two days ago a set of 195 pictures he has taken in the past in the Pyrenees. I have identified and classified 190 of them, and in agreement with Ghislain I have asked yesterday for the removal of 3 failed pictures (you already did) and today for the removal of 2 other pictures, of which no correct identification is possible. Indeed, the identification of a botanical rose requires a picture of the full plant, as also does that of the unidentified Asteracea.

With my renewed thanks for your kind support. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

The deletion of one of the remaining 2 images was really a pain (as it was nice, though unidentified). --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Idiots

May be worth reviewing the cross wiki contribs - extensive - known vandal active recently but some are blocked as open proxies. Sorry got to go but I am sure you will understand! Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you revert and protect?

Can you revert File:Anna Marie Franziska of Saxe-Lauenburg.jpg to the first edition, delete later editions and subsequently protect the page. note that the latest image is a duplicate of another file. See also the messages on User talk:Picture Perfect Prince. This new user does good work, but doesn't understand the procedures and probably doesn't read the messages on it's talk page. Greetings, --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Done and protected for 1 month. --Túrelio (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.--Havang(nl) (talk) 21:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I looked a bit further. User is a sockpuppet of User:LouisPhilippeCharles who did the first overwrite on that page; he has been blocked at de-wi. But what he does is not so bad, he is just too stubborn. To watch closely. --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Bilder von Mausoleum des Kyrus den Großen

Guten Abend Túrelio, ich will die Bilder von Mausoleum des Kyrus den Großen, die ich selbst gemacht habe, auf Commons hochladen. Aber die Commons-Webseite ist nicht erreichbar im Iran and darum muß ich ein Proxy benutzen. Dieserweise die Hochladung-Geschwindichkeit wird sehr sehr langsam sein. Können Sie bitte diese Bilder für mich auf Commons hochladen?

• Die adresse von meiner Webseite

Die Genehmigung ist auch richtig für eine Commons-Hochladung: "Some of the the pictures are old designs and also old bank notes of Iran which have no copyright and all of them are in public domain. I also publish the rest of the pictures which have been drawn or taken by me to the public domain and anyone can use these pictures for Commercial and Non-Commercial purposes as long as he/she mentions me as the author. Any derivative work based on my pictures should also mention me as the original author. Click on any of the pictures to see the full size image."

Diese Bilder müssen in der Kategorie von Tomb of Cyrus the Great hochgeladen werden.

Danke für Ihre Hilfe.

Mit den besten Wünschen aus Teheran!

Hallo Unbekannter,

toll dass du aus Teheran so gut deutsch schreibst. Das Problem ist, dass ich von deiner Website die Meldung "Service Temporarily Unavailable" erhalten habe. Ich werde es später oder morgen ncohmal versuchen. Steht auf deiner Website der Autoren-Name (Photograph) dabei? Falls nicht, müsste ich den vorher wissen, weil ich die Fotos ja ncht gemacht habe. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort! Bitte versuchen Sie noch einmal. Manchmal gibt es dieses Problem. Meine echte Identität will ich nicht verraten, weil es im Iran gefährlich sein könnte. Aber Sie können mich "Truth Seeker" nennen! Und danke für Ihr Kompliment. Ich habe Deutsch seit fast zwei Jahre gelernt. ;-)

Hallo Truth Seeker, hast du denn schon ein "Konto" (account) auf Commons? Das wäre gut, damit ich die Bilder diesem Namen/Konto zuordnen kann. Für die Anmeldung brauchst du nicht deinen wirklichen Namen preiszugeben. Es gibt schon einen User User:Truth Seeker (fawiki). Bist du das? --Túrelio (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Es gibt ein Download-Problem mit http://blogtext.org/albums/TruthSeeker/22058.JPGg. Vermutlich weil die Endung falsch ist, es sollte nur .JPG sein. --Túrelio (talk) 21:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Die richtige Adresse ist http://blogtext.org/albums/TruthSeeker/22058.JPG, ohne "g".

Nr. 1: File:CyrustheGreatTombDrawingbyThruthSeeker 22042.gif. --Túrelio (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! Die Bilder in meiner Webseite sind schon gemeinfrei. Ich habe die Genehmigung auf meiner Webseite geschrieben. Darum dürfen Sie (oder irgendjemand) mit Ihren eigenen Konto die Bilder auf Commons hochladen. Nur brauchen Sie die Adresse von meiner Webseite auf der Beschreibungen von den Commons-Bildern schreiben. Ich glaube es ist nicht wichtig, ob ich persönlich ein Commons-Konto habe oder nicht.

Nun gibt es aber ein Problem, weil ich eine Warnung erhalte, dass diese Datei (22043.jpg) schon einmal hochgeladen (File:Restoration of the tomb of Cyrus the great May 2006 -A.JPG) und heute gelöscht worden ist. --Túrelio (talk) 21:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Wenn Sie dieses Bild sehen, Sie können leicht verstehen, daß dieses Bild von meinen Bildern gemacht wurde! Ich habe diese Bilder früher auf Commons hochgeladen und viele Wiki-Projekten haben meine Bilder benutzt. Heute habe ich gesehen daß diese Bilder von einem Steward, der in der persischen Wikipedia tätig ist, gelöscht wurden! Er ist mein Feind seit fast 3 Jahre! Er wollte religiöser Quatsch auf persischen Artikeln schreiben und ich war dagegen. Er hat mein Konto in persischer Wikipedia gesperrt und auch wenn er siehst, er löscht meine Bilder auf Commons! Er hat Freunde in Meta und Commons und ich konnte mich nicht gegen ihn beschweren. Sie können hier sehen, daß mein Commons-Konto nicht gesperrt ist. Er hat seine Steward-Macht mißbraucht und dieses Konto global gesperrt! Aber meine Bilder sind wichtig für Wiki-Projekten und ich erlaube ihn nicht sie einfach zu löschen. Diese Bilder sind gemeinfrei und ich habe sie auf einer anderen Webseite hochgeladen, darum jeder kann diese Bilder von meiner Webseite auf Commons hochladen. Sie wissen Copyright-Gesetze sehr gut und es gibt kein problem diese gemeinfreie Bilder auf Commons hochzuladen. Danke für Ihr Verständnis und beste Grüße aus Teheran.

Ich habe inzwischen alle Dateien von deiner Website auf meinen Computer heruntergeladen und erst einmal je 1 Bild aus den beiden Serien auf Commons hochgeladen, File:CyrustheGreatTomb 22059.jpg und File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22043.jpg. Der Rest später, weil ich jetzt zu müde bin. --Túrelio (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank und sehr süße Katze. lol :P

Wann Sie wieder Zeit haben und meine Bilder auf Commons hochladen wollen, Bitte laden Sie auch dieses Bild, das ich neu gezeichnet habe, hoch. Herzlichen Dank!

• Guten Abend. Wann werden Sie die Bilder auf Commons hochladen? Dieser Artikel und auch viele andere Artikel brauchen diese Bilder. :-)

• Nr. 5 File:500RialsNoteIran 22047.jpg
• Nr. 4 File:CyrustheGreatTombDrawingbyThruthSeeker 22063.gif - hierfür sollte noch die benutzte Quelle bei Stronach (welches Buch/Artikel?) genau angegeben werden. --Túrelio (talk) 21:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für die Hochladung dieses Bildes! Das Buch heißt "Pasargadae: A Report on the Excavations Conducted by the British Institute of Persian Studies from 1961-63".

Würden Sie auch den Rest hochladen? Wir wollen mit diesen Bildern einen exellenten Artikel machen. :-)

File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22043.jpg, File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22044.jpg, File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22045.jpg und File:CyrustheGreatTombRestoration 22046.jpg habe ich unter Vorbehalt hochgeladen, da sie schon einmal gelöscht wurden. --Túrelio (talk) 23:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank!

• Seien Sie ganz sicher, daß diese Bilder mir gehören. Ich habe Ihnen auch vorher gesagt, daß diese Bilder sind von einem persönlichen Feind von mir, der ein Steward in Meta ist, gelöscht wurden. Sehen Sie selbst. Er hat erst diese Bilder für (Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing) gelöscht, dann für (upload by blocked sock pupetter)). Sehr komisch!

Also es ist ganz deutlich, daß es hier kein copyvio gibt. Und mein Konto ist nicht gesperrt. Er ruiniert die ganze Wikipedia um mich zu stören.

Nochmal will ich Ihnen versichern, daß alle diese Bilder, die Sie auf Commons hochgeladen haben, gehören mir und ich bin der Fotograf dieser Bilder und die Bilder sind gemeinfrei.

Opinion of relevance

My years ago schooldays German is not sufficient. Can you cast an eye over File:Familenfreundlich_WK.jpg and say whether it is a keeper or not. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC) + File:Familienfreundlicvh STadt.jpg, File:Landeswappen.jpg & File:StadtwappenHeyn.jpg  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm in hurry to get a train, therefore just in short: it's my impression that most of this users uploads are sort of "promotional", not necessarily illicit, but probably not all in scope. Likely the uploader is from the company. Will look into it tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

A whenever task. Having found them and noted them, we won't lose track of them. That was my gut feel, however, I wasn't brave of my German. <sigh>

Finally taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Max Minghella copyvio image

Hi, Seanmarti777 has re-uploaded the image you deleted at 09:18 UTC today. Would you care to delete them again and salt the page titles? The images are at File:Maxming.jpg and File:MaxMing.jpg. I've also reported this account for falsifying the source and author fileds at File:MaxMinghella2006.jpg. Thanks for any assistance - Pointillist (talk) 09:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I know you mean well but...

I put the tag on for it to be deleted, so surely putting a tag on my page saying it's been deleted is redundent. When I uploaded and requested for deletion and therefore expect it to be deleted promptly. KnowIG (talk) 13:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. When the speedy-rationale is evident, I don't always check who was the requester. --Túrelio (talk) 13:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

wazzo888

I'm sorry. I don't understand the topic you left me.It seem like i'm not very good to upload stuff, if you want to help me, your wellcome.

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Little Help

Hi mate. I'm not sure how to delete an image. If you could give me instruction, I am trying to delete this image.. File:Eric Statzer & Teresa Navaez.jpg

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Michelle Pfeiffer 2007.jpg

Hi! I try to do my work well. Might be the Flickr's user have changed the licence. To say the truth I don't remember exactly... Is there the chance that is was my mistake, too. Regards Electron  ^<Talk?> 08:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Replied at your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

My images

I'm sorry for uploading the 'copyrighted' images, but it's hard to tell which pictures on the net are copyrighted or not, as they don't say, so people like me assume they're free. I'm currently want to uploaad a new image of The All-American Rejects here then add to their Wikipedia page, it's the one I uploaded before but it got deleted. How can I tell if the image is copyrighted or not?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigwhofan (talk • contribs)

Take a look at Commons:Image casebook. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

In short, Bigwhofan, you should be thinking the opposite. By default, people retain their intellectual and artistic property rights, so to use their work you require their permission, and then compliance with any conditions to its release.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Michelle Pfeiffer 2007.jpg

Hi! I was right about the license. The Flickr user has change the license again. Now it is CC BY 2.0, see -> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeremiahchristopher/2155165442/in/photostream, so restore the file, please. Regards Electron  ^<Talk?> 11:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Strange, but great. Did you contact him for that? I've uploaded the original uncropped image in highest resolution to allow for bot-Flickreview. That's critical as it's also licensed via Getty. Can be cropped thereafter. --Túrelio (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

OK. Yes, I contacted him. I receved the e-mail. He wrote that for some reason the license wasn't correct, as you said, so I changed it... Electron  ^<Talk?> 14:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Chi Guevara

Hey there, you just set Delinker on File:Che Guevara.jpg but it choked on a fully protected page. I got a Polish admin to replace it, so the image is good to go (the remaining apparent link is just a cache thing). Also, would you mind setting the bot against File:GuerrilleroHeroico.jpg as well (it's in the exact same boat). Thanks for the help. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

First one finally deleted, second one still in use. --Túrelio (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Lenhart Schubert

Why did you remove Lenhart Schubert's image?

Because it had been taken from http://www.cs.rochester.edu/~schubert/ (without any hint of being under a free license) and been put under a bogus "PD-ineligible" by the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 22:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

immagine nella pagina mitch e squalo

Buona sera in data 3.3.2011 io avevo caricato un immagine nella pagina Mitch e Squalo Ed essendo io una loro collaboratrice Mitch e Squalo mi hanno dato il permesso di gestire e mettere le loro immagini su wikipedia. quindi la prego di ripristinare l'immagine.

Are you talking about File:190470 149825885079237 100001554802124 301604 4881310 n.jpg? This image is from Facebook and as such requires a written permission by the rights holder. Please send the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and after that drop me a note, so I can restore the image temporarily. --Túrelio (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

There is also File:188788 1818923723213 1543743962 31888458 8244037 n.jpg, nominated for deletion. No source seems to be given, is it also from Facebook? --LPfi (talk) 10:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Shiva Gajasuramardana.JPG

See my comment and take action on duplicate issue. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

What "comment"? I don't see any. --Túrelio (talk) 08:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the File:Ubuntu7.10 Cover.JPG

Hi, I have seen ,that you have added this to the file that I have uploaded.

{{no permission since|month=March|day=5|year=2011}}

there are lots of files like mine on common.

example

I think nearly none of them have permission from Ubuntu.

If permission needed I don't know ,who has done the photo work ,but I will look for it and ask for a permission. Thanks in advance --Pouyana (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Pouyana,

the problem is only about the photography on the cover, not about the Ubuntu-relatied things, they should be free. But the photo is not automatically free. --Túrelio (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

as to this site they are all free to use and property of Ubuntu. Licence--Pouyana (talk) 19:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

O.k., great. I have removed the no-perm tag from the image. Could you put the above source link somewhere into the description. --Túrelio (talk) 19:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks , I have added some info. --Pouyana (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

What is this FoP missing for Romania?

Hey, I see you deleting images take from Romanian cities saying that Romanian has no FoP. What is this FoP? They seem legitimate pictures uploaded by the authors, unless I am missing something. If you don't mind, please clarify this. Thanks!--Codrin.B (talk) 03:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, in meantime I did some research and found this: Commons_talk:Freedom_of_panorama/Archive_3#Romania. Look at the last answer which it makes perfect (common?) sense. I think your interpretation is a stretch and seems unreasonable to remove all such images. Also, the link to the Romanian copyright law from Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Romania is broken, so I am not ever sure what guidelines you use. But I found it here. And I went through the mentioned section several times. The intention is to protect the architect or the artist, from copying their work, but the photo itself is not copyrighted and people can take pictures in public places and do whatever they want with them. One provision says "it shall be mandatory to mention the source and the author's name if it appears on the work used, and, also in the case of works of three-dimensional art or architectural works, the place in which the original is to be found.", which I think can be easily satisfied and it is beneficial for Commons to specify the location anyway.--Codrin.B (talk) 04:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

First, I am not deleting, I am proposing/requesting for deletion (DR). That is a mayor difference and the DR will not be finally decided by me as the requester. A DR allows for input/opinions of others. This was necessary because the uploader was not responsive to my simple question from a month ago. In regard to our FOP#Romania-policy: this not about my interpretation, it is just what our current knowledge about copyright in Romania reflects. You may challenge that, if you have new fact or if you think that it does not reflect the local law. --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I have linked to a new source of Romanian law and included the relevant section at Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Romania. Note that the principal subject of the photograph cannot be the building and that commercial use is forbidden -- we need both here.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Wikieditor info

Hi! Could you see what is doing User:Wikieditor info -> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wikieditor_info ? In my opinion it is vandalism... Hi/she is a puppet of User:Wikinetbot, I think, who upload many files about uflp university and has vandalised the page of deletation request-> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Uflp_0022.jpg&action=history Electron  ^<Talk?> 10:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. However, as I've to go offline now, I'll look into that tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Why did you remove my photo?

Hi, I just simply don't understand why you removed my photo File:Jue wine cup.jpg and citing it has a copyright violation, while the author of the photo is myself and the object is a public item not belonging to any particular person or party. Thanks! -- Rosemania (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Rosemania, this photo was sourced by you to http://www.flickr.com/photos/rosemania/3430506877, where it is marked as "(C) All rights reserved". As many uploaders put their name in the "author entry" of the image description, even when they are clearly not the author, we usually don't take that at face value. Therefore, the source is what matters. And in your case the source says (C). In addition, our Flickr-review bot, which checked the image on March 5, couldn't find the correct image size on Flickr. Therefore, I would recommend you either to temporarily change the license on Flickr (provided the image is really the same, by bit), so that our Flickr-review bot can check the image again and confirm the license, or to send an individual permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, confirming the ownership. --Túrelio (talk) 07:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

After the license has been changed on Flickr, I've undeleted the image and re-uploaded in in the highest available resolution. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

MikeMcEwen.jpg

Hi there I've updated why I need to delete the file that I uploaded there, thanks. KrazyTea (talk) 02:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but already deleted by Rehman. --Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Aviadvigatel permission for the picture.

Hello! I am an employee Aviadvigatel in what form you need to send the resolution Pictures?

Märt 2011, 06:20 utc. Solovei777.

Hi Solovei777, go to Commons:Email templates (or the fitting language version; see links on top of that page), copy the "Declaration of consent for all inquiries" (or its equivalent), enter the filenames (or complete URLs) of the images covered by this permission, enter the name of the choosen license and mail all that to the legally responsible person of the company that holds the rights over the images and ask him/her to date and sign it with his/her legal name and mail it directly from a company email address to

permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Thereafter, you may notify me, so that I can then undelete and/or tag the images with {{OTRS pending}}. --Túrelio (talk) 11:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

File:ЗОО!!.jpg

it's my own shot. made by mobile phone camera. why removed? 46.147.177.139 19:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC) (behind the river)

Hi, the deletion rationale was "Unfree Derivative work this is likely a recent sculpture from an artist still living or not dead since >70 years; and no FOP in Russia". I don't remember the image, but I assume it was a statue or sculpture. --Túrelio (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

ok. that's write.

User SuperTank17

Several of the categories you deleted have already been recreated by this ever problematic user. See Category:Škoda 130 GL‎, Category:Škoda 120 L‎ and probably lots more - I just don't have the energy to keep after this guy. He has also butchered several other categories regarding Eastern European cars (Polski Fiat 125, 126) and countless pages on military vehicles. For a great example of this user's style and methods, see this jewel of a conversation. So far not one user has offered him any support, whereas at least half a dozen users have asked him to refrain from creating such narrow and confusingly organized categories. Thankful for any help, Mr.choppers (talk) 10:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Bild entfernen

Hallo, das Bild Hassel(Saar).JPG auf WikiCommons zeigt einen Grenzstein im Querformat und wurde irrtümlich von mir hochgeladen. Ich bitte darum, es zu entfernen. Danke!--EHaseler (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

You deleted my photo which I have copyright of. please put it back.

You deleted my photo TonglandStreets.jpg because you incorrectly stated it's a copyright violation.

Clearly you have no concept of what osgrid is. It's a virtual world which individual users such as myself pay to host. It's like a webpage except it's 3D content. I created the 3D content and then took a screenshot of it through the browser (called a viewer).

I thus own not only the copyright to the screenshot which I gave full public domain rights to, but also the 3D content I created which is visible in the photo.

You have arrogantly and arbitrarily deleted it because you ASSUMED I don't have copyright, but I do.

Please put it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxdb (talk • contribs) 00:36, 12. Mär. 2011 (UTC)

Xxdb, you may make a undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Havang(nl) (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The image had already been undeleted by me earlier and filed for regular deletion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:TonglandStreets.JPG. --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Turelo said he doubts that I own the copyright because the content looks like some of it is from real photos. Yet again you're showing your ignorance of 3D worlds. I'm going to explain it once because I'm tired of this. 3D content is created by forming primitive 3D objects which are then textured. Textures are created by uploading photographs or drawn art in the form of jpgs or tga or other formats of 2D images. These textures are applied to faces of the primitives and each time the primitive is drawn by the graphics engine, the textures are rendered on the surface. The textures are mine from photographs I took from around the Bridgeton area of Glasgow (London road and Gallowgate) and also some are from near Glasgow university on Great Western Road. The 3D content was made my me in my virtual world. Your call.

Here is the wrong place for any further discussion, take it to the above linked deletion discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Mah

io chiedo la cancellazione di due doppioni e voi cancellate i doppioni e immediatamente mi mettete quelle con i dati corretti in cancellazione. Ma dove volete che vada a prendere le informazioni di copy su delle foto mie che non sono da nessuna parte nè su internet nè altrove? Potrò fare quel che mi pare delle foto scattate da me a delle cose che ho fatto io? Chiedete di fornire informazioni e poi dite che non sono verificabili. Allora mettete delle regole più chiare, così non si perde tempo a fare dei lavori che poi vengono cancellati. Ripeto: tutte le foto che ho caricato sono libere da copyrighy, sono mie e riproducono cose mie. fate voi --Brancusi (talk) 12:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't speak Italiano and the Google translation of your comment didn't make sense. The images File:Lascito duchamp.jpg and File:Lascito brancusi.jpg were both credited by you to "Walter Battistessa". You are obviously not Walter Battistessa, because here File:Bosco RoyBatty.jpg you used the credit "fotografo Brancusi". If you upload images shot by another person, you need to provide his/her written permission, as I had already written in my edit summaries[14],[15]. --Túrelio (talk) 13:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, i'm really sorry, but I had seen other questions to you in italian and I thought ... by the way: all the pictures that I uploaded are mine. Also the two images File:Lascito duchamp.jpg and File:Lascito brancusi.jpg. I corrected the author information, that are |author=[[User:Brancusi|Brancusi]]. I am the photogapher and the photogrphs are free of third party copyrights, so the Licensing is {{PD-self}}. Best regards --Brancusi (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Deleted images

Hello. I was just wondering why File:Charice2.jpg and File:Charice.jpg were deleted. User:Jtalledo nominated a bunch of images of this singer for speedy deletion earlier today, on the basis that the Flickr licenses had changed since they were uploaded to the Commons, but the images all ought to been tagged {{Flickr-change-of-license}} instead of being deleted. These two images might have been deleted for completely different reasons (and I suspect they were, given that you have much more experience with these matters than I do), but I can't tell from your edit summary, so I thought I would double-check. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I just found the deletion requests. How odd. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The deletion rationale "I made a mistake" was from the uploader Charicenewstoday, and as the request was filed on the day of upload, I granted it. In addition, as I see now, there was also a claim of "Copyvio from http://mfound.jp/topics/assets_c/2011/02/CHARICE_MQ02-11297.html" by Jtalledo for both images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

If it was a copyvio, there are two other images by the same uploader (File:Charice4.jpg and File:Charice3.jpg ) which might have the same problems. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Not unlikely. However, I couldn't find them by Google or at Getty Images. --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Sortierung

Hallo Túrelio, eine kleine Frage zur Commons-Gestaltung. Die alphabetische Sortierung in den Kategorien ist z.Z. nur noch in Großbuchstaben. Ist das eine temporäre Baustelle oder dauerhafte Absicht? Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Z.Zt. läuft seitens der Software einiges nicht so ganz richtig, vermutlich als Folge des Mediawiki-Updates. Leider bekommen wir von dort kaum mal Vorwarnungen und auch selten ein Feedback. Auf COM:VP und dem Forum wurde schon diverse Probleme dieser Art andiskutiert. Also einfach mal beobachten und wenn es in 2 Wochen auch noch so ist, auf dem Forum oder auf COM:AN als "Fehlermeldung" posten (oder direkt auf Bugzilla, wenn du dort ein Konto hast). Schönen Sonntag. --Túrelio (talk) 18:02, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

...ich danke dir für Deine Auskunft. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Img 0692.jpg

Hi! You tagged "File:Img 0692.jpg" for renaming but did not provide a suitable name. Will you be renaming this file yourself? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 08:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, it wasn't me[16] and I wouldn't have done it before having identified the species of this animal. --Túrelio (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops. I guess I will decline the request, then. Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Roman and done

Hi. Sorry, can I ask you what is done here? Because I really don't get it. Thank You. JDavid (talk) 13:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Somebody else had uploaded a different image (+copyvio) over the original one, as a "new version". This then 2nd version had been deleted by me (therefore you cannot see it in the version history); tis was meant by the "done". --Túrelio (talk) 13:36, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but I marked this file (first version) with {{No permission since}}, because uploader wasn't an author of this file. Uploader is N12345n, but declared author is Atelier Joly. So I don't get why you've removed the tag. JDavid (talk) 13:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, now I see what you meant. I had assumed both tags refered to the same problem. I've now reinstated the no-perm. --Túrelio (talk) 14:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Panning

Hello Túrelio! @Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alexis Love on set of Barely Legal 75 9.jpg: The picture you mentioned is made by en:Panning (camera). A different effect of motion blur. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Info. --Túrelio (talk) 07:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your deletion File:Pray for Japan prayforjapan.jpg. And thank you for putting the image on your page from Japan!! --mizusumashi 10:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 11:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion request

I uploaded File:Tylenol Extra Strength.jpg (again) and was hoping you could delete it with a single comment of "The author (Editor182) requests its deletion. (global usage; delinker log)". If the previous logs cannot be removed, that's fine, as long as the correct message is made clear in the end. Thank you. Editor182 (talk) 15:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't fully understand. You had requested it for deletion and I had deleted it. Then you re-uploaded it to get it deleted again? Besides, the deletion edit-summary was exactly what you had written in your deletion request. Are we playing a game here? --Túrelio (talk) 15:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. The first deletion log claimed my image was a copyright violation, which it wasn't, it was only an overzealous administrator. The second deletion log was too long for the log and was cut short. The third deletion log was correct, short and to the point. It would be even better if it were the only log listed, but I'm guessing the previous two logs cannot be removed. Thanks again. Editor182 (talk) 16:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

O.k. As to my knowledge, deletion logs, if at all, can only be removed by an oversighter, though that would be sort of overkill. --Túrelio (talk) 06:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Antic cafe.jpg

Fue borrado por tí, Verás, muy tarde me di cuenta del aviso de "pocible violación de derechos de autor", pero la imagen corresponde a un trabajo propio, fotos tomadas de un recital, por lo que no tienen Copyright, ¿Podrías revertir el borrado?, y en cuanto lo hagas, yo agrego a la pagina de descripción que corresponde a fruto de mi trabajo. Saludos. Pierrot ~ (talk) 09:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Carrousel, it was deleted because this research result clearly suggests that it was taken from somewhere else, for example from here or here, which both have far higher resolution than your upload. And I am not sure what you mean by "que no tienen Copyright". I cannot judge whether the stage scene is copyrighted, but surely the photographer who took this shot, holds copyright over this image until 70 years after his/her death. Anyway, you can request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 09:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Entiendo, justamente esa no era la foto a la que me refería, (es que el aviso fue muy rápido y no tuve tiempo de saber a cual se refería exactamente), así que me disculpo, saludos, y espero no me ocurra otra vez. Pierrot ~ (talk) 12:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Fcarcena01 . . .

Ok ... I stop uploading files with no significant informations ...

Though I don't know what you mean by "with no significant informations", you should not upload images that are still under copyright. --Túrelio (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion Request

I have just received an email with the permission to use the logo of FC Red Bull Salzburg. What have I to do now?--Werner100359 (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Leite die Erlaubnis im Volltext samt Headern an permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org weiter, wohin der Rechteinhaber sie direkt hätte schicken sollen. Gib dabei genau den Namen der Datei an, auf den du dich beziehst. --Túrelio (talk) 16:16, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

{{Duplicate}} deletions

Hi,

I'm a bit concerned with a few issues regarding the use of {{Duplicate}}. The big issue I will be taking to AN shortly to try and get the deletion rules tightened - [17] and [18] are exact duplicates, but when you deleted one of them in December a significant amount of metadata was lost. The lack of a redirect was also incorrect IMO.

I also noticed that you added these replacements to CommonsDelinker, when some are clearly not duplicates (eg File:Tsunayoshi.gif and File:Tsunyaoshi.jpg).--Nilfanion (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing to probable mistakes of mine. However, getting notified in March about what might have gone wrong 3 months earlier ... . In all these Japanese drawings, which I hadn't been original dupe-tagged by myself, I visually compared the to-remain version with the to-be-deleted one and found the latter of clearly inferior quality and resolution. Anyway, if more admins would work on speedy-queues/backlogs there might be more time available for each file. --Túrelio (talk) 08:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree its not that useful to point out mistakes several months after the fact :)

As for the Japanese pics, I agree the to-be-deleted version was worse quality in every case. However, substantially different versions of the same things should really go via a deletion request and not a speedy. The colours are different in some cases, and I'm not sure which colour palette is correct - the DR gives chance for people to work it out. With the cropped image I mentioned, its clearly inferior quality. However, if its being used in a template for instance, replacing it with the better image is likely to be unhelpful to the relevant wiki - so it should be manually replaced, not by delinker.

It looks like a high proportion tagged with duplicate are not exact dupes, or will have problems if deleted. For instance I've seen a PNG tagged as a dupe to a JPG (of a photo), its possible the png was deliberately uploaded as a raw version - so deleting is wrong. This one of that Japanese batch includes more detailed info that its replacement. And this one you deleted yesterday needed a redirect - it was uploaded a year ago and was used in an article for several months. No redirect means the old versions of that article were broken, and causes problems for external re-users.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Just so you know, started thread on AN Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Deletion of duplicates. Two of the 4 examples I give are ones you deleted today.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh my bad. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 21:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

And Special:Undelete/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Łódź_Voivodeship.svg this one. I know creating the redirect is currently a pain but most of the time it should be done. I've asked DieBuche if a quick script to create the redir automatically is possible; if a one (or two) click deletion method was available I think it would help this a lot.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI please see this by DieBuche, using QuickDelete like that will sort my procedural concerns and is just as easy as using the nuke button. Identifiying if its a duplicate or not is another issue of course :)--Nilfanion (talk) 10:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you please create the appropriate redirects after you delete duplicate files? I've just trawled through the deletion log for March 28 - of the non-recent duplicate deletions, the all 6 of your deletions File:Chile73.jpg, File:©Milet.jpg, File:Mairie de Fonbeauzard.JPG, File:La Ramajería.SVG, File:Grey Reef Shark 2.jpg and File:Orca at Sea World.JPG should have had redirects set up. (1 of others was also poorly executed by a different admin). This old version on en.wp demonstrates some of the problems this is causing.

If you use the QuickDelete button I've mentioned this above it will prevent this problem; I'm inclined to remove the nuke button and the links in the processing (apart from the one to delinker) too. If you carry on deleting without creating the redirects, I'll take this to the AN.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Though I don't really see a need to maintain all the links/redir to outdated article versions (always a mystery for me how to know of these former uses) as the resulting redir-accumulation may lead us in the future to have as many (or more) redirs as real files, from now on I will completely abstain from dupe-deletions of files. There should be enough other admins to take on that task.

To be nit-picking, File:©Milet.jpg was (very likely) a copyvio. But as it was in use and as the ongoing copyright evaluation was located at the other dupe, I "moved" the use to this other copy to have it all at one place. So, more a pre-emptive cv-del than a a dupe-del.

However, if I understand the underlying logic correctly, even deletions such as this request File:Птрет неизвестнй в тюрбане и зеленм платье. ГРМ.JPG (a rather common case) can no longer be performed, as it is exactly the redir that is requested for deletion. By the way, in such cases I quite sometimes found the speedy-requested redir still in use (as I do always check for that) and therefore first tagged it with duplicate to enable CD-substitution, then requested CD-substitution and later (after substitution was performed) deleted the then unused redir. Quite a chain of work, but no more. --Túrelio (talk) 09:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough on the likely copyvio image.

Having billions of redirects isn't a bad thing, as redirects are cheap - having them outnumber files isn't "bad", more a reflection of the inadequacy of our file names. en.wp has 33% more redirects than articles, fr.wp has similar numbers, es.wp has over 50% more redirects, as long as we maintain Special:BrokenRedirects and Special:DoubleRedirects we don't have a problem.

As for why redirects should be kept after the deletion of a duplicate, its the same reasoning that applies to Commons:File renaming. Keeping the attribution chain for reusers of our content intact is a big deal, if we want to be considered as a reliable source of media. The renaming info goes into more detail on that, but the relevant bit really is "keep harmless redirects (minor spelling errors, or .JPG to .jpg), delete harmful ones (misleading, offensive, promotional)".

We have no way of knowing if the file is being used by someone else, like you say its hard enough to work out if its used on an old version of WP, so its best to be cautious and set up the redirect.

The exception is that recent uploads don't need redirects: As they are recent the odds of someone else using it are slim to non-existent. The recent bit is vague, but if a file was uploaded today there's no point keeping the redirect (like most files that get tagged with {{Bad name}}) - so deleting that redirect you mentioned is sensible. A file uploaded in 2005, like the Grey Shark is not recent.

Hope that explains things.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Desert

Hiya

No problem. I did a rename myself (because it felt weird to have my user name in the file name :)). Cheers. Anthere (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi! Thank you for this quick deletion. Please, don't forget File:Ballabio taglio retina.jpg ;-) Bye bye! --Delfort (talk) 22:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 08:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

21:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Automovilistas y yuntas, 1Oct 1922, ampliación.jpg

Yes, exactly: this photo can stay in Wikipedia, as originally intended. Do I remove my request or someone else needs to do it for me?--Wkboonec (talk) 00:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I've closed it already with Keep. --Túrelio (talk) 07:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Piece de el hadjar.png

It is not Algeria’s currency Why you delate it ?????????????????????????????

Piece_de_el_hadjar.png -- User:Vikoula5 8:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Because it had been tagged as "Copyright violation: Commons:Currency# Algeria. Algeria’s currency is copyright. Unless coin is pre-1948 (PD-Algeria) the coin is copyrighted" by ARTEST4ECHO. But you yourself had put it in Category:Algeria. --Túrelio (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

the Algerian bank did not link with this coin, because it it not a currency it is a jubilee Medal of an algerian factory ........ User:Vikoula5 10:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Restored. Sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 09:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Restoration Request: NorthernOakWSLiveFeb2011.jpg

Hi there,

I noticed that you marked this file for deletion due to it having a non-free licence; the photographer has since contacted me and notified me that he's changed the licence for the picture on Flickr to Attribution Creative Commons, which should hopefully allow it to be used on Wikipedia. Please visit the picture's Flickr page at http://www.flickr.com/photos/craigand/5427341219/ to confirm this and let me know if the file can be restored. Thanks! ChrisManji (talk) 09:07, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png

Hi, please revert to my last version File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png (revert version of user Kintetsubuffalo) and lock after. Thank you. --W.Rebel (talk) 18:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but when I took a look at it the map content had already been "changed" (magnitude value increased to 9). Therefore it wouldn't make sense now to revert to your last version. By the way, is the now missing border/frame that important? --Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

These same images in different languages​​. Kintetsubuffalo attack on just one. --W.Rebel (talk) 10:17, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, that might be a reasonable rationale, as it would be preferred if all look the same. So you might add the border/frame the the last version of File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png. --Túrelio (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

thank you --W.Rebel (talk) 10:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Next attact from User:Kintetsubuffalo on File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png --W.Rebel (talk) 11:26, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Funktion von templates

Hallo Túrelio, weißt Du, ob z.B. folgende tempates: {{Clist}}, {{Collapse}} in commons nicht mehr funktionstüchtig sind oder sein sollen? In Wikispecies "klappt" das Zusammenklappen. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Keine Ahnung. Ich bin mal auf Category:Zeus gegangen, wo {{Collapse}} benutzt wird, und dort schien es zu funktionieren. Geht es bei dir (wo du den Defekt bemerkt hast) immer noch nicht? --Túrelio (talk) 09:44, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

...beim "Zeus" war mein Rechner auch nicht bereit, Inhalte zu öffnen und zu schließen. Ich habe meinen Opera-Browser wieder erst mal im Verdacht (unter Firefox geht es teilweise) oder in meinen Einstellungen (MonoBook) von Commons und WP stimmt etwas nicht gegenüber von Wikispecies. Ich werde die Einstellungen mal Punkt für Punkt vergleichen. Danke für Deine Überprüfung. Orchi (talk) 12:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

...Fehler war eine Einstellung in Opera (Opera wurde als Firefox ausgegeben). Gruß. Orchi (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Theme6-production.jpg

Can you please undelete the file File:Theme6-production.jpg which you have deleted because we have received OTRS permission for it. The OTRS TT # is 2011031610003333 --Sreejith K (talk) 05:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done, though an OTRS volunteer will still have to add the ticket to the page. --Túrelio (talk) 09:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I have added the necessary template. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Florencia Bertotti.png

excuse me, but I was wrong to put the right license. I am a bit 'inexperienced and I was distracted.

Now, okay? If not good, please can you tell me what.

..and you talk easily the english? I am Italian so I have difficulty understanding English. Thanks you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.132.69.33 (talk • contribs) 19. März 2011, 17:06 Uhr (UTC)

Ciao Pediwiki,

I fear it is not o.k. These 2 images were obviously shot from a TV series. But TV content is not free. It belongs to the TV channel or company. And by making a screenshot or capture, you do not earn any rights or become the author. --Túrelio (talk) 16:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry, my language is spanish. I take the second photo with my camera in that event, (presentation of a TV series) where i asist. Firts photo is a personal photo that i take with her. Sorry my bad english. Any problem?--Huaweiideluis (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, yo solo sabe un poco de castellano. Tu has tenido la photographia File:Maite Dolores.jpg por tu mismo de verdad? Pero con que tipo the camera? Mi pregunta por los EXIF data refiere a los "meta datos" que puedes ver per exemplo en este imagen File:RiccardiAachen 2222.jpg a bacho. Eso dato son producidos automaticamente por la camera digital. Ninguno to tus imagenes tiene meta datos, por que? --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

La verdad no estoy seguro, subí las fotos a facebook. Formatearon mi Pc y para recuperarlas las copie desde facebook , la tome desde dos cámaras diferentes, la última foto fue tomada con la cámara Kodak de mi hermana.--Huaweiideluis (talk) 23:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

"la última foto" es este File:N702985515 1918209 6505.jpg? En cas de un Si, 1) pregunta tu hermana si la es accuerda con la distribucion de su foto, y 2) cambia el nombre del autor en la nombre de tu hermana. --Túrelio (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Request undeletion

We have received the OTRS permission for the following three files.

• File:Forest day 1 image.jpg
• File:Forest day 2 image.jpg
• File:Forest day 3 image.jpg

Can you please undelete the files. The OTRS ticket # is 2011031610003333 --Sreejith K (talk) 13:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. But File:Forest day 3 image.jpg should be double-checked as it is credited to "Casper Christoffersen-AFP/Getty Images"! --Túrelio (talk) 20:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Alsace, Haut-Rhin, Colmar, Musée d'Unterlinden, La Vierge de Niedermorschwihr, vers 1500..jpg

Hi Túrelio, the above is an unnecessary redirect, but your colleague wouldn't delete it. Would you be so kind? Thank you very much! --Edelseider (talk) 07:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Der Kollege hatte insofern recht als dein Foto tatsächlich auf dieser externen Seite http://www.uespra.org/index.php?option=com_awiki&view=mediawiki&article=Unterlinden%3Fqsrc%3D3044&Itemid=56 direkt eingelinkt ist und bei der Löschung des redirs dort fehlen würde. Du könntest vielleicht mal versuchen den Betreiber zu kontaktieren, damit er das Link korrigiert. Weitere externe Nutzungen habe ich auf die Schnelle nicht gefunden. --Túrelio (talk) 08:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ach so, das hatte ich nicht verstanden. Sag, wieso hast du eigentlich ein spanisches Pseudonym? Da ich deine Babel-Leiste nicht angeschaut hatte, dachte ich bisher, du seist hispanophon. Weiterhin gute Zusammenarbeit wünscht --Edelseider (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Spanisch? Túrelio ist Quenya[19]. á na márië. --Túrelio (talk) 08:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Aha. --Edelseider (talk) 09:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback request

Hi there, thanks for your message on my page. Can we please continue that conversation there? Schwede66 08:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For clarifying things at Admin noticeboard - cheers SatuSuro (talk) 12:16, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 21:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

A second thank you

Hi Túrelio. Thanks for cleaning up the speedy's I requested the last couple of days. :-) (And I've got three more for you, hehe) With love, Trijnstel (talk) 21:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 21:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

File:15. January 2010 Gul Mudin.jpg

Hello you delited this file. I find simmeler file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg is public domain This applies worldwide. Pictures taken by U.S. military personnel on duty are ineligible for copyright, unless the photographer successfully claims that the photographs were not taken as part of his or her official duties. The photographers of the Abu prisoner abuse photos have denied this under oath. I think a file 15. January 2010 Gul Mudin is the same case. Can you help me? Thenks.--PowerAustin (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

the problem is that I do not agree with the keep-decision in Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Abu-ghraib-leash.jpg. These are just community votes and they are (we all, me too) influenced by political things. Both are images are important documents, no doubt. But that does no mean they are free. In my opinion, with the Gul Mudin image it is the more clear that it was not shot doing their duty, as this "kill team" was their own idea, contrary to their duties, as I understand it. Anyway, you are always free to file the image for undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I would agree with Túrelio and state that the prosecutions will show that the photos were not part of the soldiers' official duties, and Commons cannot host them on the grounds of fair use, whereas other sites can do so.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

/* Gemma Mewse deleted wiki images */

Hi there, I uploaded two images to wiki commons about a month ago to use on conjunction with the Gemma Mewse Wikipedia page. I set the image permissions on flickr to CC so that there would not be a permission or access problem but for some reason they were deleted by yourself and I'm unsure why. I sent the permission form email in and did not hear a response and have only recently noticed that the images were removed. Can you pelase explain to me how to have these images reinstated as they are my personal images. Thank you.

Mdanie2 (talk) 14:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, could you please specify to which images you are refering to. In case it is File:Gemmamewseroachfordtonymoorejonallen.png, on Flickr it is still non-commercial, which is not allowed on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Template

Hi, I had request for deleting {{Rtl-lang}}, but Rtl-lang is protected for me so I requested deletion on talk page. can you delete that template? thanks :) 173.234.41.23 00:30, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Hilfe

Kannst du mir beim Aufbau einer Kategorie helfen? -- amrollbia ^☎ 21:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, was meinst du mit "Aufbau"? Und welche Kat. konkret? --Túrelio (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Also ich möchte ein Bild zu einer neuen Kategorie Amrollbia hinzufügen. -- amrollbia ^☎ 17:07, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Die Kategorie Amrollbia existiert momentan ja nicht mehr, weil sie, da leer, gelöscht wurde. Wenn du sie neu anlegen möchtest, was sehr einfach ist, oder ich sie für dich anlegen soll, sollten wir mal den Namen abklären. "Amrollbia" sagt mir nichts, außer dass es dein Username ist. Wenn Amrollbia keine weitere eigenständige Bedeutung hat, ist es als Kat.name ungeeignet, da keiner nach einem unbekannten Begriff suchen wird. Wenn du Amrollbia als Kat.namen wählen willst, weil du, User:Amrollbia, dort deine eigenen Dateien einsortieren willst, es sich nach unserem Verständnis also um einer User-Kategorie handelt, sollte der Kat.name anders lauten, nämlich z.B. Category:Files uploaded by Amrollbia oder Category:Images by Amrollbia. Weitere Frage: wird es bei dem "ein Bild" für die Kat. bleiben oder kommen weitere hinzu. Im ersteren Fall wird die Kat. nämlich nicht lange überleben, weil eine 1-Bild-Kat. i.a. nicht wirklich sinnvoll ist.--Túrelio (talk) 07:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Brisa passion fruit fizzy drink and sweets.jpg

Hello Turélio, I've seen that you deleted File:Brisa passion fruit fizzy drink and sweets.jpg, which, if I well recall, was uploaded by me. What was the problem with the file? Was it the brand in the bottle or something like that?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 06:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi DarwIn, it had been tagged (by somebody else) as derivative. As the Tweety figure was well visible, I considered that a valid (though not too strong) rationale. The bottle lable wasn't important for me, as it was hardly readable. If you prefer, I can undelete it and let it go through a regular DR. --Túrelio (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

If it wouldn't be too much work, I would prefer, yes. I would like if at least the bottle could remain, as it shows one of Madeira local industries, the Brisa juices.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 13:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I had undeleted it, but if was deleted again by somebody else. I had understood that you wanted to crop away the Tweety figure. --Túrelio (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, I didn't noticed it... Can you please undelete it again? I'll crop it right away. Sorry for all the trouble.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 20:21, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've cropped it now, I even prefer it this way, since I never liked that yellow bright Tweety sweet box in the back, wich has nothing to do with Madeira island. Do you believe it's ok now?-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 20:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Hope so. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Ö-u_Ulanen.jpg

Ich darf Dich bitten, das Bild wieder herzustellen, da der Maler nicht wie von Dir vermutet Herbert Knötel (war gar kein Maler, sondern ein Historiker) sondern Richard Knötel (1857-1914) war. -- Steinbeisser (talk) 09:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Du hattest das hier schon File talk:Ö-u Ulanen.jpg schon gelesen? --Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Der Herr Herbert Knötel hat in der de:WP nicht mal einen eigenen Artikel und wird lediglich als Heereskundler im BKL aufgeführt. Scheint mit der Malerei nicht weit hergewesen zu sein. Als Maler nscheinend nur Insidern bekannt (die sogar seinen Stil erkennen können, potz Donner und Doria) -- Steinbeisser (talk) 09:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Da kann ich sachlich nichts zu sagen, keine Ahnung. Wenn du das mit den beiden durchdiskutieren willst, kann ich das Bild vorübergehend entlöschen und in eine reguläre DR überführen. Just say it. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Bitte -- Steinbeisser (talk) 09:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

about File:Versailles-Appartements de Marie-Antoinette-Grande salle de Bains.png

Hello, i see that file are delete for "loading error, impossible to load". But, it seem that the file can be download ? what's the problem with this file ? Thanks. Crochet.david (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, in fact it had been tagged as such by User:Bohème. When I had gone to the image page, the image indeed didn't show. However, when I checked now, it did appear, though after a long loading time. So, I will undelete it. No, same problem, see for yourself. Eventually you should reduce the size. --Túrelio (talk) 17:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

removal of tamper evident security label picture

hi

you have removed an image I posted of a tamper evident security label which I would like reposted and the original image restored.

You have not understood that I am the Managing Director of the Manufacturer and fully entitled to list the image as I have under this creative commons license.

you can confirm this by emailing we adrian.steele@labellock.com

Please undo you removal immediately.

Dr Adrian Steele — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.149.28.146 (talk • contribs) 27. März 2011, 19:54 Uhr (UTC)

As you have neither mentioned your username nor the filename, I have no idea to which image you are refering. --Túrelio (talk) 18:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Фотография неизвестного автора

Вы удалили фотографию Любови Кабо, загруженную мной, под предлогом, что у нее не указан автор. Это фотография из личного архива Л. Р. Кабо. Автор ее мне неизвестен. Если следовать Вашей логике, то я не могу и фотографию своей персоны опубликовать, если не помню, кто ее сделал? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holothrop (talk • contribs) 10:28, 28. Mär. 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't read Russian. Goggle translates: "You have removed the photo of Lyubov Cape, loaded me on the pretext that it is not specified by the author. This photo is from the personal archive LR Cape. Its author is unknown to me. If we follow your logic, I can not and will publish a photograph of his persona, if you do not remember who did it?" Is that what you were saying? --Túrelio (talk) 08:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

In case you are refering to File:KaboLR.jpg: when the author is "unknown", you cannot release it under a CC-license, because that can only the author. If it is proven anonymous and if the relevant jurisdiction has a provision for anonymous works, you might claim PD-anonymous, if the terms are met. --Túrelio (talk) 08:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

It is the photo of russian writer Lubov Kabo, taken from her personal archive. Where must I search the author!?

When You place your photo on Facebook You also indicate the author? Be reasonable.

What do you mean by "her personal archive"? Facebook content is per se not free. A user can put an image on his/her Facebook page, without having the right to do that. If we then copy such an image to Commons and redistribute it, we may commit a copyright violation and any re-user may be sued for that by the rights holder. If "Lubov Kabo" is still alive, you could contact her and ask her for permission. A template for a legally correct permission text, is here in english and here in Russian?. By the way, Facebook? ;-) --Túrelio (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The person you talk about died in 2007. Túrelio, I'll try to explain the rules in Russian. Mithril (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Holothrop, ситуация именно такова: нельзя публиковать на Викискладе произведения, не имея никаких представлений об авторстве. Скажем, если Вы сфотографировали картину в картинной галерее, не посмотрев, кто её написал, это исключительно Ваше упущение, не дающее Вам никакого права распоряжаться собственностью автора (к примеру, продавать репродукции полотна). Если Вы не обладаете информацией в силу других «непреодолимых» обстоятельств, ситуация не меняется. В России это кажется странным, но всё предельно логично. Но! Если Вы всего лишь хотите использовать данную фотографию в статье в русском разделе Википедии, Вы можете загрузить файл под несвободной лицензией не на Викисклад, а в файловое хранилище русской Википедии. Разумеется, изучив Критерии добросовестного использования. Если понадобится помощь, свяжитесь со мной там (логин тот же). Mithril (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. --Túrelio (talk) 07:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Always welcome. Although seems to me the effort has made no effect because the user didn't see my reply. Mithril (talk) 11:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Я правильно Вас понял? Я не могу публиковать фотографии из своего семейного фотоальбома? Права на фотографии моих родственников имеет фотомастерская? Говорите дальше, умоляю Вас... :-D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.165.64.159 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC) (UTC)

Почти правильно: авторское право на такую фотографию, скорее всего, принадлежит не фотомастерской, а фотографу, сделавшему фотографию. В соавторстве с декоратором и гримёром, если таковые имели место. Авторские права, конечно же, не единственные права. Существует, в частности, право собственности. Однако, мнится мне, для юридического удостоверения права собственности на фотографию нужны документы, которых в данном случае тоже нет. Mithril (talk) 02:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Апофеоз копирастии! Удивительно, что я смог опубликовать в своем паспорте свою фотографию - ее ведь тоже делала не машина, а она в свободном доступе - по первому требованию... Holothrop (talk) 20:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Вы невнимательно прочли то, что я написал. Однако Вы можете не принимать условий, на которых фонд Викимедия предоставляет свои услуги, если эти условия Вам непонятны или чем-то не устраивают. Никто Вас к этому не обязывает. Mithril (talk) 17:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Rawa77

Hello. I'm questioning this user (Rawa77 (talk · contribs)) and his/her uploads. There is no way to verify his/her claim of being the authorized representative of the women's right group RAWA (w:Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan). I suspect that this is a fake account. Can you help me where to report this investigation? Thanks.--Officer (talk) 11:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Humberto Krujoski

Hey You! Again you erased photos mine! The photos that you erased I took for the page Humberto Krujoski. I raised and them that page after raising wiki! I took those photographies for this website: www.jemotorsport.com.ar. BUT THEY ARE STILL MINE!

P.D: Answer me in Spanish!

--Diego HC (talk) 21:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

How should we know that? The image on JE Competicion has a higher resolution than File:Humberto Krujoski.jpg. This suggested that je-motorsport.com.ar was the source. The images on je-motorsport.com.ar have no author credit, which is rather strange. But thereby we had no chance to compare the photographers name with your username. And je-motorsport.com.ar carries a clear (C) note "JE Competicion - Todos los derechos Reservados"[20]. Though I tend to believe you, I have contacted je-motorsport.com.ar and asked for confirmation. To prevent such problems in the future, I would recommend you for all your own images that have been published prior your upload to Commons to put a link to prior-publication site into the entry other_versions of the image description page.

I don't know enough spanish to translate that by myself. Google translated (with some corrections by me): ¿Cómo podríamos saber eso? La imagen de JE Competicion tiene una resolución mayor que la File:Humberto Krujoski.jpg. Esto sugiere que je-motorsport.com.ar era la fuente. Las imágenes de je-motorsport.com.ar no tienen crédito al autor, que es bastante extraño. Poro eso no tuvimos oportunidad de comparar el nombre del fotógrafo con tu nombre de usuario. Además, je-motorsport.com.ar lleva una nota de copyright "JE Competicion - Todos los derechos Reservados"[21]. Aunque me inclino a creerte, me he comunicado con je-motorsport.com.ar y le pidió confirmación. Para evitar estos problemas en el futuro, te recomiendo a todos tus propias imágenes que se han publicado antes de la subida de Commons para poner un enlace al sitio antes de la publicación en la other_versions entrada de la página de descripción de la imagen. --Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, now I understand... Then, the next time, there will be photos that I will not raise the Team´s Web, not to have problems.. (OK, ahora comprendo... Entonces, la próxima vez habrán fotos que no subiré a la página del Equipo para no tener problemas)

Thanks --Diego HC (talk) 19:41, 15 April 2011 (UTC) (My English is very bad. "It's very Difficult" says Carlos Tévez)

Deleted copyvio

Hi Túrelio! You acted a speedy I put up for one of User:Deanb's images. I have proposed almost all of his images for deletion because of repeated copyright violations (he has been blocked on English Wikipedia for this). Please take a look. Thanks, Ynhockey (talk) 09:29, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to look into it later this day. --Túrelio (talk) 07:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Oops, missed it. Done now by Jameslwoodward. --Túrelio (talk) 12:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: File:Desfile Leandro de Itaquera 2009.jpg

Thiago Toledo changed the license of the photo. Please verify that the license is correct. Thank in advance. Regi-Iris Stefanelli (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Your deletion of File:Daft Punk - Tron Legacy Soundtrack.jpg

Could You please elaborate more, as "PD-Textlogo my ass" cannot clarify which font was an obvious copyright violation. Just to be sure on my next upload. Thanks. feydey ^(talk) 22:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for not manually cleaning the somewhat "less friendly" deletion rationale that had been added by nominator User:Sertion. As I understand (and as I agree to, after vieweing the image), he wanted to express that this image can hardly be considered as PD-Text only, as the main element "tron" is graphically elaborated. (In addition, it's from Disney, who like to sue for copyvio, in general). --Túrelio (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank You for the reply. My User talk page template gave no indication of the deletion rationale that had been used by nominator User:Sertion. feydey ^(talk) 10:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Apidadant.jpg is from 1900, then it is hardly your own work

that image was not used anywhere got proof. erases everything you need, thanks.

Salines (talk) 20:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The image may be public domain. But to check that, we need to know the source and the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 20:47, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Babajanian statue at night.jpg

Thanks for your notification, the source link is rectified and the problem is solved.--Kevorkmail (talk) 11:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. But, regrettably that was not the problem. The problem comes from the sculpture itself. It is very likely still copyrighted by the sculptor. Thereby, images of the statue require the permission of the sculptor, as there is no exemption for such works in Armenia (COM:FOP#Armenia). --Túrelio (talk) 12:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Villa del Cerro speedy

Hi Túrelio. Thank you for the cleanup. I had not noticed that File:Villa del Cerro-Montevideo Map.PNG was still in use. I updated http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_del_Cerro to the new map, but maybe we should wait for a while to see if anybody wants the previous version. I am not sure: Should I remove the speedy template for now? Hoverfish (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Borrado de la imagen de File:San Beranrdo.JPG y Archivo: Socaire.JPG

Según indica la propia página de google, no violo ninguna ley sobre derechos de autor al publicar esta imagen, ya que colocando el logo de google que sale en la parte de abajo no se violan los derechos, lee la siguiente página ---------- http://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines.html

"Attribution is the line(s) shown on the bottom of the Content in the products along with copyright notices, such as “©2011 Google, Map Data ©2011 Tele Atlas.” (The exact text of the attribution changes based on geography and Content type.) The attribution text must be legible to the average viewer or reader. The automatically-generated Google logo and attribution text may only be removed or obstructed if reintroduced in a visible form elsewhere within the Content. In print use, if for some reason attribution cannot be placed within the Content, separate attribution text must be provided directly adjacent to the Content. In video, attribution must appear on-screen for the entire duration the Content is displayed; we cannot approve requests to move attribution to end credits."

http://www.google.com/permissions/geoguidelines.html http://earth.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=21422&topic=1141

File:Cerros de Incahuasi.JPG

see example

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinglerzaga (talk • contribs) 6. April 2011, 00:20 Uhr (UTC) --Túrelio (talk) 06:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for providing the links that clearly show that Google maps content is not free enough. This states that you are not allowed to use the images for commercial products, which is required per Commons' policy. This states that Google Maps/Earth material can be used under fair-use, which is also not allowed on Commons (contrary to :en wikipedia), and that derivative use is not allowed, which again is a requirement per Commons' policy. --Túrelio (talk) 06:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Erhard Mettler photo

Hi, I hope you remeber that couple of weeks I've uploaded one jpg file which was a portret of dr. Erhard Mettler. It has been deleted because didn't has a right permission to used it. I wrote same e-mail to headquarters of METTLER TOELDO Inc. and they sent me one photo which wasn't used never before. it was in their archive. I put a citation of e-mail i gave from them below:

"....We can provide you with the enclosed image of Erhard Mettler. The original picture is in our archive which has been published in earlier years when Mr Mettler was in the company. Since he is the founder of Mettler Toledo Inc. and the inventor of our main product, I think this should be enough prove that we may use this picture.

Best regards Daniel Kreienbühl

Head of Advertising Agency Global MarCom Switzerland

Mettler-Toledo International Inc. Im Langacher CH-8606 Greifensee, Switzerland Tel. +41 44 944 28 82 Fax +41 44 944 30 90 ..."

Do you think i can upload that new photo to commonswiki and use it in to Erhard Mettler? Thanks for your answer. MTPL

Hi MTPL,

great! Please do the following: upload the new photo under a slightly different filename than the deleted one, and add to the description (either at upload or thereafter) the following string: {{OTRS pending}}. Thereafter you should forward (complete with headers) the above posted original email with the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and don't forget to mention the new filename of the uploaded image, in order that our OTRS volunteers can associate the permission with the file. --Túrelio (talk) 10:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I do that, MTPL

I've done everything exactly like you said. Could you check it, if it properly done for sure? MTPL

It's fine. I have only removed the "self" from the license template, as only the author can "self-license". Could you find out anything about the time (year) when this photo was shot? It's not required, but would be helpful for re-users. It may take some time until an OTRS volunteer has checked the permission and issued the "o.k. ticket". But the image is protected by the OTRS-pending. --Túrelio (talk) 13:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, that photo is comming from Mettler toledo Inc. archive. Like mr. Daniel Kreienbühl wrote "....The original picture is in our archive which has been published in earlier years when Mr Mettler was in the company. ..." Thanks for your time MTPL

Ticket 2011040610011001 has been received but no explicit statement on the license for the photo has been given. A date for the photo is needed to know if it may now be in the public domain otherwise. – Adrignola talk 13:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Frans Oerder11.jpg

File:Frans Oerder11.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Hi, thank you for placing the above notice on my talkpage, but I do think that since I attached the speedy delete tag to the image I must be aware of its deletion. cheers Androstachys (talk) 07:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Often I find speedy-tagged images without the uploader being notified. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Delete Image Gallery.

Se puede borrar una galería de imágenes si ninguna está enlazada. gracias Salines (talk) 07:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

---

You can delete an image gallery if none is bound. thanks

Salines (talk) 09:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Salines, I am not sure to understand what you mean or want. Is that a question or an information? Galleries on Commons can be deleted if they are empty or totally redundant to the related category. --Túrelio (talk) 10:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

---

hello, the specific question is: my gallery has five images, none of them has been linked, can you delete that entire gallery?

Salines (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "my gallery", this one? --Túrelio (talk) 11:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Boy or girl

File:Vaishnavi Kadam - Kolkata 2011-04-05 2234.JPG It is really a girl's photograph. Her face looks boyish, but wears a frock (the two strips are seen on shoulder) I was also confused! After taking photograph, I asked her mother of the child's name, she told - 'Vaishnavi Kadam', in case of male child, she would say 'Vaishnav'. After getting your comment, I again asked nearby people showing this photograph, they confirmed. Biswarup Ganguly (talk) 08:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. I didn't intend to cause you additional work. --Túrelio (talk) 08:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

What's your criteria on Commons' purpose?

Wikimedia Commons' project scope states:

All files:

[...]

Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose.

You removed the {{Speedy}} template that I put on File:SERGIO Y SU CELULAR 2.jpg because is "used on his userpage". And what? That file is educational and useful for Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia project? I think not. The user that uploaded that file must understand that Wikimedia Commons is not Imgur or Imageshack, it is not a personal repository. All is explained well in COM:PS.

EDIT: I miss: Special:Contributions/Hilios1 and Special:Contributions/Fer:)nandh are cousins and they are uploading tons of personal files.

Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an educational purpose:

Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. There are plenty of other projects on the Internet you can use for such a purpose, such as Flickr. Such private image collections do not become educational even if displayed as a gallery on a user page on Commons or elsewhere.

Greetings, Fitoschido // Leave me a shout! 18:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

You might have read the message from the {{Userpageimage}}-tag that I had then added to the image:

This image is used on a user page of a Wikimedia user and is stored on Commons according to the rules set out in Commons:Project scope#File in use on Commons only: the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed or Commons:Project scope#File in use in another Wikimedia project: the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project.
If the image ceases to be used it may be eligible for deletion as it may have no educational purpose.

---

. Of course, as this image seems no longer to be used, now it can be deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 19:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

From the very page you linked: "An otherwise non-educational file does not acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page or in a category on Commons, nor solely because it is in use on a user page (the "User:" namespace), but by custom the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed." – Adrignola talk 19:37, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

LabelTag-Uploader

Hallo Túrelio, weißt du noch was hier raus geworden ist? http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:T%C3%BArelio&diff=prev&oldid=18626884

Wenn er die Fotos nur von Fotolia gekauft hat, dann kann er sie wahrscheinlich ja nicht nicht hie hochladen. Oder bezog sich das nur auf andere Bilder, also die von ihm, die jetzt noch hier online sind? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 18:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, hast du ein Langzeitgedächtnis! Das ist ja gut 2 Jahre her. Na ja, beim Suchen nach meiner Antwort auf die verlinkte Anfrage hab ich wenigstens meine damalige talkpage-Mieze wiedergesehen. Geantwortet hatte ich letztlich hier. Aber 1 Tag später hat der User seine Aktivität eingestellt. Das damals andiskutierte Bild ist am selben Tag gelöscht worden, aber nicht wegen URV, sondern oos ("Promotional content"). Auch wenn ich mir relativ sicher war, habe ich bei Fotolia mal nachgeschaut und erwartungsgemäß ein ausdrückliches Verbot der Weiterveräusserung und Überlassung gefunden[22],[23]. D.h., wir sollten unser Bilderreservoir regelmäßig nicht nur nach Getty-Material sondern auch nach Fotolia screenen und löschen. --Túrelio (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Die alte (aber vom Alter her wohl junge) Muschi ist ja süüß! Die aktuelle ist aber auch ganz nett. :-D

Nein, Gedächtnis hat damit nichts zu tun - einfach nur die Edits des Accounts angeguckt und gesehen, dass er hier geschrieben hat. Eh ich mich aber selbst durch Versionsgeschichten durchwurschtel, dachte ich, dass ich besser einfach frage, denn du erinnerst dich ja vllt. noch daran.

Mir geht es nicht um das eine Bild - sondern die ganzen anderen von ihm, die auch alle relativ promotional sind (aber sei's drum) - ist halt nur fraglich, ob z.B. die Hände nicht von Fotolia sind. Denn, wenn du mit tineye nach File:Wiki labeltag.jpg suchst, dann findet man das gleiche CD-Bild - aber ohne Hände. Aber da werden wir/ich wohl mal etwas herumgooglen müssen, um das zu finden... Was war denn auf dem gelöschten Foto drauf? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 00:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Das war eine Collage aus 5 Bildelementen plus Text. In der Mitte die Unterseite einer CD in Blau-metallic, in den 4 Ecken jeweils ein Minibildchen teils mit Leuten, die irgendetwas mit einer CD machen. Letztlich wir ein Werbebild, um zu zeigen, was das Produkt (keine Ahnung ob Label oder Software oder was; da kein Produktname) alles ermöglicht. Deshalb auch meine ursprüngliche Frage an den Uploader, ob er für alle Einzelbilder die Rechte hat. Der Umstand, dass er "gegangen" ist, legt zumindest nahe, dass die anderen Uploads auch "von irgendwo" stammen können. Insofern wäre es nicht schlecht, wenn du mal danach schauen könntest. --Túrelio (talk) 06:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Авиадвигатель

Здраствуйте я работник ОАО Авиадвигатель. Из-за нехватки времени я не написал письма подтверждающие того что Авиадвигатель разрешает использовать принадлежащие ему изображения в Википедии. Пошлите пожалуйста мне еще раз ссылку на шаблон письма. Пришлите мне пожалуйста еще раз ссылку на письмо для подтверждения прав. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solovei777 (talk • contribs) 12:48, 8. Apr. 2011 (UTC)

See my explaination and the added links on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 12:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Здраствуйте вчера я получил

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 #2011042010005251. 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=2011042010005251 Find other files from the same ticket:

, можно ли восстановить удаленные изображения.

Thanks. I've undeleted some of the files and asked the OTRS volunteers to confirm the ticket range. --Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Red Swastika Society

Fixed: File:Red_Swastika_Society_member.jpg#Licensing. I uploaded as public domain because I don't know how to do it directly with the PD China tag. Victor falk (talk) 08:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, but it is not fixed. PD-China requires and accordingly the license tag says "Please provide where the image was first published and who created it." --Túrelio (talk) 08:38, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately the source doesn't have this information, but this photo is evidently made before 1961. Also, the Red Swastika society was disolved when the communists took over in 1949. Victor falk (talk) 08:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Still per PD-China (all photographs enter the public domain 50 years after they were first published, or if unpublished 50 years from creation) you have to provide evidence that either the image has been published at least 50 years ago or that it has been unpublished in the 50 years after its creation. --Túrelio (talk) 08:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

It's obvious. Victor falk (talk) 13:29, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

So far, you have neither provided evidence that it has been published at least 50 years (i.e., before 1961) ago nor that it has been unpublished in the 50 years after its creation, which would be much more difficult, of course. Try the first one. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

How does unpublishing work? Victor falk (talk) 05:28, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Therefore I recommended you to research for evidence of the "published at least 50 years ago". --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

danke, geht.

was mach ich beim Hochladen auf Commons falsch? Error Author needed. original Source needed. Ist etwas neu? Kannst Du mein Antarctic Krill krill666.jpg Bild bitte vorschlagen als Picture of the Day Uwe kils (talk) 12:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

"Picture of the Day" - hab ich bislang noch nie gemacht, weshalb ich nicht genau weiß wie das geht :-(. --Túrelio (talk) 12:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Cuman woman warrior

Why are you marking this as a violation. I found this on an internet forum about warriors - it is quite a nice picture and would be such a shame to delete it, please dont...

Ever thought that the artist who draw this, might hold the copyright (until 70 years after his/her death)? Ever did care to inform us about the real source (http://....) instead of the useless information "internet forum"? --Túrelio (talk) 12:53, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok fine, here is the site where some of them come from: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=193607 And please tell me if it is fine, judging from the source site

Thanks. But after viewing the site, I don't think we can accept that. It is obvious that the images in the relevant posting on that site come from different sources. In addition, the forum itself does not offer any statement about copyright. That means, we cannot simply assume that the poster of these images does hold the copyright for them. He/She likely scanned them from books or other sources. If you are very hard interested to have these images, you will have to do a thorough research for the original sources and artists. When you have found them, we can check whether eventually some are PD due to age (though that seems unlikely) and you can directly contact the artists and ask them for a release under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

A.Catalina

Actually, A.Catalina is not non-communicative, just has very, very little English. I've been communicating a bit with her by email; she has been writing me in Romanian and I've been responding largely in English, which I gather she is following largely through Google Translate or some such. I did my best to explain the lack of Freedom of Panorama in Romania, and also clarified some issues she didn't understand about copyrights. Most salient among the latter was that she was under the misimpression that the copyright of a building belonged to its owner rather than its architect, and consequently was thinking she had relevant permissions where, in fact, she did not. I don't know if her behavior will change at all, but at least she now better understands the issues. - Jmabel ! talk 07:07, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Though she produced a lot of unnecessary work for me (and others), I think your effort is well-deserved as she has contributed a lot of usable images. --Túrelio (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Delete photho

you just delete the photo File:Puffin in Farne Island 2010.jpg, I've made a mistake, sorry. --Famabe (talk) 09:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

If it is really your own photo, you could change the license from CC-NC-something to CC-something by yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 13:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

DELETE ALL 3 ASAP

This media was probably deleted.

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

 

--Motopark (talk) 07:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Revista Ea.gif has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Isla Grande Boulevard.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Túrelio (talk) 07:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

MESMERIZING CAT (Wire and Plastic Products (talk) 08:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC))

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

DELETE THESE 2 ASAP

File:Paradise Art Space.jpg+File:Revista Ea.jpg Thanks again. (Wire and Plastic Products (talk) 08:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC))

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Gravlax_Traiteur_Wille.jpg

Hallo Túrelio, hab dem Benutzer sogar am 4. April noch eine E-Mail geschickt, für den Fall, dass er hier nicht mitliest. Ich denke, wir sollten jetzt löschen, die Gefahr, dass das Bild von dort nur geklaut wurde, ist einfach zu groß. Würdest Du bitte...? Grüßle, --Schwäbin (talk) 08:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Dankeschön! --Schwäbin (talk) 13:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Deleting ship categories

Hi. Instead of deleting all these ship categories, can you just redirect them? Deleting them is leaving many broken links on many Wikipedias, none of which follow the strange new convention here. Thank you. Wknight94 ^talk 12:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try to remember when I see them again. Lately it's really getting somewhat complicated with all this redir-requirements. May be we should add to the Welcome-page "Wikimedia Commons is a media file and redirect repository" ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

That would be better than a home page apology, "Sorry we can't follow the same convention as any of the other Wikipedias. en:Carnival Spirit, fr:Carnival Spirit, pt:Carnival Spirit, ru:Carnival Spirit, ...... Category:Carnival Spirit (ship, 2001)." I don't know where this Commons-only convention came from, but it's a terrible idea. Why not call it Category:Carnival Spirit (ship, 2001; port of registry, Panama; tonnage, 85,900; length, 963 ft; ...) Suddenly, to correctly find the ship's category, you need to know other things about it. Silly. I know we're not a Wikipedia, but why do so many feel the need to be different, even if it makes us worse? Wknight94 ^talk 13:16, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Ehlers 2010-10-18.jpg

[edit] File:Ehlers 2010-10-18.jpg

Hi Vleit, it is not enough to write "permission granted". You have to provide a permission by the photographer and eventually also by the depicted person (depending on applicable personality rights in your country) to OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding this file. It was sent to me by the subject for his Wikipedia page. I have his permission to make it public (see below). What more is required? Thanks, Vleit

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ehlers, Jürgen Dr. <xxx@xxx> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 06:44:31 +0000 Subject: My Wikipedia entry

MIME structure of this message, including any attachments:

   Multipart:
       text/plain, 40 lines Download this text
       text/html, 101 lines Download this text
   [paperclip] =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wikipedia=5FJ=FCrgen=5FEhlers=5Ftranslated.docx?= application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document 18 KBytes
   [paperclip] Ehlers_2010-10-18.jpg image/jpeg 3158 KBytes

Part 1.1:

Dear Vleit,

As the promised page proofs from Mr. Salin have not yet arrived, I have used the weekend for writing mysteries, starting a Facebook page (I do not know yet how it works; I have to ask Jan-Erik for every new step), writing the English version of my homepage (to be installed today, I hope) and writing an English version of my Wikipedia entry (see attachment). As I cannot put it up myself, I was wondering if either you could do that for me, or if you know somebody who might do it.

The text is nearly identical with the German version (of which I do not know who put it up), with a few omissions of German stuff and a few additions regarding English publications.

To have an English Wikipedia entry might be useful when it comes to the question of having something translated into English. That refers to both the scientific books (Die Nordsee, Das Eiszeitalter) and the crime novels. The next novel which will come out in June is set in 1938, and it might have a (small) chance to find an English publisher, because that period is of some interest in Britain - see Hans Fallada's "Alone in Berlin".

Many regards from all of us. Best wishes, Jürgen.

Part 2: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wikipedia=5FJ=FCrgen=5FEhlers=5Ftranslated.docx?= application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document (18 KBytes)

Part 3: Ehlers_2010-10-18.jpg image/jpeg (3158 KBytes) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vleit (talk • contribs) 11. April 2011, 21:52 Uhr (UTC)

The problem is that "for Wikipedia" is not enough to be uploaded to Commons. We require all uploads to be under a so-called free license, that allows others to use the images for any purpose (incl. commercial), at least in regard to copyright. Other restrictions, as personality rights, may apply. Therefore, we need a release under a specific license. As the depicted lives in Germany, please go to Commons:Emailvorlagen#Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber), copy the boxed text, enter the filename and the name of a license of the rights holder's choice (recommended is Creative-Commons-BY-SA; for a human-understandable explaination see here). Then mail all together to the rights holder (this assumes that the depicted did also shoot this photo! if this is not the case, the depicted has to ask this permission from the photographer) and ask him to read the text and, if he agrees, to put his legal name and the date under it and to mail it back to permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org. Thereafter one of our OTRS volunteers will check the permission and issue a so-called OTRS ticket to the image (equivalent to o.k.). --Túrelio (talk) 20:09, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Advice pls..

File_talk:Rasool_Pookkutty_Wax.jpg - Pls advice.....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 04:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

IMHO, the usual copyright rules for 3D sculptures should apply. However, as we currently host quite a number of wax sculptures depicting contemporary persons, I have asked about whether there is any consensus about that. --Túrelio (talk) 06:36, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Seitenlöschung

Hallo Túrelio

danke für das Löschen meiner Unterseiten. Eine kleine Bitte habe ich noch: Könntest du meine CSS-Dateien User:Labant/chick.css, User:Labant/monobook.css, User:Labant/modern.css, User:Labant/cologneblue.css, User:Labant/myskin.css, User:Labant/nostalgia.css, User:Labant/simple.css, User:Labant/standard.css und User:Labant/vector.css ebenfalls Löschen? --Labant (talk) 06:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Ich hoffe, die Großlöschung bedeutet nicht dass du uns verlässt. --Túrelio (talk) 06:54, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Nein ganz im Gegenteil. Ich habe einfach Mal meine Benutzerseite aufgeäumt. Muss auch Mal sein. Nochmals Danke. --Labant (talk) 06:58, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

K-Wagen

Howdy

Quelle und Autor sind doch angegeben, oder übersehe ich etwas?

Gruß Mulhollant (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, du willst doch nicht wirklich sagen, dass du diesen File:K-Wagen.jpg aus dem 1. Weltkrieg am 11.1.2011 selbst aufgenommen hast, oder? --Túrelio (talk) 16:32, 12 April 2011

Ich habe es nicht aufgenommen sondern gezeichnet, ganz altmodisch mit Bleistift. Beim Hintergrund habe ich ein gemeinfreies Bild hinzugezogen.

Gruß Mulhollant (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Na dann, Gratulation, dass du so gut zeichnen kannst, dass man die Zeichnung für ein Foto hält. Ist das Vorlagefoto auch auf Commons oder Wikipedia? --Túrelio (talk) 18:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Nein, es stammt nicht von hier

Mulhollant (talk) 12:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Ist das Vorlagephoto denn sonst irgendwo online? Eine sehr nahe Abzeichnung eines Original stellt m.E. urheberrechtlich eine Bearbeitung (engl. derivative) dar, für denen Legitimität der urheberrechtliche Status des Originals relevant ist. Will sagen, wenn das ursprüngliche Photo noch geschützt ist, was ja nicht unmöglich ist (Todesjahr des Photographen +70 Jahre), kann die Zeichnung u.U. das Recht des Photographen verletzen. Um dieses "u.U." zu klären, muss man aber das Original sehen. --Túrelio (talk) 12:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Photograph und Todesdatum sind nicht angegeben...aber habe das Problem schon behoben

Mulhollant (talk) 17:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Old User:Klaricid uploads

Hi, are you able to look at deleted files File:Juliaca airport.jpg, File:Stacat6.jpg, File:Dc4satco.jpg, File:Dc3satco.jpg, File:C46satco1.jpg, File:Satco001.jpg, to see whether they are taken with the same camera as his remaining uploads?. I suspect that at least File:Juliaca airport.jpg was. Thanks, --Tony Wills (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Good point. Regrettably all airplane images were "blatant" copyvios. Only File:Stacat6.jpg did show a similar church[24] than the currently discussed image, but had no EXIF data, and was uploaded on the same day. It was deleted by the same rationale, as the uploader had changed the author entry 13 hours after upload to "incamaya.org"[25]. All the other deleted files had been uploaded either earlier or later than the two church images, and had no EXIF data. IMHO, it doesn't add much to the DR, except that the uploader had indeed uploaded copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 06:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't really thinking about the current deletion request (which I think is complete nonsense :-), I was wondering whether anything else they uploaded was unnecessarily deleted. Yes, I thought the plane images were probably derivatives (photos of photos) at best. But I am suprised that File:Juliaca airport.jpg wasn't original (as the photographer appears to live in that city and apparently provided other images taken at the airport.) - it may have been on another website, but if it was uploaded by a different person (or pseudonym), it might give a clue to how to contact them (I suspect the account on Panoramio is probably to old to receive a response from). Did you find the "original" that File:Juliaca airport.jpg was supposably a copy of? Thanks for your work on this :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 08:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

The File:Juliaca airport.jpg image somehow shows that the uploader wasn't a clever or even conscious copyviolator, as it was taken from airliners.net, carrying a big in-image caption stating that and the name of the photographer. Also the style of that image was totally different from the remaining airplane images. --Túrelio (talk) 08:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Was the photographer not "sergio de la puente" or "sergio kaiser" then? --Tony Wills (talk) 10:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

The credit in the in-image caption was "Copyright Cyril Delehaye". --Túrelio (talk) 10:30, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I have emailed all the contact email addresses that I could find on the archive of the site that Klaricid listed as the author contact. I do not hold out a lot of hope that any of these old addresses will still be active (two have already bounced) but you never know (it would probably help if I spoke Spanish :-). --Tony Wills (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair image use

Hello

If I find an image under an archive, doesn't that suggest that I may use it, under fair, public rights? Regards Tholoana23 (talk) 07:59, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tholoana23,

being publicly "available", i.e. shown on a website, does not say anything about being free from copyright. To the contrary, you have to assume that any content (if not PD due to age or for other reasons) is copyrighted, if not stated otherwise. If a company puts their content on their website or makes it available for download for "press purposes", that does not mean that it is free in our understanding of free.

Fair use can be claimed locally on :en Wikipedia, if the terms are met; but fair use is absolutely not allowed on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:05, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sad news

Since you were involved in the discussion at File talk:Dubai 051.JPG, I thought I should inform you in case you weren't aware, the news has come through that Producer (talk · contribs) died in February 2011. CT Cooper · talk 12:42, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

No, I didn't know. I have semi-protected his userpage and will pray for him. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 12:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I have also placed a note on his English Wikipedia page. CT Cooper · talk 13:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sacrifice offer - photo

Dear Turelio, You deleted a photo on which (as far as I know) just limited copyright is: http://www.flickr.com/photos/travlr/4163356691/ I didn't use it for commercial goals. I put it on the next page: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Het_offer_als_rituele_dimensie What did I wrong? Theologieproject (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Theologieproject,

per our general policy we do not allow images on Commons that are not free for any kind of use, i.e. no commercial use, educational-only, whatever. Therefore, the deletion had nothing to do with your intended use of this image, but simply with our policy. If you really "need" this image for :nl, you may try to convince the Flickr user to release to Commons without this restriction. --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Kind request

Dear Turelio, can you please delete this photo from the commons, as I have mistakenly uploaded it from flickr with a wrong license. Thanks a lot.--Kevorkmail (talk) 06:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done. A pleasure. --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia_Diskussion:Fotowerkstatt

de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:Fotowerkstatt Du hast es gelöscht, wenn ich recht sehe. Bitte, danke. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 12:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, und was willst du mir damit sagen? Soll ich es entlöschen? Es war von Sandmann4u mit "speedydelete|replaced by [[File:41 025 RAW Nied 1939bearbeitet2.jpg" getaggt worden; hab aber kein Problem es wiederherzustellen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:05, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Ja, "entlöschen" bitte - ist übrigens in use, wie du ja leicht sehen kannst. Du scheinst nicht wirklich das gelesen zu haben, was ich verlinkt habe. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 15:12, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Bitte sehr: File:41 025 RAW Nied 1939bearbeitet1.jpg. Bzgl. in "in use": Fotowerkstatt ist natürlich kein "echter" use, sondern meist nur vorübergehend. Tatsächlich hatte ich vor der Löschung die FW-Seite besucht und nach lesen von "Danke an xavax, habe seine Fassung eingebaut. --Alupus" gefolgert, dass die Version von Alupus nicht mehr benötigt würde. --Túrelio (talk) 15:21, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Danke. Ja, es ist ein Projekt-"Use". Bei uralten Fotowerkstatt-Sachen, sieht die Sache vielleicht ein klein wenig anders aus, aber bei solch aktuellen Bildern stört es einfach, wenn plötzlich eine Bearbeitung weg ist. Und bei älteren Abschnitten (im Archiv) ist es einfach sinnvoll sie zu behalten, um den Diskussionsverlauf nachvollziehen zu können. Commons braucht eine bessere Verwaltung von Versionen - wie die aussehen soll, weiß ich nicht, aber löschen bringts nicht. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 17:09, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

This shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/adifans/3406749061/) is acceptable ?

Hello Ddfree, You have uploaded several files that are copyright violations and you have done so despite our requests not to do so, and despite our instructions. If you do not stop uploading files that are not free, your account will be blocked. See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons. You may also find Commons:Image casebook useful. Please leave me a message if you have further questions. --Túrelio (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Mention sur Flickr licence Acceptable sur Commons ?

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ Some rights reserved CC-BY-SA ACCEPTABLE

This shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/adifans/3406749061/) is acceptable ? Ddfree (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ddfree,

sorry, but this is the difference between the ideal and real world. As you may or may not have experienced on Commons or Wikipedia, people sometimes do not tell the truth, they lie. This also happens on Flickr, Picasa, PhotoBucket, etc. They upload an image that they have stolen from "somewhere" and then claim it as their own. However, in the above mentioned image, it is very easy to detect the lie. Just look at the description below the image on Flickr. The last words are "Photo by Ross Land/Getty Images". Getty Images is a large commercial image agency that likes to take people to court, who use their images without paying for them. And when they get you, you will pay a lot. You should never upload images that have any association with Getty Images to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 16:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

File:BEE author photo2010highres.jpg

OTRS has received permission for the file File:BEE author photo2010highres.jpg from Jeff Burton. The OTRS ticket # is 2011021310002305. Can you please undelete this file? --Sreejith K (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done, though it doesn't display. --Túrelio (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

hi

Hello. The image is no longer in use. Could you delete it please? (Lilic (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)).

Please give images better names

---

I noticed you've uploaded File:Europ12DSC_0843.JPG and I thought I should draw your attention to a common error. Please give uploaded files meaningful names. Otherwise they are difficult to track and it is hard to tell what the file is about without actually looking at it. I suggest you rename your image with an intuitive name that describes the file itself. Thanks, and happy editing!

This is just an information. New name might be File:Hotel Europejski Warschau.jpg. Renaming will be carried out by a filemover. No action at your side is required. Thank you. RE rillke questions? 16:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. However, I did not originally upload this file. I just "cleaned" it to solve its display problem. --Túrelio (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Re-El GIOCHI TV.jpg

Why only the photo of this console is under copyright? It's not the photo of the envelope or the advertisement: is the photo of the real console (you can see four real switch on it). It is not a photo done by David orban to a photo of the console, it's the photo of David Orban of the real console (placed on top of a box). --Arosio Stefano (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, in addition to the possible copyright problem (screen content), the image has so low quality (due to the high cropping factor), that it is hardly usable. --Túrelio (talk) 20:57, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the quality is very low, but I added it because it can be the only one chance to have one photo of this rare console.

If you follow the two photo links below, you can understand that the deleted photo is not the packaging of the box console but is the console device itself. The strange (colorful) slim and wide real console (in the deleted photo) is placed vertically laid against the wall. There is not a box in the deleted photo (In the first link you can see that the packaging is grey).

Excuse my poor english.

http://www.mypccollection.altervista.org/immagini/collezione/consolle_80/RE_EL%20Giochi%20TV.jpg

http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/081/f/7/giochi_tv_retroconsole_by_clickeclick-d3c7p7e.jpg

--Arosio Stefano (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

O.k., I can undelete it temporarily. But it will then likely have to go through a regular (slow) deletion request, which will allow the exchange of arguments and might let it survive. --Túrelio (talk) 20:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!!! --Arosio Stefano (talk) 20:31, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

See here: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Re-El GIOCHI TV.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 20:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Comment

Its not a problem but thanks for your message anyway. I've made my brief comment here. The photo quality is so poor that I could not be sure if it was a photo of the console package or of the actual console itself. It does not matter to me if the image is kept or deleted. Best to let the community decide. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Ahmed Ihab.jpg

Look at the photo Link in Flickr. Its not copyright violation.--Mohamed ElGedawy (talk) 06:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

With such images you need the permission of the person who made the image of the poster AND of the person who made the image of the person shown on the poster. On Flickr, you have only the first permission, but not the second one, which is more important. There is the same problem with File:Martyr - Mahmoud Mohamed Hassan.jpg. You need the permission of the photographer who took the original image of the victim. --Túrelio (talk) 06:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining. How can i get the permission of the person who made the image?--Mohamed ElGedawy (talk) 07:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

No idea. You need to find out who actually took the image and ask him/her. Considering the situation in which these photos were shot, this might be difficult.

If you are not successful and if you want to use them only on :en wikipedia, you may claim fair-use. But this has to be done locally on :en, as Commons does not allow fair-use material. --Túrelio (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, Túrelio. How are you=) I have a little problem. Can you check is this file okey for commons? Thanks. Koc61 (talk) 06:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

When producing a new work out of the work of somebody else, you also have to credit him/her. Now it should be o.k. --Túrelio (talk) 06:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I see, many thanks to you=) Koc61 (talk) 07:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

glass sculpture in murano

Cometo Di Vetro Comet Glass Star by glass sculptor Simone Cenedese

Thanks. Nice photos of a nice sculpture. But, regrettably Italy has no FOP exemption for works of art in the public. Therefore, the image cannot remain on Commons, as it violates the copyright of the glass artist. Sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 12:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

What a stupid law in Italy. Sorry but I didn't know, that no public artwokr picture can published. In Hungary, it's total different. Varga Viktor 12:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

There is one other possibility. You may try to contact the artist directly (via his website http://www.simonecenedese.it/site/en/home/ or email info@simonecenedese.it) and ask him directly for a permission to license your photo of his sculpture. If you want to try that, I would choose only 1 of your photos. Go to Commons:Modello richiesta di permesso, copy the boxed text, enter the complete URL of the image you have choosen, enter the name of the license (including the weblink to creative commons), mail it all to him, together with your personal letter. If he agrees, he should sent his permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 12:40, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I will give a try for it. Maybe thats the correct, if the author can choose between them. Of-course if he/she give rights, the data will be modified. please don't delete until the reply.

O.k. I have put a comment at all 3 DR discussions. Please sign all your comments using --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 07:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Investigation into the murder of Sam Degelia no copyrighted material.pdf

On Saturday, you deleted File:Investigation into the murder of Sam Degelia.pdf for its copyright violations, and I wanted to give you a heads up that this was re-uploaded with the delightful new title "File:Investigation into the murder of Sam Degelia no copyrighted material.pdf". This file was also deleted last year. If you want to take action or nominate it for speedy deletion, it might help to slow the user's cycle of edit warring on an EN article. I worry that, after seven deleted files, the user's just not getting the message about copyright.--Nkgal (talk) 19:36, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. As his latest upload seems to have 5 pages less then the one deleted by me, copyright-infringing material might have been removed. Therefore, a regular DR might now be more appropriate than a speedy. However, at the moment I haven't the time to scroll through 180 pdf pages. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, yeah, it seems they removed scanned newspaper articles from the PDF. I however see several pages with mug shots, and unless those are taken by federal authorities, or those in California, they're not usually public domain. Other mug shots can be fair use, but not here, and would also need personality rights labeling. Did you want me to nominate it for DR?--Nkgal (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

If you have the time to scroll through the whole new version (as the DR should be based on specified possibly copyvios, not on the users history), that would be great. --Túrelio (talk) 07:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I picked out a few pages that were clear issues, and listed them with the deletion request. If you want to leave a message there, I think it would help.--Nkgal (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the castle background on File:PySolFC-Bakers-Deal-No-2-Midst-of-Solving-by-fc-solve-with-gi-preset.png

Hi,

please see what I've written about the castle background of File:PySolFC-Bakers-Deal-No-2-Midst-of-Solving-by-fc-solve-with-gi-preset.png after you marked it for quick deletion. The castle image there was built-in in PySolFC and I just selected it from there because it was my favourite one.

Regards,

Shlomif (talk) 14:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, you just converted my derivative-tag into an incomplete deletion request. I didn't see any more writing. Can't you repeat the screenshot without that background? This would be the easiest solution. Of course, cyou could also try to find any evidence/proof that the background image is indeed coverd by the general license for the software. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Pysolfc-black-hole-solitaire.png

File:Pysolfc-black-hole-solitaire.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this 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!

Dereckson (talk) 15:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Danke

Hallo Túrelio. Ich möchte mich bei Ihnen für Hochladung meiner Bilder noch einmal bedanken. Mein Artikel ist exzellent geworden und jetzt steht auf der Hauptseite persischer Wikipedia. Hier!66.36.231.19 14:51, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Gern geschehen und Glückwunsch zum Exzellenz-Artikel. --Túrelio (talk) 15:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Callista Gingrich

Regarding the photograph of Callista Gingrich, I looked for verification elsewhere, and found it on the Gingrich Productions website. See here, where indeed it is CC-BY-SA. That seems to confirm the original uploader's declaration. I've commented out your template and note on the page, since I think it is no longer applicable, but because I don't know the protocol here I didn't want to delete outright. Thanks, Stargat (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Regularly I would consider this upload Flickr-washing as the image was uploaded to Flickr today, while it was uploaded to Commons 2 years earlier. As the image now is sourced to Flickr, we have to upload the real version from Flickr, let run the Flickreviwe bot and thereafter eventually revert to the retouched version. --Túrelio (talk) 18:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it was done wrong before, and glad it was done right this time. I see the review has occurred and all seems to have worked out. Thanks for fixing it. Stargat (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

My images deletion

Did you delete my images ? Only learning. I am happy to provide the right copyright for these, it is quite tough. We own all the images we put up and we have copyright when someone uploads these images to our website, which is were we pull them from. Not sure what to do now, it took me ages :( BTW my cat is the same as yours spitting image, if yours is the white one :) awwJasonBournes1 (talk) 16:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Regrettably it's not my own cat. You have to sort out some facts about these images. You had put your username in the author entry of the image, but at the same time sourced it to a website. That per default invalidates the authorship claim, as website owners rarely post their material on Commons, though they may in rare cases. If I understand you correctly, you did not shoot these 2 images, but they were uploaded by users of your (?) website and per the usage terms, you have the right to use the uploaded images, right? About the ages: the images are not lost; it takes any admin 3 clicks to undelete them. --Túrelio (talk) 16:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Moscow500.JPG

Hello

I'm author of File:Moscow500.png, created to replace a File:Moscow500.JPG. I'm unsure about rendering of this map (my variant can be unreadeble), so I asked to restore older File here. But after restore you delete the file again, and I was not able to compare 2 pictures. Can you restore a File:Moscow500.JPG and protect it from deletion for one or two days? I will write to you or to High_Contrast after I will save older file. `A5b (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I had read your older comment, but thought you had already done the comparison. I would prefer if you could do the comparison offline, i.e. at your local computer. For that, I could undelete the image, so that you can download it to your computer. But after a short time I would like to delete it again, as it is a clear copyvio. Would that be o.k.? --Túrelio (talk) 21:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes. `A5b (talk) 21:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I see now that my variant is very unreadable. You can delete JPG. `A5b (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Babel

Thank you for your suggest, but I don't like "badges" very much ;) I hope you'll understand me.--Trixt (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Done.--Trixt (talk) 21:35, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Alexander Binder.jpg

Hi, There are deletion discussions about File:Alexander Binder retouched.jpg and File:Alexander Binder-3.jpg. I mention this because another similar image was deleted by you, File:Alexander Binder.jpg, after a similar deletion request. If these two files are kept, I would also suggest undeleting the other one. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tony, I performed this deletion not by default, but for the log-stated reason, well considering that many European countries have rather strict personality rights laws and that we have already File:Aleanderbinder.JPG. I can undelete the image, but will thereafter file a DR. --Túrelio (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I have no real understanding of European personality rights laws, but I didn't think they were a problem for Commons - if the copyright was ok we only need a personality rights warning I thought? But please mention it on these DRs if it is a reason to delete, thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 22:28, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok those two were closed as keep, so I have started an undeletion discussion as this was cited as the source for one of those two. (Instead of having you undelete it, then start a deletion discussion). We need to keep all or delete all I think. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, over the many copyvios and vandalism of the last days I had totally forgotten this case. Go ahead. --Túrelio (talk) 05:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Must useless Rename redirections be deleted?

Hello, Turélio,thanks for all your deletions. Must useless Rename redirections be deleted? If yes, how to do the (speedy) deletion request? Just with speedy template or otherwise? Greetings --Havang(nl) (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Havang, that's somewhat disputed as of recently. The term "useless Rename", which you may have seen in my del log, wasn't choosen by me, but by the respective nominator and then is automatically included when performing the deletion. After I was "notified" about dupe deletions by a colleague (see [26]), I have stopped to perform deletions of files (as opposed to cats and galleries) in Category:Duplicate and have performed badname/"useless rename redir" deletions only if the redir was broken anyway, if the original upload (i.e. the "bad" filename) was rather recent or if the original filename was totally nonsense like for example 5.jpg. Personally, I'm not that convinced to transform Commons into a repository of redirects, but that seems to be the mainstream opinion now. --Túrelio (talk) 12:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. --Havang(nl) (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Autorisations de réutilisation

Bonjour,

J'ai recu des avertissements concernant le manque de "preuves de permission sur ce fichier", et je ne comprend pas ce que cela veut dire.

Je suis d'accord pour qu'elles soit réutilisées, et j'ajoute que ces images viennent toutes de moi.

Merci, Dylan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ing-renault06 (talk • contribs) 24. April 2011, 16:31 Uhr (UTC)

I do understand what you have written, but I cannot answer you in French.

• File:PejcinovicNice-Marseille.jpg has "Dylan Gerardin" as author and "Appareil Photo" as source.
• File:Monaco-Nice-30janvier2010.jpg has "User:Ing-renault06" as author and "own" as source, but the EXIF-data say "Tous droits reserves".
• File:NemanjaPejcinovic-entrainement.jpg has "User:Ing-renault06" as author and "Dylan Gerardin" as source.
• File:Maquette-GrandStadeNice.jpg had "User:Ing-renault06" as author and "Appareil photo" as source. Here there problem was, that the photo itself violates the copyright of the architect of the depicted model.
• File:RubensBarrichello-Williams.jpg had "User:Ing-renault06" as author and "own" as source, but were copyvios as the 1st version carried a watermark "(C) Ferrari" and the 2nd version came from http://twitpic.com/w49kr.
• File:StadeduRay-NiceMonaco.jpg has for date "16 avril 2011", whereas the EXIF data say "1. Jan. 2008".

You may therefore understand that we are somewhat hesitant to your authorship statements. You need to understand that by uploading images, which are not your own, you do not only risk to be sued yourself by the rights holder, but you also endanger re-users of our images to be sued for copyright infringement. Therefore, 1) please do not upload images not shot by yourself, and 2) if you upload images shot originally by yourself, then write {{Own}} in the source entry and your username (eventually add your realname in brackets) in the author entry. --Túrelio (talk) 15:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok,

First, I can say that the images File:Monaco-Nice-30janvier2010.jpg, File:StadeduRay-NiceMonaco.jpg and File:NemanjaPejcinovic-entrainement.jpg are myself, but I don't know how I can change the informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ing-renault06 (talk • contribs) 24. April 2011, 21:00 Uhr (UTC)

Just go on the image page, click the edit-button and change what you want to correct. Thereafter, hit the save-button and voila. --Túrelio (talk) 19:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

{{Badname}}

Hi, I couldn't understand why you added {{Badname}} to a number of redirect files as it didn't make sense, the template is for marking duplicate images, not redirects. But I now realise you were simply adding a link back to the renamed file as the redirect doesn't really work in conjunction with the speedy delete template that had just been added. I'm not sure that it is the best way, but at least I understand now :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 22:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

After some trials I think that a better way is to amend the speedy delete request by adding a link to the redirect destination, eg

{{speedy|delete unneeded redirect}} to
{{speedy|delete unneeded redirect [[:File:original]]}}

then we also get the link in the edit summary. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Though you figured it out by yourself already, this was/is simply a sort of procedural "patch" coming out of my promise (see above paragraph "{{duplicate}} deletions" to have the background) not to delete any more duplicate images and to leave the content of the duplicate-speedy-cat (except for empty cats) completely to others. As those speedy-tagged redirs, mentioned by you, if not rather recent, also fall into the do-not-delete-without-leaving-a-redir pigeonhole I was reprimanded for by Nilfanion, I wanted to make them appear also in the duplicate-speedy-cat, so that other might see and consider them for deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 13:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Ahhhh, thanks :-), more sophisticated than I thought :-). I'm afraid I fall into the keep redirects if possible camp, and have recently added a suggest to Commons_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Redirects. I think there are more reasons to keep them than generally stated but if you think there are more good criteria for deleting redirects, add it to the discussion :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 04:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Löschen des Bildes File:Landshut - Mannheim 1983 Meister.jpg

Hallo, nachdem ich schon am 7. März auf meiner Diskussionsseite darauf hingewiesen wurde, dass für das Bild File:Landshut_-_Mannheim_1983_Meister.jpg eine geschriebene Erlaubis für die Veröffentlichung auf Commons benötigt wird, wurde das Bild verständlicherweise von dir am 10. April 2011 gelöscht. Leider habe ich die Löschung erst bemerkt, als es in Wikipedia verschwunden war. Ich habe mich jetzt um eine schriftliche Erlaubnis des Lizenzinhabers bemüht, der eine Weitergabe des Bildes unter der "Creative Commons Namensnennung-Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen Deutschland"-Lizenz erlaubt. Wie muss ich jetzt vorgehen, damit die Löschung des Bildes rückgängig gemacht werden kann, ich könnte dir z.B. eine E-Mail mit dem Erlaubnisschreiben im Anhang senden? Danke --2000 (talk) 09:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hallo 2000, die schriftliche Genehmigung sollte an permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org gehen, falls das nicht schon passiert ist. Bitte komplett mit Email-Header usw. Das Bild kann ich vorübergehend entlöschen. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die schnelle Antwort! Die E-Mail habe ich abgesendet, das Original-"Dokument" (existiert ja nur auf Papier) im Anhang und der Wortlaut zusätzlich in der Mail selbst. Ich hoffe, das passt so! --2000 (talk) 10:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ich habe mal {{subst:OP}} hinzugefügt. Ich hoffe ihr nehmt mir die Einmischung nicht übel. (Brauchte mal Futter für mein neues Script User talk:Rillke/AjaxMassDelete.js). -- RE rillke questions? 11:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

admin babel

I had to dive a bit to find the syntax, but I it is now added. Platonides 22:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Undelete

Can you undelete File:UPLB Campus map.svg? My laptop has recently crashed, and I need a copy of it. Moray An Par 08:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. Did you finally download it, so that I can delete it again? --Túrelio 08:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sathya sai baba.jpg

You forgot to close this deletion request --Sreejith K 11:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding. --Túrelio 12:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJIECI

User BENJIECI hi turelio please upload this image http://www.celebrity-pictures.ca/viewpicture/?id=167794

Hi BENJIECI, that is not possible. See the disclaimer at the bottom of that page. Uploading it would violate copyright. --Túrelio 09:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJJIECI hi Turelio please unblock me

Hi BENJJIECI, I will only unblock you earlier if you promise not to upload more clear copyvios to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 11:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Info, please

Hallo Túrelio. I've saw this thread after processing another one which seems to be related. I've also saw Category:Sockpuppets of Jerry Dandridge. It seems there's a dewiki background, can you please have a look? Thanks, --Dferg (talk) 10:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I've already worked on it. However, as Martin H., who also has CU rights, earlier has already dealt with Sockpuppets of Jerry Dandridge, I wanted to leave it to him, as it might go easier that way. I've directly talked to the requester, who is in no hurry since the "wrong" account is already blocked on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'll keep watching that thread (though my German is still very basic :-)). Regards, --Dferg (talk) 13:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

scale model - Public Museum

Hi Túrelio!

I published 2 pictures of a scale model from a public museum but they have been deleted. How come they violate or infringe any copyright if they are in a public place and it's about a heritage site?

"File:Maquete01.jpg" and "File:Maquete02.jpg"

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diegoruschel (talk • contribs) 13:14, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Hi Diegoruschel,

both images were deleted as being a derivative work and violating the copyright of the designer of the actual model, of which you took these images. Like real buildings such models are usually under the copyright of its designers until 70 years after their death. If you have any evidence that the designer is already dead for that long, we can undelete your images. --Túrelio (talk) 11:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Esk15453435

User Esk15453435 hi turelio okey stop upload file please blocked user gohe 007 reason vandalism

Hi Esk15453435, though I don't fully understand what you are saying. If you stop uploading copyvios, you will not be blocked. What is the problem with "user gohe 007"? --Túrelio (talk) 13:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User Esk15453435 user Gohe007 are you admins yes or no

I am an admin, User:Gohe007 is not. --Túrelio (talk) 13:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User Esk15453435 Turelio Look This file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alexis_Amore_at_Alexis_Amore_Party_2.jpg please look this file

O.k., but what is the problem? I don't understand. --Túrelio (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User Esk15453435 Turelio Occupation ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.132.125 (talk • contribs) 1. Mai 2011, 16:13 Uhr (UTC)

No idea what that means. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Where are you from Turelio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esk15453435 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

From Germany, as shown on my userpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:32, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio do you speak Deutsche Sprache — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esk15453435 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Sure, what did you expect from somebody from Germany ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

User_talk:Jancen_sergio#Urheberrechtsverletzungen

Hallo Túrelio, kannst du den User mal eine Woche zum Regeln verstehen blockieren? User_talk:Jancen_sergio#Urheberrechtsverletzungen Oder siehst du irgend eine Einsicht bzw. Reaktion? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 16:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio please is not blocked me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esk15453435 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 1. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Esk15453435, você também é usuário Jancen sergio? --Túrelio (talk) 17:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Ja

Danke! Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Move a file

Hi. Sorry to bother you, but can you move File:Journée International des travailleurs et travailleuses anticapitaliste - Montréal.JPG to File:Journée internationale des travailleurs et travailleuses anticapitaliste - Montréal.JPG please? It's embarassing to say, but I made some grammatical mistakes... Thank you. SSDGFCTCT9 (talk) 21:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 22:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Islamofascism.svg‎

Please add a header when you start a new subject on a user talk page; failure to do so is somewhat annoying. In any case, the file expresses a "Muslims: clear and present danger" point of view which, without any further context, at a minimum borders on Islamophobia. It really isn't any different from some other files in the category (File:Eurabia Flag.svg etc.). AnonMoos (talk) 08:30, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The relevant difference between the two flags mentioned by you, is that the latter does exist in the web, so the file simply documents something used at least virtually, whereas the former is purely fiction and might even have been created to get used, aka abuse of Commons for activism. --Túrelio (talk) 08:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

That's nice; however this has no relevance to whether the Islamophobia category is applicable. AnonMoos (talk) 08:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435

UserEsk15453435 hi turelio what is this Qualified to the phase of tournament indicated

Esk15453435, I have no idea to what you are refering. --Túrelio (talk) 12:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio Please Unblock me

But who are you, Easds123454323? The blocking time of this account as already expired. So it should be no longer blocked. But do not again upload copyvios. Next block will be longer. --Túrelio (talk) 12:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio Please blocked this user Soccer-holic reason vandalism page premier leagie 2012 2013

Why should I do this? Soccer-holic (talk · contribs) has no edits at all on Commons. May be you are mixing up Commons and Wikipedia. --Túrelio (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserEsk15453435 Hi Turelio Please Blocked User Gohe007 reason Upload Several Files

Gohe007 (talk · contribs) has no edits/uploads since April 18. No reason to block.

And with this, our little game comes to an end. I don't know what you intended with your mostly strange questions. I have no longer time for that game. If you face real problems, take them to COM:AN. EOD. --Túrelio (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

MonstarPR

UserMonstarPR hi turelio please not remove me picture

But these images are "(C) All rights reserved" on Flickr. --Túrelio (talk) 15:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

UserMonstarpr hi Turelio what is this Welcome to OTRS

Please sign your comments always with --~~~~.

I have no idea what you mean by "Welcome to OTRS". OTRS is our system for confirmation of permissions. If a user want to upload an image that he did not shoot by himself, but got permission by the original photographer, he has to mail this permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). Our OTRS-volunteers then check the permission and either give their o.k. or request more information. --Túrelio (talk) 15:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Gedenkseite

Hallo, zunächst einmal ein herzliches Dankeschön für Dein Engagement für die Gedenkseite hier auf Commons. Daß es bisher relativ wenig Feedback gab, mag daran liegen, dass einerseits im Verhältnis relativ wenige die Commons-Adminseiten auf der Beo haben (gehöre selbst auch zu denjenigen), andererseits die Kommunikationskultur auf Commons zumeist etwas langsamer und weniger heftig ist als in anderen Projekten (wobei Ausnahmen sicher die Regel bestätigen *schmunzel*).
Da ich befürchte, dass meine Sprachvermögen im Englischen nicht mehr ausreicht, um nicht missverstanden zu werden, hier mal vorab ein paar Gedanken zu den von Dir gestellten Fragen:
Diese Liste kann und wird nie vollständig sein, da wir in den meisten Fällen gar nicht erfahren werden, dass ein Mensch hinter einem Account verstorben ist. Das sollten wir bei der Diskussion imho im Auge behalten. Nur diejenigen einzubeziehen, die hier regelmäßig über einen längeren Zeitraum aktiv sind, gefällt mir persönlich nicht, denn wo will man hier die Grenze ziehen? Außerdem darf die Gedenkseite nicht zu einer "Best of ..." werden.
Warum nicht auch an diejenigen erinnern, die hier einen selbst angelegten Account hatten, auch wenn sie hier so gut wie nicht editiert haben - denn gerade Commons ist ein übergreifendes Projekt, das nicht zum Selbstzweck, sondern quasi als Dienstleister für die anderen Projekte fungiert. Was wäre Commons ohne diejenigen, die die hier hochgeladenen Dateien systematisch z. B. in ihrem Heimatwiki einbinden?
Um es auf den Punkt zu bringen: ich finde jeder, der hier auf Commons einen selbstangelegten Account hat, von dessen Tod wir irgendwann gesichert erfahren und der einer Aufnahme in die Gedenkliste nicht (auf seiner Benutzerseite oder per opt-out) widersprochen hat, sollte ohne weitere Diskussionen aufgenommen werden - unabhängig von der Zahl seiner Edits oder des Accountalters.
Daher: volle Zustimmung zu der von Dir bislang geleisteten Arbeit an dieser Seite. Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 13:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC) Vielleicht versuche ich mich in den nächsten Tagen mal auf der DS in der hiesigen Arbeitssprache - mag aber nichts versprechen.

Hi 4028mdk09, Danke für die Rückmeldung. Wenn dir letzteres zuviel Mühe macht, kann ich dein Statement auch gerne in englischer Kurzform und unter Bezug auf dieses Posting in die Diskussion auf Commons talk:Deceased contributors‎ einfügen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Dein Angebot nehme ich - ehrlich gesagt sehr gerne - an. Zumal es sicher einfacher ist als meine sprachlichen Patzer und Mistverständnisse hinterher auszubessern. Aber bitte nur, wenn es Dir nicht zuviel Arbeit macht - danke! --4028mdk09 (talk) 14:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

So, erledigt. Ich hoffe, du fühlst dich korrekt wiedergegeben. --Túrelio (talk) 19:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Habe es gerade erst gesehen - Du hast es absolut auf den Punkt gebracht. Herzlichen Dank! --4028mdk09 (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Category:FSO Polonez

Hello.

All I did was include the amount of information necessary for understanding the subject in its entirety.

However I can include this information on a separate page leaving only a small portion on the Category page.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

You could create a separate gallery page FSO Polonez in which you include 1 to 3 image(s) of each subtype, so that the reader gets an overview without the need to scan thourgh all the (sub)categories. However, even such a gallery should not mimic a Wikipedia article. --Túrelio (talk) 14:12, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

This is a rather complicated subject. Without providing a point by point breakdown it is next to impossible to properly describe the history of FSO Polonez and all its variants and models which is nessacery for someone who does not posses much knowledge about the subject to understand what is what and why.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 15:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I have cut some of the information concerning the development work (which I might add was already a very brief and undetailed description).

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 15:29, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Your gallery looks quite better now. Hopefully, the sections currently without images, will be filled over time. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Cropped picture

Hi Túrelio!
I am writing in connection with File:Dachldz.JPG. It wasn't error. I cut this photo deliberately becouse it was taken awry. I wanted to use sky in the background to decorate my user page on wikiepedia. Finally picture looked no good so I didn't insert it for my user page. - Adim444 (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 08:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ronald Davis

Please restore this image File:P0055av_Ring.jpg that was deleted this morning from the en:Ronald Davis article on the English wikipedia. My understanding is both the painting and the image of it were released by the artist. Thank you...Modernist 11:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Modernist,

I would like to, but we really need evidence for that permission, as I had written at File talk:P0055av Ring.jpg. If you received it by email, then send the original email from the artist to OTRS and tell me when you have done so. I can then temporarily undelete the file. --Túrelio (talk) 12:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll let you know when the email is sent. I'm working on it, thanks...Modernist 21:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Where do we email you the artist's permission?..Modernist 23:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I asked the artist to email you - through en:wikipedia...Modernist 01:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Email has arrived, but I have to forward it to OTRS, because they have to issue an OTRS-ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 06:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Annalisa Scarrone

Grazie per la spiegazione: ora ho capito cosa mi dicevi con quei rettangoli rossi :) e quindi ti faccio una domanda. Come posso mettere le foto che avevo scattato io allora? Devo mettere l'originale? E con quale licenza? Potresti rispondermi in italiano? Grazie per l'attenzione--Little Kiwi (talk) 15:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't answer in Italiano, I could only Google-retranslate it. When you want to upload images originally shot/taken by yourself, you should put {{Own}} in the source entry. But please do this only with images originally shot by yourself. As you have already uploaded 3 copyvios, the next one likely will get you blocked. With your own images, you can choose any Commons-allowed license (see Commons:Licenze). If you want to retain some control over your image, you might choose {{CC-BY-SA-3.0}}. Ciao. --Túrelio (talk) 15:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Forse ho capito cosa devo fare. Devo caricare le immagini originali e dare a voi il Ticket OTRS?--Little Kiwi (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

No, you do not need an OTRS ticket for your own images. You need to get an OTRS ticket for images from other photographers, from whom you received a permission. You need to send this permission to OTRS; they check it and then issue their o.k. or rejection. --Túrelio (talk)

Popular Science Monthly image galleries

Hi, and thanks for all your help in cleaning up. I also felt that the two images have value on their own, but couldn't think at first of how to deal with them. Finally, I properly titled, described and placed them in their proper category: Category:Native American pottery. I needed to move them because the PSM gallery is a very important tool for tracking and verifying that the images and .djvu pages match as the Internet Archive numbering is off and pages are missing in some of the scans. To correct the error, they often rescan another contribution of the same, but do not remove the damaged copy from their download list.Ineuw talk page on en.ws 18:01, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

As of Aziza photo 028 edited.jpg

The author changed his license and sent another message to OTRS. Please check. Thank you. [User:i_rodionov] 21:22 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've tagged it with OTRS-pending. Final evaluation will come from OTRS. I am not on OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 21:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks [User:i_rodionov] 21:36 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Torrentecosa.JPG erased

Could I know why did you remove the Torrentecosa.JPG image from commons? I explained that it's a mine image! Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arzino (talk • contribs) 21:17, 6. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Because it was sourced to a website, http://www.tilimentmarathonbike.it/images/contenuti/r4.jpg, that doesn't show a free license for its content. --Túrelio (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Rapid removal

Please remove all pictures that I put up for speedy deletion. Дагиров Умар (talk) 09:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Огромное спасибо. -- Дагиров Умар (talk) 23:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Romanian Copyright law (File:2006 0610TurdaMonument.jpg)

It was a deletion Rewquest for (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log) It was deleted,so it will remain deleted. (i never reupload a picture even if the reason for deletion is not right) The reason was::Contemporary monument (built im1995), thereby still copyrighted. As Romania has no FOP exemption, the image violates the copyright of the sculptor.

Still i have some questions:

• Why, the Romanian law is applied on commons? Are you familliar with the romanian law? As far as i now

Regarding your arguments: Thanks, but there are already 2 problems. 1) the monument is actually (without reasonable dispute) the "principal subject" of the the image; 2) media on Commons per our policy have to be free for commercial use. In order to be whitout reasonable dispute, the picture shoul present only the monument. Otherwise it is disputable. Rregarding the Commons policy, it is a fair reason to delete a picture, but it was not the reason for deletion request. :)CristianChirita (talk) 22:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi CristianChirita,

we (also) apply Romanian law because the image was taken in Romania. At least one reason for this is the Schutzlandprinzip (sorry, only in German).

I am not familiar with Romanian law, but Commons:Freedom of panorama#Romania has sufficient information.

Regarding "without reasonable dispute": please, be honest to yourself, the name of the file was "2006 0610TurdaMonument.jpg".

I do not understand what you mean by "but it was not the reason for deletion request". --Túrelio (talk) 07:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Giuseppe_meazza_1937.jpg

Hi Turélio, I really can't understand why it's said that the above mentioned image is fallen in the pubblic domain: no information about the author is given, except a generic claim which states a not proved death of him. Aside from this, the fact that the author is dead doesn't mean anything by itself, because it's necessary to know if he dead more than 70 years ago and, to be honest, I'm sure he didn't, as this would mean he dead shortly after taking the picture, which is not probable. Also I don't see any information regarding the original source, therefore it's impossible to be sure that the author is anonymouse. I'm not expert, otherwise I would start a deletion request by myself. Consider what is the best thing to do in this case. Goodbye. --79.3.238.232 16:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. I've filed it for deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 07:30, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

deletion request

Hi. Could you delete File:Ralf Zumdick.jpg? Because I've made a mistake, I've uploaded the wrong photo... Best regards--Sabri76 08:12, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Honestly, this one File:Ralf zumdik.jpg should also be deleted as it does show the depicted in a somewhat demeaning manner. Agree? --Túrelio (talk) 08:15, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

User Deletion

Turelio,

My account - User:TheGlobalFCzone - was recently deleted.

Is it possible to easily change the username or create a new account?

Thank you,

Roth

Hi Roth,

it was not your account that has been deleted (that's impossible), but only your userpage User:TheGlobalFCzone, as its content was considered as promotional. You might consider re-creating your userpage, but avoid promotional wording/content. Username change is possible (see COM:CHU), but somewhat complicated, as you have already uploaded files. --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Мои фотографии (=My Photos)

Список фотографии снятых лично мной (per Google: List of photos taken by me):

• File:Калининаул.jpg
• File:Юртауховские горы.jpg
• File:Село Ленинаул.jpg
• File:Акташ-аух и Юрт-аух.jpg
• File:Юртауховские горы.jpg
• File:Ярыксуаух Гачалка.jpg
• File:Мечеть в Юртаухе.jpg
• File:Yurtauh.jpg
• File:Gora Gebek-kala.jpg
• File:Yurtauh yuzhnaya okraina.jpg
• File:Selo Yurt-auh.jpg
• File:Chechenskoe selo Yurtauh.jpg
• File:Исторический центр Юртауха.jpg
• File:Reka Aktash.jpg
• File:Юртаух Хоте.jpg
• File:Зориотар.jpg
• File:Peyzazh na yuge Yurtauh.jpg
• File:Banayyurt.jpg
• File:Ачхой-Мартан.jpeg
• File:Акташ и Саласу.jpg
• File:Мечеть в Ведено.jpg
• File:Мечеть в Джалке.jpg
• File:Comito.jpg
• File:Mechet v Kurchaloe.jpeg
• File:Булгат-Ирзу.jpeg
• File:Шовхал-Берды.jpeg
• File:Кандаураул.jpg
• File:Sharoargun.jpg
• File:Новосельское.jpg.
  Остальных можно выставит на быструю удалению (per Google: The rest can be put up for speedy deletion.). С уважением — Дагиров Умар (talk) 13:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I've copied it to the DR discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 13:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. -- Дагиров Умар (talk) 13:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

My page

Hi Túrelio, I'm Clara and I would like to know why you've deleted my page. It was very important for me because I shared that page with a boy who is special for me and we had lots of memories there and now I don't know how to get that again...Please explain me what can I do. Thank you

Hi Clara, as you are not logged-in and didn't provide the filename, I have no idea to which image you are referring. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

my user name was Marclaradossis, what can I do?

Ok, I see. It was you talkpage, User talk:Marclaradossis, that has been deleted, because it was found being out of scope. Look, our pages, including userpages, are to be used for Commons-related content. You have no uploads at all, you only had some edits on your talkpage in 2009. Thereafter, other users, without being logged-in added content to your talkpage. I can temporarily undelete your talkpage, so that you can copy the content to your computer. But thereafter the talkpage should be "cleaned". If you do not want to upload anything to Commons, you should consider to retire your account. Remember, we are repository for free media files, not a forum or webspace provider. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok thank you, so now what we should do? I opened this page with this boy years ago and then I forgot the password and we couldn't enter but two weeks ago more or less I discovered that I could comment again in our page so we started to write there until today that we've realized that we couldn't see the page. From now on what should we do? can we keep writting in a diferent way or something like that? please tell me. Thank you again.

Hi, please read again, what I wrote you in the above paragraph. If you simply want to safe the content of your talkpage to your personal computer, I can temporarily undelete the page. If you want this, then say so. Thereafter, the content should be deleted again, as it has nothing to do with the aims of this project. If you want to contribute to this project, i.e. upload freely licensed media files, then you can try password-recovery by requesting a new password to be send to the email address you provided when opening your account. If you have no intention to contribute to Wikimedia Commons, you should request to retire (close) your account, by stating this here. --Túrelio (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

ok I have understood everything more or less so I want you to undelete my page please. Thank you for everything.

 Done now. However, after saving the page content to your computer, you should "clean" the page by yourself. Otherwise it will likely be deleted again. Did you finally recover the password for your account? --Túrelio (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm not very clear but my english isn't as well as I would like and I do what I can. About my password I've been searching how to get it again but I don't know how to do it..I'll try if I can find the way to get the password and if it's not possible I'll do another account. What do you thing about that? Do you think that's a good idea?

But I told you already: "you can try password-recovery by requesting a new password to be send to the email address you provided when opening your account". When you try to log-in to Commons under your username, you will be asked for the password and you are offered to get a new password. When you click on that, you will get send a new password to the associated email address. --Túrelio (talk) 20:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok I think that I've resolt everything more or less. Thanks for your help and sorry if I have bothered you.

File:Burj Khalifa building.jpg

Hi there! Would you mind reuploading File:Burj Khalifa building.jpg to English Wikinews for use on n:Man commits suicide by jumping from Burj Khalifa? Broken image links make people sad ;-). Thanks, — μ 09:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Does English Wikinews allow fair-use content? The image is still available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burj_Khalifa_building.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

It does, and thanks. It's all been sorted. — μ 10:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

File:CD Granuloma2.jpg

The file is needed since the File:CD Granuloma2.jpg contains an XML error in the commit summary caused by mediawiki, which is known for a long time and only fixed for new commits. So I will recreate it.Dirk Hünniger (talk) 05:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Kein Problem. Besonders dringend scheint es aber nicht gewesen zu sein, da ich die Datei als Duplikat am 6. Sep. 2010 (!) gelöscht hatte. Es wäre allerdings gut, in der Beschreibung irgendeine Bemerkung zu hinterlassen, sonst wird sie demnächst wieder von jemand anderem als dupe markiert/gelöscht. --Túrelio (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion request

Could you please delete File:Nokia N82 (front photo).jpg? The file is now orphaned. Thank you. Editor182 (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Ellen Oléria

Olá, a imagem File:Ellen Oléria.jpg foi retirada do Flickr com a permissão da criadora Suelene através e e-mail enviado para mim, que foi encaminhado para permissions-commons-pt@wikimedia.org sob o título "Permissão de upload", Terça-feira, 10 de Maio de 2011 22:35 Caso haja dificuldade em localizar este email eu posso mandar novamente, ou esclarecer alguma dúvida. ZackTheJack (talk) 19:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I have removed the speedy-tag. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Logo Chevrolet.svg

Hi How are you? I ask something to you: This picture] is a violation of copyright? I have understood, that the partial or total reproductions in wikimedia are prohibited that is under copyright laws, and this is a partial reproduction of a Chevrolet's logo.

I trust you. Greetings!!! --Diego HC (talk) 22:27, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not really sure about that. The similarity is so weak/little. Bu we can put it in a regular DR, so that others could voice their opinion. --Túrelio (talk) 23:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

加賀充

Hi, can you tell me what 加賀充 contained? I am trying to help User:Kagamitsuru to understand our scope. Thanks, :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 05:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Copy&pasting a few lines from the deleted page to Google: Its a copy of http://ja.yourpedia.org/wiki/%E5%8A%A0%E8%B3%80%E5%85%85 with an image on top. That page again appears to be a stored version of ja:加賀充. --Martin H. (talk) 06:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 09:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care during my off-time. Case seems to be settled now. --Túrelio (talk) 15:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:PL Bolesław Leśmian-Przygody Sindbada żeglarza 004 .jpeg

This is just reason why I asked for removal. Details explained in file talk page. Ankry (talk) 22:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. I hadn't seen that you had nominated it by yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 07:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Tureli

Guten Tag Turelio ich bin noch zimmlich neu bei Wiki. Danke für die Antwort auf meine Bilder. Ja die Bilder sind alle von mir gemalt. Ich zeichne und male seit ich klein bin. Leider sind viele meiner Kunstwerke bei einem Hausbrand letztes Jahr verbrand. Die welche zum glück noch da sind waren bei meiner Mutter eingelagert waren. Die Werke die auf welche Sie geantwortet haben sind aus meiner neuen schaffens Zeit.

Hallo Tosco12, bitte eigene Kommentare immer mit --~~~~ unterschreiben. Die 3 Gemälde-Reproduktionen sind momentan gelöscht, weil sie unbenutzt waren und etwas ouf of COM:SCOPE wirkten. Ich kann sie wieder ent-löschen, wenn du sie irgendwie konkret einordnen kannst/willst. --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

File Upload

Hello Túrelio. The other day you deleted a file I uploaded, File:HairSingleCover.png, so I was wondering if you knew how to do it right. It is a normal single cover for a Lady Gaga song. You can find the official image released by Gaga herself here. Is there any way you could upload it? Thanks in advance, --Evengan (talk) 16:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Evengan, I fear that is not possible. See Commons:Image casebook#Album covers. Publishing something in the internet is not equivalent to release it under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 16:30, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

How is it then that I find all the single covers in their respective articles? --Evengan (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you give me an example? If you refer to :en Wikipedia, they allow so-called fair-use content; Commons does not not. If your local project does allow fair-use content, you should try uploading the image locally. --Túrelio (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I want to upload it to :en Wikipedia, is there a special place to upload the image there? Thanks in advance, --Evengan (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

See en:Wikipedia:Non-free content. --Túrelio (talk) 18:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Macruve Photos

Hola Turelio, Qué debo de hacer para borrar las fotos que me indicas. Gracias--84.125.194.30 20:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hola Macruve, the 3 photos mentioned on your talkpage are already deleted. Or do you want also your other uploads have deleted? --Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tûrelio, Estas fotos están subidas para ser insertadas posteriormente en unos artículos en Wikipedia. En relación a la fecha las añadireé en breve. aunque todas las de blanco y negro son de 1960/1961. Las fotos que llevan una marca de agua serán eliminadas. Las lleva porque estaban publicadas antesen mi propia web. Las fotos que me dices que son copia se pueden eliminar directamente, aunque son extraidas de un propio video original. Muchas gracias.--84.125.194.30 15:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Turelio, please help

Good afternoon, sorry but I'm lost, I need your help, my bad i nglés the other hand I'm new in Common, all photos are free to use and correspond to the classification of architecture, but I have no idea how to add that information to the photos, can you please tell me how? I did not cause any problems for my ignorance. Thanks macruve@yahoo.es--Macruve (talk) 15:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't really help you with categorization. However, the most pressing problem is whether you have the full copyright for these images. Did you really shoot the original photographies by yourself or did you scan existing photo-prints? The next thing to do, as I had told you already on your talkpage, is to add the date (year) of the creation of the original photo into the date entry to replace the "?" sign. --Túrelio (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The FOP and romanian copyright law

It seems that the Google Street view does not interpret the romanian law in the sense Wikicommons does. http://www.romania-insider.com/google-includes-romania-in-street-view/16118/ And surprise the romania press does not show any surprise :)CristianChirita (talk) 22:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, Google is Google. Of course, FOP or no-FOP becomes relevant only when you are imaging works of art that are still protected. Anyway, the problem would be that the rights holder (the artist or his heirs) would have to sue Google, which is not that easy. So, finally it's a question of power. We do not (want to) follow this approach. --Túrelio (talk) 06:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Doullens (14 mai 2011) Nuit des Musées 019.jpg

Hi Markus3,
are you the parent of the little girl in the foreground of File:Doullens (14 mai 2011) Nuit des Musées 019.jpg and of File:Doullens (14 mai 2011) Nuit des Musées 012.jpg or, if not, did you ask her parents for permission to publish this image? --Túrelio (talk) 07:58, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

And what is your answer? --Túrelio (talk) 08:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Was für eine Eile ! Mein English ist "nichts" ... und brauche immer Zeit zu "argumentieren" und klar zu antworten.

Nein, das Mädchen gehört meiner Familie nicht. Aber die Eltern und andere Personen (Angestelle und Verantworter des Museums, "Begleiter/Animateurs" des Maler-Klubs, usw haben klar gesehen, dass ich Personen (und natürlich auch Kinder) photografierte. Manche kennen mich in Doullens und andere haben sogar mich gefragt, ob ich sie gern knipsen wollte, damit sie Erinnerungen des Abends haben. Einige glaubten, ich photografierte für eine Lokalzeitung. Ich erklärte jedesmal (und wie immer für alle meine WP-Bilder), dass es "nur" für Wikipedia und Wikimedia Commons ist. Jedesmal habe ich also die Gelegenheit, sie zu fragen, ob sie es mir erlauben die Bilder per Internet zu zeigen. Immer bekomme ich die Antwort "ja, natürlich" und immer zeigen sie sich gespannt und wollen so schnell wie möglich die Fotos sehen. Sie fragen mich sogar immer die präzise Internet-Site-Adresse.

So eine "Frage" wurde mir schon gestellt ... Siehe hier !... und meine sehr präzise Erklärung ist da zu lesen. Wirklich nie Problem gehabt ! Wenn es der Fall wäre, würde ich natürlich machen wie gewünscht (Gesicht unscharf machen oder sogar Bild zerstören). Grüsse ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 08:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

O.k., dann ist es gut. Denke aber bitte daran, dass auf Commons hochgeladene Bilder nicht "nur für Wikipedia und Wikimedia Commons" sind, sondern auch beliebig außerhalb benutzt werden (können). Bei Bildern mit identifizierbaren Personen bitte {{Personality}} hinzufügen. --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Goku578

Hi Túrelio. Some kind of action would be appropriate IMO, he keeps uploading in spite of the warnings. Regards. --Eusebius (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

 Taken care of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! (File:AixafemElFeixisme.jpeg)

Guten morgen! Sorry my German is way too limited. As you can check in the site where it comes from (Gallica.fr) there is no further indication (as far as I know...). I may be wrong but in general the images from Gallica are freed from copyrights. However if you can prove me I am wrong, I will gladly accept your say. Have a nice day, sincerely, Claudi Balaguer/Capsot (talk) 09:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

My "evaluation" has nothing to do with the source of the file. This poster/painting/photo (not sure what is really is) is clearly the work of an artist. In Europe (slightly different to the US), the artist always retains his authorship and until 70 years after his death also the copyright (if there is no proof to the other). As this was allegedly created around 1936-8, the artist needs to have died already in 1940 for the image to be PD in 2011. So, if you need this image on a WMF project (except :en, as they accept fair-use), you have to find out the name of the original artist (it might be in the illegible caption at the lower right border) and when he/she had died. --Túrelio (talk) 09:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I found a bit more information on the site even though it doesn't say anything about the author, will this prove to be enough? It says (in French) "Public domain". Bye! Capsot (talk) 10:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

"Notice complète Titre : Aixafem el feixisme [Ecrasons le Fascime] : [affiche] / [non identifié]

Éditeur : [s.n.]

Date d'édition : 1936-1939

Sujet : Espagne -- 1936-1939 (Guerre civile) Relancer la recherche sur ce sujet dans Gallica

Sujet : Histoire Relancer la recherche sur ce sujet dans Gallica

Type : image fixe,estampe

Langue : Espagnol

Format : 1 est. : lithogr. en coul. ; 95 x 61 cm

Format : image/jpeg

Droits : domaine public

Identifiant : ark:/12148/btv1b9017940c

Source : Bibliothèque nationale de France, ENTQB-1(1936)-FT6

Relation : http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb39841733z

Provenance : bnf.fr"

Thanks for the research. However, the claim is purely "authoritative" and without any explaination/proof. However, I can change the speedy to regular DR to allow for more input/opinions of other users. Feel free to comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:AixafemElFeixisme.jpeg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Rancatore.jpg

This image was uploaded here by someone with a difficult uploader history--according to his/her talk page. (you have some contact with this person) It may be genuine or perhaps be a copy vio. If you think it is genuine, then feel free to flickrpass it. If not, then perhaps it should be deleted. I notice this person has 2 images here from the same flickr account but I cannot say if there is any conclusive evidence of flickrwashing. Perhaps it is a genuine photo and I am just a little concerned. I don't wish to accuse anyone of anything without clear evidence. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• File:Lungomare Poetto.jpg
• This is a duplicate. --Leoboudv (talk) 07:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Dupe is gone. First one had a "(C) Roberto Ricci" caption on Flickr, suggesting Flickr user is not the photographer. Therefore tagged with no-perm. Will likely go after a week. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: This flickr account that the uploader uses is interesting. It contains many flickrwashes here and here which are correctly licensed as 'All Rights Reserved." But the uploader uploaded another image below and I cannot say if it is a flickrwash or not:
• File:Romeo&Juliette-Salzburg-2008 (1).jpg

I just find it interesting that on flickr, the web site never what digital camera was used. Of course the flickr acount owner could use a non-digital camera but with so many flickrwashes...it creates some doubt. Anyway, I won't complain on this other image. Maybe Tineye can see if it is a copy vio or not. Best wishes, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Likely a copyvio from http://rolandovillazon.blogspot.com/2010/02/juan-antonio-gatell-mas-que-un.html. --Túrelio (talk) 09:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Of course you are right on the uploader's second image. Sadly with this uploader's images, its so predictable...with many copy vios. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Löschung von Synadenium grantii

Als ich gerade eine Kategorie für Synadenium grantii machen wollte, tat sich die Meldung auf, dass Sie diese Kategorie schon vor mehreren Monaten gelöscht haben. Können Sie mir den Grund dafür geben? Soll ich etwa meine Datei <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Synadenium_grantii.jpg> umbenennen? Danke im voraus! --Jdsteakley (talk) 14:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jim, assuming that you are en-native, I answer in english. By the way, you don't need to address me with the formal "Sie", that's very unusual on such a platform. True, I had deleted this category, full 2 years ago! So, I had to "dig deep" to find out the reason for that. The cat had been tagged (by somebody else) as "Needless empty category, previously used for misidentified plants." and surely it had been empty, as non-empty cats aren't deleted. You can simply re-create the cat, provided 1) this species name is botanically correct, and 2) there are >1 files, as we usually don't have 1-file-cats. If this term is obsolete, then it shouldn't be used for a cat, and renaming of your File:Synadenium_grantii.jpg following current taxonomy might be more appropriate. --Túrelio (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Editconflict: Ich habs grad zufälligerweise gesehen. Ich habe die Kategorien wieder hergestellt. Sie wurden gelöscht, weil sie keine Bilder enthielten. Allerdings ist mir nicht ganz klar warum dein Bild in der Kategorie Category:Synadenium grantii und Category:Euphorbia bicompacta ist? LG, Amada44  ^{talk to me} 14:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Vielleicht ein Notbehelf, weil letztere anscheinend Syn. Synadenium compactum ist; aber eben nicht grantii. --Túrelio (talk) 14:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Ich bin kein Botaniker, orientierte mich zunächst an das Vorhandensein von Synadenium grantii in wikispecies. Allerdings habe ich inzwischen diese "Klärung" gefunden: <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ul1bHEKJQbQJ:database.prota.org/PROTAhtml/Euphorbia%2520pseudograntii_En.htm+%22Synadenium+grantii%22+Euphorbia&cd=10&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.de>. Dennoch habe ich meine Datei nicht umbenannt oder aus der wieder hergestellten Kategorie entfernt. Und da eine Kategorie mehr als ein Bild enthalten soll, habe ich gerade ein zweites eingefügt. --Jdsteakley (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

PDF-files by Clickrubyshoes

Hi Túrelio, I am a bit confused by the contributions by Clickrubyshoes. These handle a lot of legal stuff, which I would remove as privacy-violating when I would encounter them on nl-wiki (my homewiki). But I am aware that in the United States it is more usual to simply and fully name suspects etc. Still, I wonder whether these PDF-files are in project scope. What would you, as an experienced and non-american admin, think of it? Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 08:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Lymantria,

have the same feeling as you. Technically most (or all) of this pds are unsourced. Redistribution of material from PACER may be violate their terms per http://www.pacer.gov/documents/pacer_policy.pdf. In addition, most files could be considered out of scope. Howver, there is en:User:Clickrubyshoes/JB Carlson, which seems to be the final aim of this uploads. --Túrelio (talk) 08:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Túrelio,

Thanks for your response. Yes I noticed the JB Carlson page alos. As a source, the files may be inside of scope. I will give it some thoughts. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 11:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I created deletion requests: Commons:Deletion requests/PACER files by Clickrubyshoes and Commons:Deletion requests/Indiana State Courts files by Clickrubyshoes. You already noticed the latter I see :). Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 06:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

danke

fürs Löschen. --Martina talk 20:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Ach. Da hatten sich noch zwei geduckt: File:Landtag Erfurt 2011-05-18 mnII (7).JPG + File:Landtag Erfurt 2011-05-18 mnII (21).JPG. *liebguck* :-) --Martina talk 20:30, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Gerne doch. --Túrelio (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

krismoyes.jpg deletion

Hey Túrelio,

I'm in the process of requestion that the photographer, David, can open up his license so we can use krismoyes.jpg

Hope this finds you well.

Warm regards,

Swissstevens (talk) 02:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)Steven

Hi Swissstevens,

thanks for notifying. In the description you put "Cara Stricker" in the author_entry. So, she isn't the photographer? --Túrelio (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Túrelio,

Thanks for getting back to me. You're referring to "Kris_Moyes.jpg" a new image I uploaded, which was photographed by Cara Stricker. No problems there. The question I have is in relation to the previous file you deleted "krismoyes.jpg" photographed by David Wieland. Here is a copy of the log:

"20:23, 22 May 2011 Túrelio (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Krismoyes.jpg" ‎ (Copyright violation: Flickr review NOT passed: Author is using NC, ND, or all rights reserved.) (global usage; delinker log)"

Since the 22 May, David has been notified and has agreed to release the rights of the image, so I would love to upload it again for use.

Is that ok?

Sincerely,

02:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)~Steven

O.k., but File:Krismoyes.jpg had been uploaded by Krismoyes (talk · contribs), not by you. Or is Krismoyes your second account? Anyway, I've undeleted it and let run Flickreview again. Coming back to File:Kris Moyes.jpg, we do really need a written permission from Cara Stricker. To get this, please go to Commons:Email templates, copy the "Declaration of consent for all inquiries", enter the filename and the license of choice and mail it all to Mrs. Stricker and ask her to read, date and sign it and then return it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 06:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Permission to free publishing of image

Hi, Turélio! Good day! Thank you for the banner asking for permission. Here is, below, the reproduction of the e-mail my wife Dalgiza Borges and I, the owners of the copyrights, sent to permissions-commonswikimedia.org. Please, do not delete the image. Please, create the right conditions where necessary in Wikimedia Commons to avoid the image deletion. Here is the copy of the above mentioned e-mail:

"To permissions-commonswikimedia.org

I hereby assert that I am the creator and, with the photographed person in the image (my husband Cláudio César Dias Baptista) the owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK [ File:Ccdb de a soltura da cobra 009 tamanho medio.jpg].

I agree to publish that work under the free license (please choose any of them or any other for full public domain publication) [ FAL, CC-BY-SA, CC-BY, GFDL].

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[ May 21,2011, DALGIZA BORGES (the photographer) and my husband CLÁUDIO CÉSAR DIAS BAPTISTA (the photographed person) ccdb@ccdb.gea.nom.br, ccdb1@ig.com.br, www.ccdb.gea.nom.br, Brazilian Telephone number: (22)2764-8126]

NOTE 1: - I am the PHOTOGRAPHER of the image which link is above, owner of the copyright with my husband (the photographed person) and with him THE PUBLISHER of the above mentioned image. My husband Cláudio César Dias Baptista is the person who uploaded the file with the image, we cannot violate our own and exclusive copyright! Please, do not delete the image from Wikimedia Commons

NOTE 2: in our site, www.ccdb.gea.nom.br, page http://www.ccdb.gea.nom.br/english_pages.htm there is an authorization for FREE PUBLICATION of all the images included in the same site (and the above mentioned image is one of them), if the source (the same site) is mentioned.

---

Cláudio César Dias Baptista – CCDB - www.ccdb.gea.nom.br " Ccdb (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cláudio, I've changed to tag at the above mentioned image to OTRS-pending. What about File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Turélio! Thank you for changing the tag and for the answer. Here is the copy of the permission I've sent to free publication of the file File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg

"To permissions-commonswikimedia.org

I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the work [File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg].

I agree to publish that work under the free license (please choose the GFDL and/or any other licence type to free, public domain, publication) [GFDL].

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[May 23, 2011 - Cláudio César Dias Baptista (CCDB) ]"

Best regards,Ccdb (talk) 11:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Permission to free publishing of image "Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups

Hi, Turélio! Thank you for changing the tag and for the answer. Here is the copy of the permission I've sent to free publication of the file File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg

"To permissions-commonswikimedia.org

I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the work [File:Guitarra de ouro ainda sem os pick-ups.jpg].

I agree to publish that work under the free license (please choose the GFDL and/or any other licence type to free, public domain, publication) [GFDL].

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[May 23, 2011 - Cláudio César Dias Baptista (CCDB) ]"

Best regards,Ccdb Ccdb (talk) 11:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Tag changed accordingly. Shortly thereafter the regular OTRS-ticket has been added by another colleague. --Túrelio (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi!

Sorry! I made a mistake. I was trying to remove this image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Giorgia_2009.jpg because even though I had the verbal permission of the owner to upload te file the website told me that there was a problem. Is it possible to remove immediatly the image? -- Sara santopietro 23/05/2011

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!! It won't happen again! -- Sara santopietro 16:22, 23/05/2011

Image talk page remains

Don't forget to delete File talk:Tour First - La Defense - Inauguration 6 mai 2011.jpg for the image you deleted a little while ago. Ww2censor (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

 copied and deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 19:32, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Reporting

Hello! The user "Hold and wave", continues to remove unjustifiably other users' messages from its user talk. 79.36.143.69 18:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC).

Hi 79.36.143.69, while I understand your concern, "cleaning" the own userpage can be o.k., if the activities/behaviour of the user shows that he/she got the messages. This seems to be true with this user. I had asked him not to request speedy deletions but regular deletions, and he did indeed change his earlier behaviour. IMHO, this is o.k. However, feel free to take this to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. I am also aware that it may give a bad impression when a user does nothing else than requesting deletions. However, I am rather sure that up to 1 in 10 files on Commons have indeed a questionable copyright status. So, finding these files is actually a service to Commons and to the re-users. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Flagged items I submitted.

Hello Túrelio

I'm new to Wikipedia Commons and sumitted several documents which got flagged. Could you please help me understand what is the proper way of citing these items? All of the items I've submitted are publicly available and are free from certain sources. The documents came from the federal government.

While I was learning about his process I noticed other legal documents that were cited:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:FR2ndAmmended.pdf&page=1

But I seem to not being doing it the proper way. Please advise.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clickrubyshoes (talk • contribs) 23. Mai 2011, 19:44 Uhr (UTC)

Hi, currently there is no problem with File:FR2ndAmmended.pdf. For information about problematic uploads of yours, see you talkpage User talk:Clickrubyshoes and follow the links to the deletiion discussions, in which you can participate. --Túrelio (talk) 19:31, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG

Hi Turelo, Thanks for having deleted this file. Today I tried to re-put this file on Wikimedia Commons, but I've found the bug: click on the file page, then click on the image to look at il in full resolution : you'll see it's not the same picture. The right one is the one in full resolution. The bad one is another picture located in the same folder in my hard drive disk. What to do? Thanks for looking. (P.S.: I'm French, I take German lessons but I prefer speaking English, weil ich ein schlecht Deutsch spreche.) Fandecaisses (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Very strange phenomenon. I have no idea how this can happen. A possible solution would be to convert it into TIFF format and then to re-convert it to JPEG. However, all EXIF data would be lost. I have asked on Commons:Forum for better ideas. --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

The problem may be caused by the bug, which is discussed here. --Túrelio (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I may have an idea. I copy the file in an empty folder and I upload the copy. I don't know what will happen, but I shoul try. Fandecaisses (talk) 10:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Try it. But you should choose a slightly different filename than Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG. --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

In fact, could you delete File:Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG please? It hasn't been uploaded again because it is the same... Thanks! Fandecaisses (talk) 11:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, so I've re-put the picture, same results. My problem probably comes from the picture. I will convert and re-convert it, and too bad for EXIF data. Could you please delete the file (again)? I'll break my computer if the problem is still here... Fandecaisses (talk) 12:21, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I have done this by myself. But, the problem remain. That is the proof that the problem is not your file, but our stupid MediWiki software. For now the problem can't be helped. I would recommend to leave the image out of the article for now and try it again one week from now. --Túrelio (talk) 12:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Fandecaisses (talk) 12:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Why did you deleted the Felipe Machado picture?

Felipe Machado authorized me to use it in his wikipedia page.

05/23/2011 16:21 obocci 19:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obocci (talk • contribs) 23. Mai 2011, 21:21 Uhr (UTC)

You need a written statement of the photographer or legal rights holder, Felipe Machado or whoever, and send it to OTRS. Assuming you are a spanish-speaker, go to Commons:Modelos de mensajes for further instructions. --Túrelio (talk) 19:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

LG GD880 Mini roif456

why you deleted my file LG File:LG-GD880-Mini-03.jpg GD880 MINI???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roif456 (talk • contribs) 24. Mai 2011, 02:57 Uhr (UTC)

Because you have obviously, http://www.tineye.com/search/d69fd04860808469ee6ba1a45255e519c0ef7949/?sort=size&order=desc, stolen the image from another website. --Túrelio (talk) 06:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Dsc20050129 144406 10.jpg

I've made a silly mistake while uploading this file from en-wiki. Could you help in renaming it to something like Spongolite? Mithril (talk) 11:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but could you please add the complete link to the source file/page, not just to :en. --Túrelio (talk) 12:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I've clarified the source information. Nethertheless that seems to be worthless since the original file would be soon deleted from en-wiki. Mithril (talk) 13:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: For your information

As explained in Niabot's talk page it was a terrible misreading mine of one of his sentence joined with a misunderstanding of the word. I'm really sorry about that. Sting (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

ACK. --Túrelio (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Why did you deleted the picture? =

i have got the License directly from the author 走近伪科学.Thank you. File:柳州东门 East Gate of Liuzhou.jpg http://www.flickr.com/photos/40685025@N04/5754316337/in/photostream — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李海斌 (talk • contribs) 24. Mai 2011, 20:43 Uhr (UTC)

Hi, did you see the striken-through $-sign? That means "no commercial use" of this image. This restriction is not permitted on Commons. If you can convince the photographer to lift this restriction, then we can host it on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 18:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

sorry, it's difficult to change it, but you can ask him directly that if i can use it at wikipedia, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 李海斌 (talk • contribs) 25. Mai 2011, 02:22 Uhr (UTC)

Sorry, no, that is really your task as the uploader. In addition, "use it at wikipedia" is not enough. The image must be free for everybody to use it anywhere. --Túrelio (talk) 06:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

thank you for your information. i´m trying to ask him to change it.

About the picture Sambalpur.jpg

That picture is originally uploaded in the [English Wikipedia], as It is in public domain uploaded by User:Akkida who will be the right person to give info about the pictures which have made the collage. --ସୁଭପାSubha Pa^Utter2me! 07:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I did now. But that would have been your task as the uploader. On :en they are somewhat less meticulous about these things. --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of two of my photos (KARINA GALVEZ)

Hi Turelio, I am poet Karina Galvez and hadn't noticed your messages about deletion of two of my photos. One is: File:Karina Galvez - Pintura al Oleo de Luis Burgos Flor - 2009.jpg The other one is: File:Karina Galvez 1995.jpg The first one was taken with my own camera, and the oil painting is in my home. Maestro Luis Burgos is like my father and he painted this oil painting of me and for me in 2009. The second one is the black and white picture that appears in my book "Poesia y Cantares" which I published in 1995. I hereby give my written permission to Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia and any websites related to their parent company, to publish both these photographs and share them with your readers. Please upload them back to where they were. If you need to reach me by phone my cell phone in the U.S. is <censored> and my personal email is <censored>. If at all possible, send me a message when they have been uploaded back, as I need to use them asap. Regards, Karina — Preceding unsigned comment added by POESIA77 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 26. Mai 2011 (UTC)

Replied per email. --Túrelio (talk) 06:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Corny pictures still in scope

Hi, re the photos like [[::File:Piers$1.jpg]], two points. Speedy is not the right process for "out of scope" deletions: speedy guidelines. Files for use on an editors user pages for personal use are allowed: COM:Scope. By all means delete them on copyvio grounds where necessary, but I think we need to give new users a bit of elbow room, you never know they may actually stay and do something useful. :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

deleted. Not so new, the user joined Wikipedia 3 years ago and recently wasted his time with writing a hoax article on his talkpag, messed up with 21 files, 19 of them are based on unfree content, the remaing ones (A dollar note with his face edited on it, a paint-created banner 'for president') are simply not usefull outside the hoax/vandalism world. --Martin H. (talk) 12:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

@Tony, I'm not sure what "corny pictures" means. When seeing all these cheap photoshops of this user all at once, which I did, likely everyone of one us would have the similar feeling, what a crap, away with it. At least this was my feeling. 1 or two might be tolerable, but not 20+. However, to spare this user a bad impression, I only speedy-tagged the images and then deleted only a few per day, not all at once, so that he had time either to get accustomed to it or to react. Of course, many might also have been copyvios, but I didn't hold them worth my time to check for the original. I do think the same about filing DRs for this crap. --Túrelio (talk) 12:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes it is crap :-). I was looking at his commons "contributions" and didn't know about 3 years worth of wikipedia activity! I don't consider it is a hoax or vandalism if he just wants to have a humorous user page. I don't think he was trying to fool anybody, I expect that is just his idea of humour. If he creates such pages and then tries to move them into article space, that is a different matter. But yes one or two joke images is enough :-). But he is human, I live in hope that he will improve :-). I don't think that trying to squashing people completely will work (he will just pop up under a new name somewhere else, and perhaps behave worse), I always want to engage and channel people to do something useful - often a waste of time, but I live in hope :-). He wasted his time writing a parody of a biography, how do we guide him to producing useful work (ok not a Commons problem, a en:wiki problem) ? --Tony Wills (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Check his older contribs, looks like he is interested in cricket, guid him to the wikiproject on cricket or ask him to help with updating statistics if he like.

I should mention that guiding people to make usefull edits is an occupational therapy for both, its nothing else, its an investment of time to obtain a minimum output from the guided (or to prevent negative output). The average return on investment is negative. If you join a project that pursues writing an encyclopedia you should either want to write an encyclopedia or leave. If you not made this decision I will not invest in you, its like buying shares of a planned company that not yet knows what business to join with a CEO who isnt sure if he prefers entepreneurship, command economy or a nice campfire of money. Therefore, as long as the user not shows his positive intention to contribute, he probably not worth an investment. Its not me who has to guide him, its is own free will to join the project and contribute and Im here to guide him if he is (e.g. for technical reasons) not able to pursue this will. --Martin H. (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes the return is low :-(. He obviously has nothing better to do, it would be nice if he could help somewhere. As you say, too much time spent discussing him already, thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

the photo have changed

can you change the situation of photo: File:柳州东门 East Gate of Liuzhou.jpg and File:柳侯祠 Ancestral Temple of the Marquis Liu.jpg ? the author has change the permission.李海斌 (talk) 21:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 22:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Casa Boyacá.jpg

Didn't this image fail flickr review? Now the uploader removes the fail mark. Strange. I don't think the uploader is the flickr account owner...but I cannot be 100% sure. The license has NC and ND restrictions which is very restrictive, too. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:12, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

• Also is this image from NORAD? The source flickr site only has 20 images.
• File:NORAD Jet Fighters Santa 2008 W.jpg

Strange web site. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

For the first I've re-added the no-perm tag and requested permission from the uploader. For the second, well, on the Flickr source it says "Unrestricted Public Domain" and it's licensed "(C) All rights reserved", . --Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Thank You for your comments. --Leoboudv (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Museum signs

Hi Turelio, these rather crappy mass uploads by "Bin im Garten" flood the categories of the Ethnological Museum. Many of the images are totally useless, and once the descriptions are transferred to our description fields (which of course the uploader should do), at least those should really be deleted. The user didn't even bother to link which descriptions fit which images. This is useless for any user who isn't standing right beside the obejct in the museum... I spent hours of repairing this crap while uploading own images from the museum, describing and categorizing "bin im Garten"'s images as well. Most of the description fields indeed are not copyright violations, but I'd like the others to be deleted, too. I put a lot of work in museum categories etc., but careless users like this one shouldn't be encouraged to get away with this. --FA2010 (talk) 16:17, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

D'accord. But "copyvio" is something different than "useless or out-of-scope". For those just useless, I would recommend you to put a list on the uploaders talkpage and ask him to consider requesting them for deletion by himself. That spares you the tagging of each image and may have an "educative" effect on the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Südseeabteilung in Ethnological Museum Berlin 143.JPG, which you didn't delete, has no relation to any of the uploaded images. Hence it is out of scope. --FA2010 (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Foto Ivan Fila

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe eben gesehen, dass Sie Deutsch sprechen. Ich wollte vorhin mein im letzten Jahr hochgeladenes Foto [27] durch ein komplett neues, aktuelleres Ersetzen (Rechte sind bei mir). Leider ist mir da offensichtlich ein Fehler unterlaufen und ich hab es nicht ersetzt, sondern irrtümlich wohl als "Neue Version" des alten hochgeladen. Könnten Sie mir helfen, das Alte in korrekter Weise durch das Neue zu ersetzen? Ich wäre Ihnen sehr dankbar! Grüße, --Socc82 (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Mir ist nicht ganz klar, ersetzen hier auf Commons oder ersetzen im Wikipedia-Artikel? 2. Frage: soll das "alte" Foto weiterhin auf Commons verfügbar bleiben oder ganz gelöscht werden? --Túrelio (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Havmannen.jpg

Actually, the file Havmannen.jpg isn't a copyright violation in Wikipedia even if it might be so on Commons. When it is removed from Wikipedia with this argument used as a reason its simply wrong. There are two (possibly three) rationales for use of such work of art; one is when the subject is at public display and isn't the primary subject of the photo, another when its the subject of some sort of critical description or review. A Wikipedia article is such critical description and any copy of such an article is also covered by the same norwegian laws. Jeblad (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jeblad, o.k., but none of the "possibilities" outlined by you would be o.k. on Commons. I don't know where the image was in use. If on :en, it might go by "fair use". Anyway, you should check if the project where you want to use it, does allow it, then you should upload it locally. If you need the file temporarily undeleted, I will do so. But first check if it is accepted on the local project. --Túrelio (talk) 19:42, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Baustein gesucht

Hallo, ich suche gerade mal wieder den Baustein für Fotos, auf denen lebende Personen abgebildet sind - leider vergeblich. Kannst Du mir helfen? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Z.B. {{Personality}}. --Túrelio (talk) 20:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank! --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Ian Somerhalder at the CW Upfront.jpg

Thank you for killing that image - I knew it wasn't kosher but I couldn't nail down the source that well to be able to delete it myself... didn't pop up on the WireImage website and that one tends to have most of the Getty stuff there as well. Tabercil (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

This DR

Do you know if this is a flickrwash? The uploader has a very bad history with uploads from his talkpage but I cannot say if the Fidelio Artist flickr site is a genuine site or not. Or just a creation of this uploader? Martin H. is suspicious and I am doubtful of this uploader but I don't want to prejudice the uploader either. Maybe you can be a neutral third party and make a judgement on keeping or deleting the picture? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, complicated case. I had no-perm tagged File:Rancatore.jpg already 8 days ago. Now I found that File:David Alegret.jpg was uploaded in a far higher resolution to Commons than it is available on its alleged Flickr source. As the uploader didn't react to my message from May 20th, a DR or even a (justified) speedy might wake him up. --Túrelio (talk) 07:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: I want to assume good faith but some of the deleted images came from Fidelio Artist. Its hard to trust an uploader with this history. But in this case...the real question is this: does one question the flickr source: Fidelio Artist? I don't know if Fidelio Artist is genuine or not and that is a problem sadly. I cannot say if this is a genuine account or a flickrwash account. If it is a genuine account, then the photos should be passed. If not, they should be deleted. Good night from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:32, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

May be, if there is enough interest in these images, we should contact the Flickr account direct and use some "legal wording" to prevent him gaming us, if he is not the real rights holder. --Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Copyvios

Hey Turélio, thank you for checking my sloppy copyvio marks. All from that user is a copyvio, apparently, I've already removed from the wikipedias the files which he had used in wiki-en and wiki-pt.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 07:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I know that it's sometimes hard to track down the "real" source. --Túrelio (talk) 08:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Silke Birgitta Gahleitner.tif. I've changed to no-perm. Yesterday I answered the uploaders question on :de, whether everything is o.k. with the image after he got the file from the depicted.[28] I told him that he needs to send the permission to OTRS. So, lets give him some time. The fact that it's in TIFF, instead of JPEG, suggests he is true. --Túrelio (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! At first it seemed an obvious copyvio, but then I checked the other contributions by the uploader and suspected there could be an authorization somewhere. I'll remove my copyvio notice from his talk page, then.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 08:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, actually the cv-tagging made me somewhat "proud", because it's good to know that the current deficiency was detected very early (by you) and because I had predicted in my answer to the uploader, that he should act soon as the image will be tagged earlier or later ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Eheheh Marking copyvios is not something I usually do, but I was taking a break from the Rozentals and happened to stumble upon it. However, the last thing I want is to scare away some valuable contributor who has actually taken the trouble to get free images from public personalities with a blunt copyvio warning, so thanks for correcting me on that one.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 08:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hab's versucht

aber ich soll's wegstecken. --Yikrazuul (talk) 21:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Momentan würde ich es dabei belassen, solang sich das nicht wiederholt. IMHO solltest du selbst im Ton aber auch etwas herunterfahren, zumal man auf diese Weise andere kaum dazu bringt, das eigene Lagerdenken mal ersthaft zu hinterfragen. Diese SP-Geschichte, sofern sie sich bestätigt, ist schon unangenehm genug. --Túrelio (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Klar, bei solchen Grundsatzdiskussionen (Exkludisten vs. Inkludisten) wird es immer irgendwann derbe, deswegen renn ich ja auch nicht gleich zur VM. Immerhin weiß jetzt Niabot, was ich mit "club" meine, auch wenn er es als Getrolle tituliert. Diese SP-Geschichte ist tatsächlich dämlich, schade, dass es technisch nicht möglich ist, SPs zu unterbinden. Würde wieder mehr Vertrauen schaffen. Grüße, --Yikrazuul (talk) 21:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Sacos R001-021.jpg

Hey User: Túrelio, wfor what´s deleted? ; File:Sacos R001-021.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.63.237.142 (talk • contribs) 29. Mai 2011, 21:32 Uhr (UTC)

Because it had been tagged "Duplicate of File:Sacos T001-021.JPG", about 4 months ago. --Túrelio (talk) 20:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Bee Arthur

Hello! I am Bee Arthur everything on my picture is mine. It is me wearing my own dress.The Logo B'EXOTIQ is mine. I am a fashion designer. You may crosscheck from www.bq.awuraba.com.

---

Bee Arthur

Hello Turelio!

I am Bee Arthur. The picture is me in my dress with my logo B'ExotiQ. you may crosscheck from www.bq.awuraba.com or facebook. My Page is B'ExotiQ by Bee Arthur. Otherwise, kindly advise how to proceed. Many thanks.

Bee Arthur (talk) 10:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC) Bee Arthur 30 May 2011

Hi Bee Arthur, great. Then we only need the permission of the photographer. To prepare the correct permission text, go to Commons:Email templates, copy the boxed "Declaration of consent for all inquiries", enter the name of the image file and the license of choice and mail it to the photographer. He/She should then read it, date and sign it and email it back to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 10:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:MUSEE DAVID D'ANGERS.jpg

Good morning:

When you delete a DR, it leaves a red entry in the log, which someone has to check and cleanup -- wouldn't it be easier for all of us to simply close the DR in the usual way, with "error" as the closing comment? Regards,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Good afternoon,

o.k. I hadn't created this DR and had assumed that there was nothing else remaining as it was empty except of the speedy tag. --Túrelio (talk) 13:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

These images

Are we supposed to remove the human flickr review tag here for US Government work for these 3 images or just mark them to be safe? Please see the flickr license.

• File:Doost Marble Factory in Herat-4.jpg
• File:Doost Marble Factory in Herat-7.jpg
• File:Bolan Poultry Farm-3.jpg

Maybe you know what to do? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:24, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

To be on the safe side, I've manually confirmed Flickreview record. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

• OK, I'll do that then. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Les Charlots

Hello, Túrelio.

Do you understand that in the Web we cannot find any free image of the group? The deleted image was a frame made as a printscreen by me. And - in support of my rights - please, see an analoguos event. I insist the file must be restored, even if it will be non-free and only for the Russian Wikipedia. --Ceroi (talk) 09:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Are your refering to this image File:Charlots.png? "support of my rights" - sorry, you have no rights in this image. Your printscreen violates the rights of the original photographer. Anyway, Commons does not host non-free images. If your local project does allow fair-use equivalent material, then you have to upload it locally. The same way as it happens with fair-use material on :en, which is not hosted on Commons, but locally on :en. --Túrelio (talk) 09:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Translation of the page: "This file is not free (does not meet the definition of free cultural works). In accordance with the decision of the Wikimedia Foundation, it can be used in the articles of the Russian section of Wikipedia only under the criteria of fair use. Any other use (as in the Russian section of Wikipedia, and outside it) may be copyright infringement". But, as far as I can see, that file was uploaded like the ones of mine. What "local projects' upload services" (or "servers") do you mean? Please, give me the links to their pages. --Ceroi (talk) 09:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

What is so hard to understand here? Your example is located on :ru, not on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 09:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

File:American Buildings Survey.jpg

Kannst du bitte den Verschieberest löschen? Unter dem Namen wurde das gestern hochgeladen und in der Fotowerkstatt besprochen. Inzwischen habe ich es auf einen sinnvolleren Namen verschoben, kategorisiert und eingebunden. Danke. --Matthiasb (talk) 10:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Brazilian copyvios

Answered, sorry, I forgot to fill in the summary in my edition.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 11:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't doubt the hit, but Photobucket itself often hosts copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

We will have no collaboration from Mrzero, so it seems. He left me a message in wiki-pt saying he doesn't care if we delete all his uploads. Perhaps I should feel some gratitude for the very few legit uploads he has done (not counting the plaques, whose origin is uncertain to me), but the time I've spent tracking down his copyvios doesn't allow for much sympathy for such users, really.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 13:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Wydadii

Thanks for checking his latest uploads, I've indefed him and nuked them all. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:26, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Reply

Hello Túrelio. Regarding your question at File:Kaczyce-kosciol.jpg. The author of this photo is my friend. I don't have a contact with him for a long time, so I cannot obtain the OTRS permission from him. Since that is the case, I think it should be deleted, especially since we have other properly licensed photos of this church. What do you think? - Darwinek (talk) 15:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I hadn't seen that this was the problem. --Túrelio (talk) 15:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the intromission, but is OTRS really necessary in this case? It's It was a nice and useful image uploaded by a trusted user.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 15:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, well, he had asked himself for deletion, first without a sufficient rationale. When I asked for more, he made me aware that it wasn't even his own image. --Túrelio (talk) 16:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

There are several other photos, that I have uploaded, with the same problem; i.e. taken by my friend (without OTRS permission) and with existing alternative. Can I request their deletion here? Photos taken by my friend without exisiting alternative should be left on Commons. - Darwinek (talk) 16:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, yes and no. "Missing permission" is not really influenced by "being used" or similar. If the images were uploaded with the expressed consent (even if verbal only) of the photographer/friend, who is no longer accessable, you yourself might send an permission to OTRS and see if it is accepted. If the images were uploaded without the expressed consent of the photographer/friend, they should be deleted alltogether, being with or without alternative. The risk that a re-user is sued by the original photographer is simply too high, IMHO. Of course, at first you should try to contact that friend of yours and ask him whether he would issue a permission, which is not that complicated. --Túrelio (talk) 16:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I see. Well, I will try to contact him. The point is, that until 2008 I've uploaded bunch of photos by my friends with their verbal consent. Anyways, I should probably obtain OTRS permissions from them in order to avoid possible trouble in the future. For several years, I am uploading only my photos anyways. - Darwinek (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Arthropoda.jpg

Hi Túrelio, wärst du bitte so lieb die alte Version des Bildes zu löschen? Sie ist eine Urheberrechtsverletzung und wurde mit dem Reupload korrigiert. Best Dank! Hekerui (talk)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Stained glass windows of St. Martin

Hello Túrelio, please review the following deletions, since I believe they were deleted by mistake due to a wrong copyvio tag. If those photos are like the one still not deleted, I believe they are covered by FOP in Germany, since they are in a public place:

• File:Schalkenmehren St. Martin6388.JPG
• File:Schalkenmehren St. Martin6389.JPG
• File:Schalkenmehren St. Martin874.JPG

Thanks, -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 20:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, I deleted them myself. They are regrettably not covered by FOP of Germany, because that is only valid for the outer appearance. Images shot from inside a building are not covered. FOP regulations differ from country to country; in Austria it's broader than in Germany, for example. I didn't delete the 4th image, because I think there is nothing copyrighted in this. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

But I consulted Commons:Licensing and it says: "Objects permanently located in public that can be photographed from public (accessible) grounds, without devices such as a ladder", it doesn't says it has to be from outside. If it is indeed the case, that explanation should be modified.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 21:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, the standard place for such information would be Commons:Freedom of panorama#Germany. I didn't even realize that COM:L had anything about FOP. --Túrelio (talk) 06:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Is a stained glass window a work of architecture or a work of art? I expect the window design is the work of an artist, not an architect. If a work of art, permanently located in a public place, then it is fine. Perhaps one would have to edit out the architectural detail of the window surround. --Tony Wills (talk) 07:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I fail to see the difference for us. The photo was taken from inside, which excludes FOP exemption in Germany. --Túrelio (talk) 07:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I was looking at the phrase 'public places', (öffentlichen ... Plätzen), which I now see has been defined as "squares, plazas" on our FOP page, although that qualification doesn't appear in the English translation of the legislation. I expect that there has been much discussion (and hopefully legal interpretation) of this, I will go and look :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, I didn't knew Commons:Freedom of panorama. I have the same doubts as Tony Wills: 1) I'm not sure this is even a "work of architecture", since the building is undoubtedly PD-old, and only the decorative glass of the windows seem to be recent. If instead of glass they used Picassos to cover the windows, what would it be? I believe this is more a work of art than an architectural feature. 2) I do not speak German, but that mix-up of "places" and "plazas" seem very awkward and ill defined, especially considering how Germany has such a reputation of clarity (though I'm quite frustrated trying to understand how their copyright law works respecting anonymous works, I still don't understand it).-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 12:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

He he, the FOP provisions in Germany are rather clear, see this detailed 38 kBytes long article de:Panoramafreiheit (in German, of course). FOP is not restricted to architectural works; actually the relevant § 59 UrhG just says "Werke" (i.e., works of art). Besides, there have been quite a number of court decisions about FOP, some even from the highest court of Germany. The question about photographies of copyrighted works taken from interior is actually not a question, it's a clear no, see de:Panoramafreiheit#Innenaufnahmen. To be sure, the situation is different (more lax) in Austria and the UK. --Túrelio (talk) 12:13, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I see, sculptures are specifically mentioned there, which answers my doubts. Thanks for the explanations, they were very educative indeed. The English documentation here on Commons should be clarified, however, as it passes a message that does not correspond to reality.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 12:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Those links are certainly useful, I too would like to see a propper translation (google can only get you so far :-). An interesting point is that the photo has to be taken from a public place (so a view of the same thing taken from a better angle, but not on public ground, is prohibited). The controversy about photos taken from enclosed 'roads' (eg underground railways), is interesting, I would have expected that you could take photos of things in the interior of tunnels (eg sculptures, posters), just not the architecture (although you might have to stand in the middle or the railway tracks to do it ;-). I also suppose that if you take a photo, from a public place (through an open door or window) of an artwork, that it would be allowable (so long as it didn't show internal architecture, or the architecture was out of copyright!). --Tony Wills (talk) 23:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe I've red somewhere that the work of art has to be on permanent display, so that paintings and posters, for instance, are not covered by FOP. The Portuguese law says that, and I seem to recall to have red something like that on Túrelio's links above about the German law. That would probably exclude other artworks such as sculptures photographed through open windows, as they are not "in permanent display", but rather displayed only when the window is open. I wonder what would be the case is the window is always open, or if it's a glass wall, however.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 06:14, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Three Blind Mice.jpg & File:Poster - Men's Group 2008.jpg

These 2 images are potentially flickrwashes. But the uploader has uploaded 2 other images which deal with the same web site. I don't know if its own work or a flickrwash. Maybe you can ask him/her? Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I've contacted the original film company. --Túrelio (talk) 06:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

• That sounds a reasonable idea. If they say no, then it is a flickrwash. If not, the images can be kept. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I've done the same and got a positive response, i.e. this Flickr acount is indeed officially linked to the original film company. I will forward this to OTRS such that we get this archived. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

It is archived under OTRS ticket number 2011060310004486. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Its good that the problem is resolved then. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Slandering?

You included {{!vote}} inside a discussion in which anybody had put arguments on the table. Additionally you included it right before many  Delete arguments. It isn't appropriate to do this for two reasons:

1. There was no "pure voting"/canvasing
2. The placement (right before your opposition) of the template is itself is slandering of the arguments.

Have a nice day. -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 08:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, "slandering" because of your accusation of "missuse" (incl. the original typo).

Eynbein's "invitation" on DCII (now version-deleted due to serious privacy violations) is clearly canvassing. Not unlikely that even Eynbein was canvassed, a user (accused of being a SP of Simplicius) who had ten (10) edits on Commons and no own work uploaded, but goes straight to this DR. Besides, you should know for yourself that pure votes are completely irrelevant in this DR. The image will (very likely) be deleted anyway, but it is the wrong way to single-out 1 contributor, who is now even slandered by others such as Eynbein and Widescreen. While I acknowledge that you and Neourf have pointed to an existing potential problem (which merits a solution), the way you are doing it results in poisoning the atmosphere on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that we have proposed licenses and no rule for custom licenses. Without having confirmed what is allowed and what is not (currently i assume only unchanged licenses to be allowed) i can't support the upload of images under such custom licenses, which are even a legal problem for Wikipedia itself. The last deletion was a month ago. No one tried to start a discussion to achieve a solution. I guess you won't start it, since the outcome should be clear already.

I have made multiple requests, in a nice way, to inform Wolfgang to change his licensing. He just ignores it, or is actually trying to get trough with that. Instead on deleting every image one by one i would make request to delete any of this images, if Wolfgang doesn't change his mind. This is also not good for the athmosphere, but at least it happens only once. -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 09:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

ACK. But how would/do you react when you get the (clear) impression that your uploads are targeted with whatever plausible or non-plausible arguments?

Besides, you seem again to misinterpret/misunderstand me in your conclusion ".. you won't start it, since the outcome ..". I do take the discussion in the first DR already as a (sort of) precedence and I acknowledge that the stance of the community towards this has changed now. Geoff Brigham (whom I have taken in the boot, by the way) has to a certain degree supported your concerns in regard to re-users, but has strongly recommended a general community decision about this issue. Very early in the current DR I have outlined a number of questions/issues that have to be addressed in such a community decision. None of you has taken that seriously or done anything about it. I have more than enough to do with the daily amount of copyvios etc. You can't really expect me to do your work, as this was your initiative. I will support a polling/Meinungsbild about this and contribute to it. But you have to start it. If you feel more comfortable, create a first outline in German. Then other de-natives can "finalize" it and thereafter it may be translated into en, fr, it, es etc. --Túrelio (talk) 15:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Löschung: Orchids in Mallorca

Hallo Túrelio, könntest Du bitte die gelöschte Category:Orchids in Mallorca wiederherstellen. Nach Beratung mit Bdk sollte sowohl "Orchids in Mallorca" als auch "Orchids of Mallorca" mit differenzierter Handhabung nebeneinander möglich sein. Vielen Dank und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

...danke! Orchi (talk) 18:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

That's twice tonight you've nuked a copyvio I tagged after an OTRS complaint. Nice work. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. However, now I'll go to bed. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

File:What do you want to be when you grow up?.jpg

Why isn't this image own work? The image resolution by the uploader here is so much higher than the one on flickr. This would indicate its the same photo. I have the same problem with my own pictures at flickr. Since I have a basic account there, flickr limits the resolution to only about 1024 X 783/683 pixels. But if I upload the same image here, I get the maximum resolution which can be as large as 3264 X 2448 pixels. I think its reasonable to accept good faith here. Perhaps the photo can be passed? Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I've send the Flickr user an email. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: OK. If it was me, I would assume the flickr account owner is the uploader. But I suppose its better to be sure. Very Interesting. It seems that someone else also asked the uploader the same question...but she seems to be away. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Axis occupation of Yugoslavia 1943-44.png

The file File:Axis occupation of Yugoslavia 1943-44.png is a derivative work of this PD image. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there any problem for that..(Copyvio or something) but irrelevant as source is PD??--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 15:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

No, but before my nsd-tagging, source and authorship were not that clear (and led to a complaint on COM:AN/U). --Túrelio (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

My mistake, I did not clarify the source properly. Has the complaint been lodged by one "User:PANONIAN"? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 17:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, his complaint was my reason to check the file. However, I hadn't the time and the nerve to mediate your edit-war. --Túrelio (talk) 17:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

He is the author of the source file, knows full well it has been released into public domain, and understands that this is a modification of his PD file. He has posted a bad-faith report in a deliberate attempt to delete the images on a technicality (I assume counting on my absence or preoccupation with enWiki issues). He is in general rather maliciously disposed towards me. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:33, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No need to justify yourself. I didn't take the source issue as a bad intention from your side. --Túrelio (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Wegen AN

Sei nachsichtig mit ihm, er ist ein wenig impulsiv :D --WizardOfOz ^talk 18:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Natürlich war das eigenlich harmlos, aber wehret den Anfängen. In letzter Zeit sind die Umgangsformen und die Stimmung auch auf Commons m.E. schlechter geworden. Dann reagiert man selbst auch gereizter und schon hat die Spirale begonnen. --Túrelio (talk) 18:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Na dann schau dir mal die Diskussion über die Karte an wo wir beide beteiligt sind :D. Dort ist die Ganze Diskussion kurz vorm kippen :D --WizardOfOz ^talk 18:18, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Meine Frustrationskapazität ist für heute schon ausgeschöpft durch die Mobbingaktion des :de-Dödelclubs gegen Martina, Ralf and andere. Wenn du den Eindruck hast, dass es dort zu fetzig wird, zieh dich einfach eine Zeit lang zurück oder bitte auf COM:AN um eine vorübergehende Seitensperre. (Ich muss ehrlich sagen, dass ich diese Art von Konflikten über Fahnen, Karten usw. wirklich hasse, weil eine Intervention für einen inhaltlich unbeteiligten Admin extrem zeitraubend ist.) --Túrelio (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Was für Mobbingaktion? Hier oder auf dewiki? Meinst den Roletschek? Hab nichts mitgekriegt. Was die Karte betrifft, war nur ein Hinweis damit du dir ein Bild machen kannst. Für mich ist die Diskussion dort erledigt. --WizardOfOz ^talk 18:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich möchte diesen Typen durch ein Direktlink nicht noch publicity verschaffen, zumal die justiziablen Sachen inzwischen eh versionsgelöscht sind. Schau dir nur die Benutzerseiten de:Benutzer:Ralf Roletschek und de:Benutzer:Martina Nolte an. Das sollte schon reichen. --Túrelio (talk) 18:39, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Schade. Wie es scheint zwei gute weniger :( Anscheinend gibt es überall solche spezialisten die es schaffen einem die Freude zu nehmen. --WizardOfOz ^talk 18:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Mémorial col des Abeilles.jpg

This memorial was installation, in homage of a resistant, deceased in 1944. it must dated after the second war. the author is unknown. I do not see or can be the copyvio or the author's right in this case! -- Véronique PAGNIER (talk) 17:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Selbstgemachtes (?) aus Caracas?

Hallo Turelio, von einem Nutzer gibt es eine Reihe von Bilder aus Caracas, die mir zu professionell aussehen, als das sie (wie angegeben) selbstgemacht sein könnten. Eines ist hier

File:Caracas1.jpeg

- die Bilder des Nutzer mit EXIF-Daten sind deutlich schlechter als die 3-4 "Postkarten". Trifft m.E. auf alle Bilder Caracas1 bis Caracas4 des Nutzers zu. Wie weiter? Das ist mir nicht klar. Grüße Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich vermute dass alle - außer vielleicht dem 1 EXIF-Bild - alle copyvios sind. Allerdings gab tineye keinen hit. 1 Bild habe ich via Google gefunden. Wenn's dir gerade danach ist, dann such doch in Google nach dem Dateinamen oder der Beschreibung. Andernfalls kannst du für alle eine DR stellen. Der Uploader wird sich eh nicht melden; war auf :it auch nur kurz aktiv. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Südamerikanische Städte sind ein Quell immerwährender Detektivarbeit. Das Bild wurde in diesem Skyscrapercity Beitrag von Juni 2009 bereits verwendet. Es stammt von Flickr, ist dort - vermutlich weil der Pro-Account des Flickr-Benutzers abgelaufen ist und infolge seine Beiträge auf 200 reduziert worden - noch auf dem Server gelagert aber nicht mehr über http://www.flickr.com/photo.gne?id=3458121033 zugänglich. Urheber nicht mehr identifizierbar, aber Bild aus dem Internet kopiert. --Martin H. (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

und p.s.: File:Caracas3.jpeg stammt aus dem gleichen Skyscrapercity Beitrag, ebenso File:Caracas2.jpeg und File:Caracas.jpeg. File:Caracas,entrata di uno dei tanti centri commerciali.jpg kommt aus der gleichen Skyscrapercity Diskussion ein Beitrag darüber. Da hat sich jemand großzügig selbstbedient. --Martin H. (talk) 21:34, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Da hat sich wieder jemand den Sherlock-Holmes-Award verdient. --Túrelio (talk) 05:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

+ 1, wunderbar, Danke! Cholo Aleman (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Universities in Danang

Just a note regarding your deletion of Category:Universities in Da Nang: Da Nang actually has other universities besides the University of Da Nang (e.g. Duy Tan University, Da Nang Architecture University, etc). I created the category, and I realize that there was only the U of DN subcategory in it—I just hadn't gotten around to uploading the rest of my pics. I've been (and still am) busy IRL for the past while, so I probably won't do any work on it for at least another month or so, but I just wanted to drop you a line to let you know that I'll eventually recreate and continue filling up the category. --Dragfyre (talk) 15:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dragfyre, thanks for the note. There is absolutely no problem in recreating a cat, when it is used. It's not like recreating a copyvio ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

October Project image

Hi Túrelio, yesterday I tagged File:October project on rooftop.jpg as a copyvio, but I believe this was an error on my part. The image was an original file, much larger than the press kit image, so it could not possibly have been a rip from the PDF. Would it be possible to undelete the image, but retain the {{Npd}} tag for now (it appears in the last history edit prior to the copyvio tag)? I am in the process of getting in touch with the photographer to get confirmation for OTRS. Thank you so much. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁galaxies 00:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:24, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Túrelio. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁galaxies 08:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:What do you want to be when you grow up?.jpg

Dear Admin Turelio,

Update: Regarding this image, after thinking carefully, I decided to flickpass it. I gave my reasons in its image talkpage here. (You may wish to read it) I said that if anyone has a problem, they can revert the flickrpass and retag it as nsd. But personally, it seems very likely that the uploader is the flickr account owner. If there is a problem, the image can be deleted in future. I also notified the person who originally filed the nsd tag here and he said on my talkpage that he has no problems. Maggie, the uploader, clearly works with the 'Building Tomorrow' organisation and places a watermark on her photos on educating African children in Uganda from this article but that is not a good enough reason to delete her photos especially when her flickr account shows no evidence of flickrwashing. With kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

ACK. I haven't got an answer from the Flickr-Maggie. --Túrelio (talk) 08:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Patrolling question

Hello,

Often while patrolling, I encounter files like this. I can't confirm the source and permission because login is required. What should I do in these cases?

Thank you in advice,

Yours Sincerely -- RE rillke questions? 18:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Rillke,

the most simple, still formally correct way would be tagging it with cv as the source website (before log-in) says "© 2006-2011". I've done that now. If you guess the image could be "o.k." and valuable, you might tag it with no-permission, which gives the uploader 7 days to provide a permission. --Túrelio (talk) 19:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. -- RE rillke questions? 19:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:BudaViewfromPest 029.jpg

Zur Information: [29] --08-15 (talk) 20:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:CMCLagerhuelsen.jpg

Hallo Turelio. Habe mich drangemacht und am 23.5. eine neue Lizenzerklärung meiner Firma für obiges File und weitere unklare files gemailt und auch am 23.5. noch die Bestätigung unter der Ticket#: 2011052310006377 erhalten und dies auch unter der Undeletion-request-Seite gemeldet. Nur: es ist bisher nichts passiert; kann ja verstehen, dass es mit all den vielen fleißigen Admins und dem Riesenberg an abzuarbeitenden Aktionen eine Weile dauert, würde die Aktion aber noch gerne vor meinem Urlaub erledigt wissen. Kannst Du da was erreichen? Wäre Klasse. (Den gleichen Text habe ich auf Deiner deutschen Disk-Seite platziert.) Dank schon mal und Gruß vom --Leumar01 (talk) 07:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Du meintest sicher File:CMCLagerhuelsen.jpg (mit n am Ende), oder? --Túrelio (talk) 09:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Uups, natürlich, und ob, ja. Danke! Gruß --Leumar01 (talk) 12:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke fürs Löschen

Moin Turelio, wollte nur Danke sagen und eine Frage loswerden, gibt es eine Möglichkeit meine Bilder so aufzulisten, das ich sehen kann, ob sie in keiner Seite eingebunden sind. Ich habe bei der Umstellung einige Bilder verloren, die Galerie zeigt ja nur Catlose an. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 11:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich misch mich mal wieder ungefragt ein ;-)

Ich habe Duesentrieb am 9. Mai eine Wikimail mit eben dieser Frage geschrieben (Anzeige auf einen Blick, wo die Bilder eingebunden sind). Leider erhielt ich keine Antwort. Vielleicht fragst Du ihn auch nochmal? --Schwäbin (talk) 11:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Für offizielle Aktivitäten im Namen von Wikimedia Deutschland nutze ich einen separaten Account, Benutzer:Daniel Kinzler (WMDE). Fragen und Anregungen nehme am liebsten per Wikimail an diesen Account entgegen. Da er jetzt zum WMDE Team gehört hat er Stress, Beantwortung von Mails dauern da bei einigen Herren länger ;), spreche aus eigener Erfahrung und kann sagen, das sich die Damen und der Boss schnell melden. ;))) Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 12:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Leider keine Ahnung. Ich wär nicht mal darauf gekommen, deswegen Düsentrieb anzusprechen. Die "normale" Gallerie-Auflistung ist dir natürlich bekannt. Nutzung oder Fehlen derselben wird da aber nicht direkt angezeigt, sondern man muss für jedes Bild auf "Usage" klicken. Aber das dürfte für dich nix neues sein. --Túrelio (talk) 12:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Da er WikiSense (die Galerie) und auch das Tool CheckUsage programmiert hat, hab ich ihn angesprochen. Raboe und mir geht es drum, nicht erst bei jedem Bild einzeln auf Usage klicken zu müssen, sondern eine zusätzliche Spalte in der Galerie zu haben, die (analog zur Spalte, in der die Kategorien angezeigt werden) auf einen Blick die Seiten anzeigt, in die das Bild eingebunden ist. --Schwäbin (talk) 12:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Genau darum geht es. ;) Aber schreib ihn ruhig noch mal an und erwähne das wir jetzt schon zwei mit der gleichen Frage sind. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 13:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Mach Du das lieber. Ich mag ungern einem ehrenamtlichen Wikipedia-Mitarbeiter zweimal eine Bitte vortragen, er hat ja selbstverständlich das Recht, eine unbezahlte „Auftragsarbeit“ nicht anzunehmen. Aber Du könntest ihn auch mal bitten, wenn von zwei Seiten sowas kommt, sieht es für ihn vielleicht wieder anders aus. --Schwäbin (talk) 13:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Nee er ist, so meines Wissen, bezahlter Angestellter der WMDE, aber ich schreibe die Mail. Tschüß -- Ra Boe watt?? 14:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Falls du eine User-Kat in deine Bilder eingebunden hast, gäbe es dafür ein Auswertungtool. Beispiel (lange Ladezeit) --Martina talk 17:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Und wo sehe ich jetzt, ob sie in keiner Seite eingebunden sind? -- RE rillke questions? 20:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Wer nur seine Dateinutzung sehen will und keine Nutzerkategorie hat: Magnus -- RE rillke questions? 20:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Wenn es nur um Wikimedia- Projekte (das was immer unter "Globale Dateinutzung" steht) geht, kann ich auch ein JavaScript zusammenzimmern, sollte es keine andere Möglichkeit geben. -- RE rillke questions? 20:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke, Martina, für den Hinweis auf das Tool von Magnus, das hilft mir!

Zumindest mir reicht eine Nutzung auf Wikimedia-Projekten. Ich dachte halt, wenn es die WikiSense-Galerie schon gibt (und die ja auch bei den Beiträgen gut verlinkt ist), müsste man ja nur noch eine zusätzliche Spalte reinsetzen. --Schwäbin (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Appropriate template

Hallo! I've recently found one more problem with file licensing by user form Russia. User Vladlen666 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) have uploaded a pack of files claiming that they are in public domain ({{PD-old}}). However he didn't put the names of their creators: just "soviet artist" (e.g., File:Coregonus lavaretus pidschian.jpg), "soviet photographer" (e.g., File:Orlov A G.jpeg) and "soviet cartographer" (e.g., File:Pohod Tamanskoi armii.JPG). At least in some cases that copyright violations took place. I hope the reason of such activity is misunderstanding and try to explain him what's wrong with it. Neverthless the files do exist here and I dont't know what template should be added better to files under doubt. Mithril (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Your tagging of File:Coregonus lavaretus pidschian.jpg was correct. I have now tagged File:Orlov A G.jpeg as no-permission, because the name and life dates of the photographer were not provided. As I don't read any Russian, it would be great if you could explain the uploader what is missing. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

The problem is much more larger: I believe that about one third of all files uploaded by this user is of such kind. Mithril (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Just try to find out what is missing in each file and then tag it as no-permission or no-source or, when you are rather sure, as copyvio. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Something is going wrong. Mithril (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

No. That is rather normal ;-). Opinions differ. Anyway, you re-tagged it. --Túrelio (talk) 06:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

• Seems to me I need help here. That's fair use and good faith attack. Mithril (talk) 01:43, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

• I'm a page stalker and I'm reading this. ;) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 01:56, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

  Be sure it is no problem. Mithril (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

a picture of Dr Israr Ahmad and weirdos

Hey Turelio, :) you recently deleted a picture I had provided for the article Dr Israr Ahmad. Why did you delete it? I had obtained it myself from the said owner (dr Israr) with his full permission to release it into wiki public domain. There may be one other reason, there are ultra orthodox muslims (salafis) who do not like to save and use pictures of human beings, maybe one of those weirdos complained of it being a copy right violation!! I can assure you it isnt, maybe if you could explain a little, it would be really helpful. (Note: those orthodox dudes have deleted his pictures many times before, you can check it in the page's history!!). Thanx! Afghan Historian (talk) 06:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Afghan Historian,

are your referring to File:Dr Israr Ahmad.jpg? If yes, well, this file wasn't deleted by me, but by User:Yann. I did only notify you of the deletion request. As of the deletion log, it was deleted because it is assumed to be a copyvio from http://malikumairawan.blogspot.com/2009/05/dr-israr-ahmad-jeane-dixon-and-imam.html, a page to where the same image was uploaded in 2009. This is not a proof, but at least suggestive of copyvio. I recommend you to either talk to Yann or to file an undeletion request at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 06:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Photo under incorrect copyright (File:Tommy-castillo.jpg)

Túrelio, I am Mr. Tommy Castillo's personal assistant. You have previously deleted the Official picture of him from the commons area; tommy-castillo.jpg. uploaded by user spkeller13. This picture is NOT owned by Strathmore Paper company and is owned by Mr. Castillo himself. He has given permission to Strathmore to use it on their website with his biography.

Please contact me or Mr. Castillo via email.

Thanks,

Personal Assistant to Mr. Castillo, Samantha P. Keller 407-271-5140 spkeller13@me.com Tommycastillo@me.com

Spkeller13 (talk) 13:43, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Samantha,

could you please send a confirmation to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I can then undelete the image. --Túrelio (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Neochilidia fusca.jpg

Could you please rename this file into File:Neochildia fusca.jpg. That's a typo. Mithril (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Mithril (talk) 21:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

CyrustheGreatTomb

Hallo Túrelio, du hast die Bilder von hier unter einer CC-Lizenz hochgeladen. Ich lese auf der Website Namensnennung/Gleiche Bedingungen, aber nicht spezifisch CC. Habe ich da was falsch verstanden? Wenn ja, würde ich mich über eine Erklärung, damit ich es verstehe, freuen. Gruß --Atlan 03:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Atlan, das war ein besonderer Fall. Den Hintergrund findest du hier. Der mutmaßliche Ersteller hatte Zoff mit einem Adminkollegen aus der gleichen Gegend (Mehr will ich dazu jetzt mal nicht kommentieren), der die meisten Bilder vorher mal geöscht hatte, wobei mir die Rationale aber wenig stichhaltig vorkam. Da das ganze eine Art Service war, habe ich überhaupt nichts dagegen, wenn du díe Validität der Bilder hinterfragst/überprüfst/falsifzierst. Du kannst auch gerne mit dem mutmaßlichen Ersteller Kontakt aufnehmen, zumal er recht gut deutsch spricht. --Túrelio (talk) 08:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, ist schon in Ordnung, ich bin zufällig darauf gestoßen und wollte mal nachfragen. Scheint ja zu passen. Gruß --Atlan 08:54, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

hilfe... (umbenannt zu File:Ramón Grau Director.jpg)

hier File:Director.jpg hat Benutzer Samaeli in altes Bild mit einem neuen überschrieben, - das neue ist offenbar nonsense. (Das alte war passabel) Wie mache ich das rückgängig? kapiere ich leider nicht. Grüße und Dank im Voraus Cholo Aleman (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Habs revertiert. Ich glaub das kann aber jeder User; einfach in der Tabelle "Dateiversionen" auf das "zurücksetzen" neben der gewünschten Version klicken. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke! - nächste mal probiere ich das selbst, eher seltener Fall. Cholo Aleman (talk) 09:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

October Project image

Hi Túrelio, thank you so much for your previous help with File:October_project_on_rooftop.jpg. I have been in touch with the photographer, Steven Lowy, and its apparent that the image is, in fact, a copyvio. Can I request you to, once more, delete it permanently? I'm really sorry for the trouble. The image is technically licensed to be used by the band, but not freely by anyone else, so even if the uploader is affiliated with the band (which neither the photographer nor I know, or can prove), they never had any right to upload the image in the first place. I will remove the image from the articles it appears on in a short while (I'm writing back to Mr. Lowy at the moment). Thanks so much, and if you prefer me to go a different route (tagging the image copyvio again), let me know and I'll do that. Either way, thanks for working with me on this. I assumed good faith and it turned out it definitely was not! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁galaxies 20:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Gone. --Túrelio (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

You work fast, that's great, thank you. Again my apologies for wasting everyone's time. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁galaxies 21:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Lizenz Bilder

Hi:

I request that the images I uploaded to wikimedia commons are not deleted. Some of them belong to other historical characters and personalities of national importance in my country. The sources are indicated and are publicly accessible, it is clear that besides being used to promote culture and knowledge of some officials currently in office.

Ich beantrage, dass die Bilder, die ich auf Wikipedia hochgeladen werden nicht gelöscht. Einige von ihnen gehören zu anderen historischen Figuren und Persönlichkeiten von nationaler Bedeutung in meinem Land. Die Quellen sind angegeben und sind öffentlich zugänglich, ist es klar, dass neben verwendet wird, um Kultur und Wissen von einigen Beamten, die derzeit im Amt zu fördern.

danke schon

BlackBird07 (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi BlackBird07,

the importance of a depicted person has no effect on the copyright of its image, which belongs to the photographer. A photography is protected by copyright until 70 years after the death of the photographer. This is also true for Peru[30]. The fact that an image is available/shown on another website has no meaning for copyright. For uploads to Commons you have to provide proof/evidence that the image is either out of copyright (because the photographer has died 70 years ago) or was released under a free license by the photographer. What we really don't like here manufacturing description entries or bogus ownership claims. When you uploaded File:Pedro-Cotillo-Zegarra.gif, you provided "www.unmsm.edu.pe" as source. After I notified you that this source entry 1) is incomplete, because we need the link to the page where the image is actually shown, and 2) that we need evidence of a permission, you changed[31] the authorship from "unmsm" to your username. You did the same with File:Omar-Chehade2.jpg, File:Luis izquierdo vasquez.jpg, File:Alcalde transitorio Marco Parra.jpg and File:Jorge del castillo.jpg. Eventually you do not know that claiming authorship over a work of whom you are not the author, is a criminal act in many countries, see Copyfraud. Therefore, I have reverted your changes to protect you and potential re-users from legal problems. If you want to remain your uploads on Commons, you first have to find out (and provide evidence for) who was the photographer (name, location, eventually year of death). If the photographer is still living, you may ask him for a written permission. --Túrelio (talk) 08:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

File:The NA Barakat Academy of Nakaseeta.jpg

Maybe its time for this image to be deleted. Its more than 7 days now. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Regrettably, the Flickr user did never reply to my mail. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

• Thank You sadly. But someone had to make a decision eventually. It was perhaps a derivative image, too. --Leoboudv (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for help: two images

Dear Turelio, Thanks for your help with the file I uploaded - USAFA stone circle.jpg - where you fixed the image by removing the CMYK color coding to allow non-corrupted viewing in IE. However, it looks like the problem returned when you improved the image again by removing the lower section. When I try to use the image in an article, the very small photo that appears is all right, but when I click it, the large image that appears is corrupted. Is there any way to delete other images and just leave the corrected image that you created?

Also, there is a similar problem I have with another file I uploaded: Rusk Memorial Chapel.jpeg. I had originally uploaded a black and white image, but then replaced it with a color image. When I use the file in an article, the small version that appears is the new (color) file -- but when I click it the large file that is shown is the old black and white file. Again, is there a way to delete this black and white file completely, so that only the color file remains?

If you can help with one or both of these issues, I'd very much appreciate it! NearTheZoo (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi NearTheZoo,

this seems to be related to the still lurking cache-problem on Commons. (If you want to see a real problem case, look at File:Iguane à Chichén Itzá.JPG and click on it.) At least I couldn't reproduce the problem with File:USAFA stone circle.jpg. When I clicked on the image, the full resolution was shown withut any problem. The same was true for me with File:Rusk Memorial Chapel.jpeg. When I click on the image, I see the full resolution without any problem. Besides, I'm not sure whether deleting the first version would really help. Did you ever click on the "purge" button on each image page? --Túrelio (talk) 12:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Turelio - thanks for your note! The "USAFA stone cirlce.jpg" file seems to be working now. The "Rusk Memorial Chaplel.jpg" doesn't work for me (it shows up in color in the article, but clicking it gives the black and white version) - but I guess that's not the end of the world....

However, there is one other file that is driving me a little crazy, and I wonder if you could take a look? It's "Army Chaplain School flag.jpg" - which, if you look at the history, you'll see I've reverted back and forth between two images so many times that it is embarassing. I uploaded a tiny image, but then found a much better one and uploaded it. For some reason, though, when I revert to the small image, it shows up in the article and when you click it, it shows up small, which makes sense. But when I revert to the larger image, and it shows up in the article -- when you click it, it shows up very fuzzy. However, when I click the thumbnail in the list of past versions (for example, the second in the list) it shows up clear. For now, I've reverted to the smaller image for the article. Any ideas? NearTheZoo (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

In this case, after reverting to the larger version I could indeed reproduce the phenomenon, clicking on the thumb or on full-resolution produce the small image version. Absolutely strange. It remained even after purging. I would recommend you to raise this issue on COM:VP, as I have no idea what to about that. On second thought, I have downloaded the larger version and run it through "optímising" in IrfanView and voila, it worked.--Túrelio (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for trying, Turlio. Drives me crazy! :) Anyway, I uploaded the image to a different file - "Flag for Army Chaplain School.jpg" -- and it works perfectly. So I used the image from the new file in the article and have marked this first (problematic) file -- "Army Chaplain School flag.jpg" -- for speedy deletion. Somehow I have continuing problems when I try to upload a "better version" of a file over an existing one. If I upload it separately and request the first be deleted, it seems to work. This just adds work for wikimedia commons editors, though. Anyway - thanks! NearTheZoo (talk) 14:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

My DR comment

Dear Turelio, you did the right thing. It was inappropriate, I see. And reinforced the position of the guy. I make many mistakes, you see? But, without errors, there is no learning. Thank you for your work. --Giorgiomonteforti ^{Speak your mind} 10:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. --Túrelio (talk) 10:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Pedro Passos Coelho

Hallo Túrelio, du hast verschiedene Bilder von Passos Coelho auf Commons gelöscht. Beim Laden der Bilder habe ich auf die Lizenz geachtet und diese genau so eingegeben wie sie auf der Webseite stand. Meines Erachtens habe ich keinen Fehler festgestellt, wieso hast du die Bilder gelöscht? Also so kommen wir nicht weiter.--Cruks (talk) 11:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich habe folgende beiden Dateien gelöscht:

• File:Passos Coelho.jpg von http://www.flickr.com/photos/ppdpsd/5804130698/in/photostream; Problem: NC
• File:Passos Coelho2.jpg von http://www.flickr.com/photos/ppdpsd/5800673915/; Problem: NC

Beide tragen eine no-commercial-use-Beschränkung (siehe durchgestrichenes Dollar-Zeichen), die auf Commons nicht erlaubt ist. Du kannst natürlich den Autor fragen, ob der diese Einschränkung auf Flickr generell aufheben oder dir eine Genehmigung (ohne NC) für Commons geben kann, die dann natürlich von jedermann genutzt werden kann. --Túrelio (talk) 12:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

OTRS

Thank you for reviewing the image. Although I used to be an OTRS volunteer, I no longer have access. I verified that the ticket number was the same one as what was recorded for the original image listed in the speedy deletion rationale. I still keep authors' permissions in my email so was able to review it from there. Anyway, thanks again. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 14:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

This DR

If you have any views on this DR--either for or against, please feel free to make them known. I thought it was an AP photo but maybe I'm wrong. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

• By the way, is this a copy vio/flickrwash as the flickr account only has 14 images.
• File:FernandoColundaénCancún.png

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

How to provide copyright permission ?

Hi Túrelio, I received a written permission from Ms. Danielle Chesnay, the rights holder of Louis-Olivier Chenay's pictures. Shall I provide this permission anywhere on Wikimedia and how ? Many thamks in advance for your help. Best regards Jean-Michel Henny (talk) 21:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jean-Michel,

just go to Commons:Messages type (assuming that you prefer French), copy the boxed "Déclaration de consentement", enter all the filenames (or complete URLs), enter the name of the license of choice, mail that all to Ms. Danielle Chesnay and ask her to read it and, if she consents, to date and sign it and to mail it back to permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org. After she told you that she will send the permission, you should add {{OTRS pending}} to all images covered by this permission. This will save them from premature deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Template move

Hi, sorry for the additional work for my mistakes. I saw that you are often required remedies to my wrapping a new category, but I realize now that you are overworked in this. I can then, if and when I realize my mistake, I simply move to that category IMHO more correct to avoid you dirty work? Once moved to put the warning to the old class for cancellation. It can help or you still have to watch to make sure it is a correct operation? Thanks and sorry for the translator (as fast as I do) :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 08:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I am not totally sure that I understand. A category (cat), once it is created, cannot be "moved" to another name, such as from Category:Buildings in Adria to Category:Buildings in Adria (Italy). Of course, the content of a cat can be "moved", just by changing the cat entry at the bottom of each page. Deleting an already emptied cat is no big deal, whereas moving many files from one cat to another, is quite some manual work. So, if you have a full cat with a wrong or unfitting cat-name, it does indeed help, if you move the content (i.e., the files in the cat) to the new cat. Thanks for yor care. --Túrelio (talk) 08:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

As you can see in in the history of "Adoration of the Magi Triptych by Hans Memling"], a SieBot moves provides some interesting information. It renames the related talk page too when possible. --Foroa (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Afghan Leopard Gecko.jpg

{{Flickrreview}} not sure what to do but I got the license changed on the original picture on Flickr. Please review. Andrew Pollock (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Undeleted and new run of Flickreview. --Túrelio (talk) 20:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

For my own edification, could you please tell me why CC-BY-NC-SA isn't okay, but CC-BY-SA is? Andrew Pollock (talk) 22:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

NC means "no commercial use allowed", as you may know. Per our policy, files on Commons have to be free also for commercial use. A file that has only a NC-license is therefore not allowed on Commons. Some users uploads files under a NC-license plus a different non-NC-license. However strange this combination may look, it would be allowed.

RE:your upload. In case you are the original photographer, you may now change the license on Flickr back to NC, as we have recorded the non-NC-licensing at upload time to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 06:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Kim Estrada.jpg

Dear Admin Turelio, I left the comment in this picture. In your view, is this picture OK or is it a flickrwash? Originally, there were 6 images all of Kim Estrada on the flickr account photostream. Now there are 12 images. If it is OK, feel free to pass it. If not, consider failing it or doing nothing. When I see this picture, I see no camera metadata and it looks like it has an artificial perspective...which might make it a derivative. Thank You, --Leoboudv talk) 06:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: I made a reply to your response to the DR . I don't know who to trust sadly--if the uploader is really Patricia Campbell. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Jean(-)Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville

Halli, hallo. Du hast vor ein Paar Wochen die Notiz von Jean-Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville gelöscht (siehe das). Ich habe ein Bißchen recherchiert, und habe gefunden, dass obwohl die Englische Wikipedia Jean Baptiste ohne Bindestrich schreibt, alle anderen (inklusive die französische) außer ein Paar (nl, pl z.B.) schreiben Jean-Baptiste mit Bindestrich. Ich habe auch bei der Bibliothèque Nationale de France hier geprüft, und es ist klar, dass der Name mit Bindestrich geschrieben sein sollte. Ich habe auch fest gestellt, dass im englisch sprachigen Raum, der Bindestrich ist irgendwie nicht benutzt. Ich frage mich aber, welche Version wir da wirklich benutzen sollten. Ideen? Danke! notafish }<';> 00:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi notafish, meine Löschung beruhte nicht auf eigener Recherche, sondern weil der Eintrag für mich plausibel (mehr nicht) mit {{bad name|Creator:Jean Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville}} markiert war. In Anbetracht deiner Quellenarbeit scheint klar, dass die Bindestrich-Variante die Richtige war. Ich habe diese nun entlöscht und die andere Variante zur Löschung markiert. --Túrelio (talk) 07:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Susan sponder

Sometimes when a user talk page consists solely of a recently-added welcome template, I add my comments on top of the template, since the template is so long that I worry that a new user might overlook comments added below it... AnonMoos (talk) 13:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

ACK. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

hello

Hi. I asked for you to delete a picture of mine, and you did. [32] Could you add it back? I would like to change some colors on it. And it fits in well with the others here, [33]. Also, I have some problem with the wikipedia coding. I used the "==" but I don't get another section. Do you know how to fix this? (Lilic (talk) 06:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)).

 Done. You had opened a gallery, but not closed it. Therefore the "==" didn't work. --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. (Lilic (talk) 16:01, 20 June 2011 (UTC))

Please Review your delation

Hello,

You deleted one of my pictures but i have the copyright. Can you please note that?

Thanks,

Louis.

Hi Louis,

please sign your comments with --~~~~

Are your refering to File:Stéphanie Manasseh.jpg? If yes, the problem is that the image was also found here: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150183299043515&set=a.450410728514.241383.183345158514&type=1&theater and http://www.accessibleartfair.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Labels-Magazine.pdf. If you are really the photographer, then send a written confirmation to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. If you are not the photographer, you have to provide a written permission by the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Datei:Fessenheim abschalten2.svg

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe die Version des "Atomkraft-Nein danke" Logos hier gefunden: Datei:Atomkraft Nein Danke.svg. Wird unter anderem auf der Wikiseite http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Atomkraft-Bewegung verwendet. Gruss

Hallo Mondberg, aber du hattest auf de:File:Atomkraft_Nein_Danke.svg die Warnung "do not transfer to Commons ..." gesehen? Ich persönlich sehe eigentlich kein Problem damit, zumal dasselbe Logo in anderen Sprachen inzwischen auf COmmons liegt. Es könnte aber doch passieren, dass jemand anderer das moniert. --Túrelio (talk) 18:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Ob das hier

irgendwen interessiert? --Martina talk 20:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, so ganz verstehe ich das Problem selbst nicht. Ich hab mich sogar extra mal ausgeloggt, konnte aber keinen Unterschied zum eingeloggten Zustand erkennen. Als Creditline erschien in deinem Foto beide Male "Foto: Martina Nolte / Lizenz: Creative Commons CC-by-sa-3.0 de" und beiden Male war der Lizenzname mit einem Link zum legal code unterlegt. Einen "Use this file on the web"-Button sehe ich garnicht, nur das allgemeine Link "(Reusing this file)". --Túrelio (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Die Creditline zeigt Name und Link zur Lizenz korrekt an. "User this file on the web" ist nicht mit jedem Browser zu sehen (sowieso nur ausgeloggt). Zum Beispiel IE8 nicht, Firefox 4.0.1. ja. Ich geh zur MediaWiki-Seite damit. --Martina talk 18:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Jetzt hier --Martina talk 11:16, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio candidated for featured picture

Hello Turélio, what do we do with this? I fear there will be more files in this situation, this user has a very unfortunate habit of passing others work as his own, and even trying to win prizes with it.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 05:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

As the Pescadores escultura image was already gone, I've checked his other uploads, but didn't find any evidence or suspicion for further copyvios. However, we should keep an eye on hiim. --Túrelio (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I guess I got rid of at least the most obvious, thank you for reviewing it. Many of the remaining uploads seem to be legit, though I have a certain suspicion about his other candidate for featured picture, but perhaps it is legit as well. I was asking about this page because I don't know if I should leave it as it is, or if it should be deleted as "dependent on deleted file". I guess it should be kept as a record, but just in case, I thought it would be better to ask.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 07:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I see. As I've never been active on FP, I've no idea. But I would leave it as a record, as you said. --Túrelio (talk) 07:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Companies and ships of those companies

I found that you removed the ships category for Hawaii Superferry. Was something wrong in the spelling? I add these categories to devide between the company and the ships. Extra images of the company have sometimes nothing to do with the ships and it gives the possibility of adding Ships by operator, when the company also has a lot of other activities. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

It had been tagged by Vantey as badname/dupe of Category:Hawaii Superferry. --Túrelio (talk) 19:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll contact Vantay to clarify the use of these categories. --Stunteltje (talk) 19:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Cat for user talk pages

Is it okay, please see here--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

No, out of scope as is the "article" on the talkpage. Cats removed and user advised. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Upgrading .svg image of the Coat of Arms of Nepal

Hi,

I am new to editing on Wikipedia and I am mainly interested in working on materials related to Nepal. Currently (and actually for about a year now) I am trying to upgrade the .svg image of the Coat of Arms of Nepal (Image). I even uploaded an upgraded version of the .svg file last summer but at some point later on it was taken off and a page shows that you were involved in making the decision link.Sorry for my rudimentary skills at editing. I also uploaded a .gif file which was converted to .png by another user. This image has not been taken down image.

In the reason for removing the "upgraded" image it was written that the new image is a "scaled down duplicate" but the image had actually been altered in other ways: the text on the red ribbon at the bottom of the picture was "corrected" and a bangle was added in the female hand to match more closely with the actual Coat of Arms, as depicted in the .png image. The continued use of the present inaccurate image is particularly bothering because almost everyone on the Internet seems to be using the current image.

Also, it seems I can't re-upload the upgraded version of the file because it has already faced deletion once. Therefore I thought of asking you for help. I realize that I failed to credit the original creator of the image appropriately but it was mainly because I did not know how to do that here. Apologies for that shortcoming.

Thanks a lot for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely, PraShree (talk) 04:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi PraShree, I can temporarily un-delete File:Coat of arms of Nepal.svg, so that you can check which version you do want to remain and eventually to complete the description/source/credit etc. Are you still online in this moment? --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your prompt response.I have compared the file that was deleted with the .png file (which is a scan of an actual Coat of Arms on an official document) and I am quite sure that the new file is much more like the actual the Coat of Arms. Some of the letters and words written on the current .svg file don't make proper sense even to people who can read them. I would greatly appreciate it if you could restore the deleted file.PraShree (talk) 04:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done, File:Coat of Arms of Nepal.svg. --Túrelio (talk) 07:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I have updated some information on this file. Also, could you please suggest improvements that would qualify this image to replace the older image. And what is the procedure for replacement?PraShree (talk) 03:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Your "to replace the older image" refers likely to its use on a project page, such as wikipedia, right? Well, this has to be discussed on the respective project. If there is no dispute/resistance, you might simply replace it. However, a better way might be to make a suggestion/proposal on the talkpage of the article where you want it to be used. --Túrelio (talk) 06:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I will do that right away. PraShree (talk) 23:26, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The Breyer Law Accident Book

The image I am uploading is not violating any copy write laws, I own the copy write. Why is it coming up as a violation?

Hi, if you are refering to File:13 biggest mistakes accident book.jpg, this had been tagged as copyvio by User:Chatsam; you may ask him. You other two uploads have been deleted by my colleague User:Jcb. --Túrelio (talk) 18:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Request

Please block user:Lycaon indef and protect the discussion page. That account is no longer used on commons. Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Düsseldorf

Hallo Turelio, mich wurmt, dass bei bei inzwischen leider vielen Städten, auch bei Düsseldorf, die Kategory "Streets in..." so versteckt ist, dass sie nur von ganz versierten Nutzern gefunden wird. Obwohl das eine so wesentliche, zum Nachschlagen geeignete Kategorie ist. Ich wollte jetzt die Kategorien Plätze und Straßen wieder in einer Oberkategorie "Streets and squares in Düsseldorf" zusammenführen und diese dann direkt unter Düsseldorf einordnen. Die bisherigen Kategorien können ja trotzdem beibehalten werden. - Leider erst nachdem ich die Kategorie eingerichtet habe, sehe ich, dass Du sie schon mal hast löschen lassen. Ich schlage vor, auch eventuell gegen das sich einbürgernde allgemeine Vorgehen, sie wieder aufleben zu lassen. Gruß --Kürschner (talk) 10:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, obwohl ich als gebürtiger Kölner bei Düsseldorfer Straßen sicher als befangen angesehen werde ;-), kann ich mich an den Vorgang nicht mehr so recht erinnern. Vermutlich habe ich als dupe/badname markierte cats gelöscht, aber sicher nicht von mir aktiv solche Markierungen vorgenommen. Wenngleich eine Überkategorisierung vermieden werden sollte, ist jede vernünftige Maßnahme zur erleichterten Auffindbarkeit begrüssenswert. Grundsätzlich ist es gut sich vor größeren Strukturänderungen anzuschauen wie es bei anderen Städte-Kategiesystemen gemacht wurde. --Túrelio (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich bevorzuge großzügige kölsche Lösungen, danke, Gruß von der scheel sick! --Kürschner (talk) 10:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Image Gansowiki

Hello Túrelio, I removed the copyvio of this image Gansowiki.jpg, I'm just warning you. Truu (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. "Warning" sounds a little bit to strong ;-). In between somebody else reverted your last edit. Anyway, my "no" wasn't meant as an "o.k." for our file, because the existance of the uncropped image (your link) makes it a likely copyvio. --Túrelio (talk) 16:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Vanilloideae.svg

Hallo Túrelio, können wir das Bild bestehen lassen? Wenn ja, wer löscht mein "copyvio"? Kann man von der Herkunftsseite nach andere Daten kopieren? Viel Grüße. Orchi (talk) 19:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich hatte garnicht gesehen, dass du es markiert hattest. Da die vermutliche Quellwebsite unter CC-BY-SA steht, dürfte es durchgehen; allerdings müsste die Lizenz und ggf. die Autorenangabe korrigiert werden. Ich habe deshalb mal den Uploader gefragt und von cv auf disputed umgestellt. --Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke! (Der Uploader ist sehr fleißig und aktiv, hatte aber in der Vergangenheit schon einige Bilder mit Urheberrechtsverletzung hochgeldaden). Gruß. Orchi (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Sunny Leone

User Kjllhkjlhj5535 hello turelio please look this image http://www.flickr.com/photos/animenut/4937276560/

Hi Kjllhkjlhj5535, nice, but fully copyrighted; see the (C) at the right side. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

User Kjllhkjlhj5535 hi turelio this user gohe007 are you photograph or flickr yes or no

Don't know what you are talking of. --Túrelio (talk) 21:41, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stasi-2.1-zensursula.png

Hallo Túrelio, 7 Tage sind vorbei, kannst Du das jetzt bitte entscheiden?--89.247.93.212 16:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Wir sind hier nicht auf :de und handeln mehr nach Angemessenheit als nach starren Regeln. --Túrelio (talk) 18:13, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Rückmeldung. Habe gerade ein Zeitfenster von 30 Tagen erfahren. Na, da wird wohl noch einiges an Bites verbrannt werden.--89.247.93.212 18:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Old and New EMU at Howrah Station .jpg

Sorry!

Just copied the photo from the english Wikipedia... are you going to deleete it there too?

Regards, Knipptang (talk) 20:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC) 20:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

As I am not an admin on :en, I wouldn't be able to do so. Besides, as :en allows fair-use, eventually this image is under fair-use on :en. --Túrelio (talk) 20:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Cameras on white background

Hi. Why delete a category to the benefit of a less precise one? --Eusebius (talk) 06:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, likely because it was speedy-tagged as being empty. Feel free to re-create it, if you think Category:Cameras and lenses on white background is too full already. --Túrelio (talk) 06:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

It was manually emptied right before the deletion was requested. I'm afraid we don't have any tools to spot this kind of stuff... --Eusebius (talk) 06:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:270530_2129385835767_1279594596_32543004_6961963_n.jpg

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:270530_2129385835767_1279594596_32543004_6961963_n.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 project page, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Faoureddine (talk) 07:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, if you want to contest a deletion request, you should add a comment[34], instead of tagging the deletion request itself. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Permissions given

Hello there, i have sent the email re photo usage on Wikipedia, thank you

Hi Unknown, what is your username or to which image are you refering? --Túrelio (talk) 09:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Massimo Sarmi Poste Italiane 01.jpg

Hello, I've seen you deleted the image of Massimo Sarmi. Actually I received the image directly from the press office of Poste Italiane. I had contacted them for a research and they gave me that image to use freely. I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you for your consideration --Filippo Marci (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Filippide84,

please forward your original communication with the Poste Italiane to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and mention the above filename. The OTRS colleagues may approve it or ask for further details. --Túrelio (talk) 10:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Stasi-2.1-zensursula.png

Guten Morgen, ich gehe wohl recht in der Annahme, dass Du nicht der Admin bist, welcher über die beiden Deletion-Requests entscheidet, da Du mit Deiner Meinung involviert bist und demnach nicht unabhängig, oder sehe ich das falsch?--89.247.45.68 10:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Es gibt keinen "der Admin ...". Jeder Admin ist völlig frei darin, sich der Schließung einer DR anzunehmen; außer wenn er/sie die DR selbst gestellt hat. Aber auch das ist kein Hindernis, sofern es sich um eine unumstrittene DR handelt. Meinung und "Unabhängigkeit", was immer du damit meinst, schließen sich nicht aus. Als Admin muss man sich ohnehin darum bemühen, bei Konflikten möglichst "objektiv" oder besser "sachbezogen" zu agieren. Zudem "kontrollieren" wir uns gegenseitig auch und sind keineswegs immer einer Meinung. Wie dem auch sei, ich sehe keine Notwendigkeit mich in deiner Frage festzulegen, weder grundsätzlich noch im Augenblick, zumal in dieser DR durchaus noch nicht alle Fakten auf dem Tisch liegen. Wie ich einer anderen IP schon geantwortet hatte, auf Commons werden DRs i.a. geschlossen, wenn die Zeit reif ist, was manchmal auch Wochen dauern kann. --Túrelio (talk) 10:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Welche Fakten fehlen?--89.247.45.68 10:34, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Z.B. die Identität des Fotografen des Originalbilds. --Túrelio (talk) 10:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Die Identität des Fotografen ist irrelevant, die Kopierrechte für das Foto (welches gar nicht veröffentlicht wurde), hat das Ministerium und dieses gibt seine Fotos nachweislich frei zur freien Verwendung! Da Du von Beispiel sprichst, was noch?--89.247.45.68 10:45, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

In der Verwaltung des Deutschen Bundestages, Referat PI 2 – Besucherdienst – Foto- und Bildstelle, ist ein Fotograf mit der Entgeltgruppe 6 TVöD angestellt, welcher u.a. auch Portraitaufnahmen der Mitglieder des Deutschen Bundestages und der Bundesregierung herstellt. Er bekommt dafür Lohn und hat keine Urheberrechtsansprüche an diesen Fotos, ergo ist seine Namensnennung unerheblich.--89.247.45.68 11:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

So, ich hatte gerade das Presseamt der Bundesregierung am Telefon und bekomme es (ich hoffe bald) auch schriftlich, dass die Fotos der Minister frei zur Verwendung sind. Dann ist diese Farce hoffentlich erledigt.--89.247.45.68 10:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

In welchem Gesetz steht, daß Urheberrechtsansprüche erlöschen können? Das wäre ein brandneues Gesetz in Kontinentaleuropa. Bzw. wo steht, daß man keine Urheberrechtsansprüche hat, wenn man dafür Lohn bekommt? Das ist gelinde gesagt einfach nur grober Unfug. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Tritt Du den Beweis an, dass das von Dir genannte Foto bearbeitet wurde.--89.247.45.68 12:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Wir benutzen keine Beweisumkehr. Der Uploader muß beweisen, daß sein Werk frei ist. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 14:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Ich weiß zwar nicht, was auf dem Bild genau zu sehen ist, aber hier ist zu lesen, dass Urheber immer der Fotograf bleibt und der Arbeitgeber lediglich ein Nutzungsrecht erlangen kann. Anders sieht es ja bei Computerprogrammen (§ 69 b. UrhG) aus. (Warum eigentlich dieser Unterschied?) -- Rillke

Software zu erstellen gilt als handwerklich, nicht als Kunst. Also wird ihr kein Urheberrechtsschutz zugebilligt. Fotos werden per gesetz prinzipiell als Kunst angesehen. Ob das nun richtig ist, kann jeder sehen wie er möchte, es ist Gesetz. --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 17:46, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Gebelsheikhsuleiman.jpg & File:DoubleFalcon.jpg

This is a sketch/drawing of a graffiti and a vessel which is 3D art should it not? Or is the first picture 2D art because it is just a drawing? The second photo seems to me should be deleted. Just curious, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I've deleted the 2nd one. However, File:Gebelsheikhsuleiman.jpg looks like a drawing to me. If we assume that is a mere reproduction (which make sense in the context), it should go as PD-Art/old. --Túrelio (talk) 13:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• OK, I'll license it as Pd-Art. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Woodland/Forest

Hi, I am curious as to why the change of Category:Woodland of the East Riding of Yorkshire to Category:Forests in the East Riding of Yorkshire. I would consider that there are no forests in the East Riding of Yorkshire and that woodland was a more appropriate category. The woodland category is used in other counties in England such as Category:Woodland of Derbyshire. Keith D (talk) 10:24, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

This had been requested by User:Skinsmoke ({{Bad name|Forests in the East Riding of Yorkshire}}) and had seemed reasonable to me. --Túrelio (talk) 10:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Keith D (talk) 13:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Neo ender drawing

Hey Túrelio, I'm not so sure any more that the drawing depicting that kid was computer generated. In fact, the facial expression has something peculiar to the drawing that can't be seen in the photo. Assuming that it is a drawing made from scratch, is it still a derivative? From Jacklee comment It seems that if it's an unauthorized derivative it is allowed with it's own copyright.-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 06:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

To discuss this, I opened the DR. Otherwise it would have been a derivative-speedy ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 06:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, ok, thanks. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 06:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

[35]

hallo turelio, da du bisher der einzige admin warst, der zu erkennen gab, dass er sich bisher mit dem fall zumindest beobachtend beschäftigt hat, bitte ich dich, da offenbar "afbrochert" sich dazu nicht bereit findet [36] hier tätig zu werden, indem du die schnellgelöschten files wieder herstellst. ansonsten werde ich, wenn du auch die meinung vertreten solltest dass afbrochert hier richtig entschieden + gehandelt hat, mich dazu genötigt sehen die anderen mehr als 90 files [37] - die ebenfalls unter gleichen bedingungen entstanden + von mir hochgeladen wurden - schnellöschen zu lassen, damit endlich juristisch hierbei "klar schiff" gemacht wird + ich dabein nicht weiter unter dem verdacht der gesetzesübertretung stehe. dontworry (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh Mann, da fragst du eigentlich den falschen, da ich vermutlich der admin auf Commons mit den meisten Löschungen bin ;-). Da du sicher kein Basta, sondern eine zumindest halbwegs begründete Entscheidung erwartest, brauche ich dafür Zeit, die ich frühestens heute abend finden werde. --Túrelio (talk) 08:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

danke, es eilt nicht - hat ja schon so ne weile gedauert. bis ende der woche reicht mir vollkommen. dontworry (talk) 08:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

hallo turelio, kurze erinnerung: das ende der woche meinte den sonntag 03.07.2011, nicht 2012! ;-) dontworry (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

True, you have a mail. --Túrelio (talk) 12:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

danke, habs gelesen. geh dann noch ne runde spazieren. ;-) dontworry (talk) 07:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Jardí de les Escultures FOP

Hi Túrelio, Alle bilde vom Garten der Skulpturen sind vom Barcelona, ​​wo FOP gemacht, so das is gut!--Kippelboy (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, sorry for my bad german (longtime without speaking :). The installation is a permanently show in Barcelona, next to Fundació Joan Miró. Was opened in 1990 as a permanent, free and public exhibition of sculptures. Thanks for taking care of this kind of topics :)--Kippelboy (talk) 08:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I've added cat FOP (for freedom of panorama) to avoid further questions in the future ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Sovmusic-katyusha.ogg

there are lots more soviet-pd files, that are as old as the Katjucha i uploaded and which are still in wiki. Apply same rules to all files, keep all or delete all.

- for example :

• File:Chanson sur Staline.ogg (Author Матве́й Исаа́кович Бла́нтер) died in 1990)
• File:22june.ogg (Author Jerzy Petersburski died in 1979)
• File:Gimn partii bolshevikov.ogg (Federal work of Alexandrov Ensemble)
• File:Internationale Russian.ogg
• File:Le Tourbillon Blanc.ogg
• File:March of the Defenders of Moscow.ogg (written 1944)
• File:Plaine ma Plaine.ogg (Author died in 1974)
• File:Shostakovich Symphony 7 (Leningrad) Flute Theme.ogg (Author died in 1975)
• File:Svyaschennaya Voyna vocal.ogg (Author of Lyrics, Vasily Lebedev-Kumach died in 1949
• File:Ансамбль красноармейской песни Центрального дома Красной Армии имени М. В. Фрунзе.jpg (Frunse is not in Argentina)

-

• Interesting would be, if the argument of federal russian work given in File:Aleksandrov BA.jpg applies to all concert file of the alexandrov- and other state ensembles. Then i could upload some more files. (The Russian licence is placed here on the understanding that the Soviet military was a state government agency and that its official photograph of the co-director of of its army entertainment corps (i.e. this image) is a state agency document.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzosft (talk • contribs) 29. Juni 2011, 16:40 Uhr (UTC)

I didn't originally tag the file for deletion, only performed it as I found the deletion rationale "this is not PD-RU-Excempt. It'a just a song with real authors" plausible. For the moment I cannot take care about the other files listed, sorry. --Túrelio (talk) 15:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Tolle Einstellung - erst mal weglöschen aber nicht überlegen. Die genannten Datei stammen teilweise aus der selben Quelle und sind auch mit pd-soviet gelistet. Also bitte gleiches Recht für alle Files. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzosft (talk • contribs) 30. Juni 2011, 15:23 Uhr (UTC)

Ich habe sehr wohl überlegt, wie du meiner obigen Antwort hättest entnehmen können. Seitens Dritter besteht zudem kein Anspruch, dass ich allen auf meiner Disku geäusserten Vorschlägen und Wünschen nachkomme, da ich das in meiner Freizeit mache und nicht dafür bezahlt werde, sondern meinen Lebensunterhalt durch andere Arbeit erwerben muss. Wenn dir die Löschung der aufgelisteten Dateien dringlich erscheint, dann stelle selbst entsprechende Löschanträge. Sofern diese gerechtfertigt sind, verstößt das nicht gegen de:Wikipedia:BNS. Außerdem solltest du deine Kommentare "unterschreiben" (--~~~~), damit das nicht andere machen müssen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Malcolm_Lidbury

HELP: There is a BIG RED copyright warning at the top of my category listing Malcolm Lidbury http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Malcolm_Lidbury

I AM Malcolm Lidbury (aka Pinkpasty) and the images I am loading too Wikimedia are of my own paintings & sculpture which I have personally created & then photographed.

My sculpture blog http://www.malenudesculpture.blogspot.com/

Can some one pleas get rid of the big red warning sign at the top of my own category, of submissions of my own art ?

I really find wiki confusing, hostile & obstructive to newbie contributors

Malcolm Lidbury aka Pinkpasty

 Done. That was based on the earlier assumption that you are not the artist. --Túrelio (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Paintings by Malcolm Lidbury

Hi thank you for your msg

RE:- Paintings by Malcolm Lidbury (loaded to wikimedia by Pinkpasty). I am one and the same person. But thank you for looking out for my copyright.

It is because wikimedia has been such a usefull resource to me as an artist and sculptor ( http://www.malenudesculpture.blogspot.com/ ) that I wished to contribute back by making images of my own art & sculptures I have created availabe on wikimedia for use too others under creative commons.

Yours Malcolm Lidbury aka Pinkpasty

Hi Malcolm,

thanks for your feedback. In order to save you further requests (by other users) about the legitimacy of the uploads through your account, I would recommend you to send a permission to our "permissions volunteers" OTRS, which would then put a sort of "o.k.-stamp" on the pages (not on the images) of your uploads. If that would be o.k. for you, then simply send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in which you state that the account Pinkpasty belongs to the artist Malcolm Lidbury and that the "reproductions" (photos) of your works are uploaded with your consent. This email would not be made public, but can only be accessed by our OTRS volunteers. It would also not necessarily require the identification of your real name and your account name, in case you do not want that. --Túrelio (talk) 11:00, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Flickr human review

It looks like there are many valuable images for human review today but its now 1:30 AM in Vancouver, Canada. I have marked 3 images. Maybe you can mark a few...if you have time. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Thunderbird5.png

Hi Túrelio

I want this image deleted because I forgot to remove my email addresses before uploading. I'll re-upload the one with email addresses removed after it is deleted.

Mongkhonvanit (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I re-uploaded the file but the preview image here(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/Thunderbird5.png/800px-Thunderbird5.png) is still not updated. --Mongkhonvanit (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, that happens quite often in recent times. Usually the outdated thumb will disappear after some time. --Túrelio (talk) 06:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Files: Crocodileserekh.jpg, DoubleFalcon.jpg e Pe-Hor.jpg

I received an e-mail of FRANCESCO RAFFAELE that says:

"I think there should be no problem: it'd be good for my site too, which I recently happen to update seldom (but I have new pages in preparation).

Many are scans of images which cant be used for selling material, but in this case Wiki has no such finality"

Like this, i think that there isn't a violation... --Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your feed-back. Sorry, but "which cant be used for selling material" is actually a restriction to non-commercial-use-only, which is not allowed on Commons, as we not only serve the Wikimedia projects, but also the "rest of the world". --Túrelio (talk) 22:16, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

User/talk page vandalism and harassment continues

See Special:Contributions/Лука_Мудищев & Special:Contributions/МеДвЕд. Looking forward for protection of the pages. I would also advise indefinite semi-protection of the userpages and blocking vandal's IP range for some time if it's allowed by the local policy. --Gleb Borisov (talk) 16:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Protecting user: namespace pages will be a sollution, protecting user_talk: pages is not wanted. I looked for the IPs but cant help you with blocking IP ranges in this case, that will have to much negative effects on other users. --Martin H. (talk) 16:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Harry Kalas image

Just so you are aware, the image you deleted of Harry Kalas was originally properly licensed. That Flickr user realized that his images were being used for Wikipedia and illegally revoked the CC license, depriving us of a lot of quality pictures. I just wanted you to be informed of that. Thanks. Killervogel5 (talk) 12:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Could you please specify the filename of the image you are refering to. --Túrelio (talk) 12:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

File talk:TRANSEARCH International Logo.jpg

Well, unused (there's an article on en.WP) and incorrectly stated (Fair use is not allowed on Commons) are not enought for an image to be deleted. Though, uploader requested it to be deleted (incorectly stating it's copyrighted material, while it's probably just trademarked). See User talk:Celestewhatley

All in all, everyone seems to prefer to get this image deleted, so it's fine. But i still think there was no real problem for commons to host this image.Lilyu (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Looked borderline to me too. The one letter with a dash through it might merit some "copyrightability"; but who knows? --Túrelio (talk) 13:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

The Invisible Pink Unicorn knows Lilyu (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Help !

Bonjour Túrelio,
Grâce à ta connaissance des arcanes des Wikis, t'as pu me dépanner une fois à propos de Botanique, ce coup-ci il s'agit de entomologie ... C'est tellement plus chic d'épingler un joli papillon aux murs de WikiCommons avec son vrai nom, et si en plus il est en latin !...
Alors la question est: Qui est cul et chemise avec les papillons d'europe ?
Merci d'avance. Daniel Villafruela (talk) 15:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello Túrelio
With your knowledge of the Wikis'arcanes, you have helped me once, about Botany. This time it's on entomology ... It's so much more chic to pin a beautiful butterfly on the walls of Wikicommons with his real name, and if in addition it is in Latin !...< br /> So the question is: Who is in glove with the butterflies of Europe?
Thank you in advance. Daniel Villafruela (talk) 15:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour Daniel,

that's a topic of which I've no idea. The only "butterfly" I've uploaded so far was the one feeding on my blood from my blood-soacked sock. After viewing the edit history of this image, User:Leonardorejorge seems to have some knowledge in claasification. In addition, you might simply ask for an expert at the english COM:VP or at the german-language COM:FORUM. I've put a request in german on the latter. --Túrelio (talk) 07:26, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour !

Le mystère est résolu grâce à un spécialiste belge des papillons, Jean Delacre. Il s'agissait de Iphiclides podalirius alias le Flambé que bien d'autres avaient photographié sous d'autres cieux. Je l'ai quand même épinglé sur Wikicommons. - Merci pour la réponse.

In approximative globish :
The mystery was solved by a Belgian specialist of butterflies, Jean Delacre. It was Iphiclides podalirius alias Flambé (in french) that many others have photographied in various lands. I still pinned it in Wikicommons
Daniel Villafruela (talk) 11:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Grave_of_Charles_de_Morny

Hallo Túrelio,

hast Du eine Ahnung, was das sein/bedeuten soll? Echt seltsame Dinge, denen man auf Commons so begegnet... <kopfschüttel>

Grüße, Schwäbin

So besser? Sei mutig gilt im großen und ganzen auch auf Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Ich hab nur das Kätzchen gesehen und nicht verstanden, was es mir eigentlich sagen wollte... Sonst wäre ich natürlich mutig gewesen. Danke Dir. --Schwäbin (talk) 10:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, gut zu wissen. Mit einem netten Kätzchen-Foto kann man dich also quasi hypnotisieren. --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Hypnotisieren eigentlich nicht (ich erfülle wenige der gängigen Frauen-Klischees). Ich hab nur nicht verstanden, worum es eigentlich ging (übrigens immer noch nicht, aber war wohl auch nicht wichtig). --Schwäbin (talk) 10:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Derselbe User hat noch weitere solcher Kat. erstellt Category:Grave of Ernest Baroche, hier aber ohne Kätzchen. Spielt wohl gerne mit templates. RE:Hypnotisieren: bei mir geht das schon, aber eher im RL. --Túrelio (talk) 10:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Str13.jpg

Túrelio: Did you make the original painting/drawing or did your just take a photo of it?

No, this is not my job. I have a source file (.cdr). I am the author develop the graphical and DTP of the "Miri szkoła - Romano elementaro" ISBN 978-83-918449-1-5 (see http://elementaro.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=53 page nr 100)

I have copyrights for layout & develop the graphical of this book.

Ask wiki (talk) 07:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Real name removed and replied at your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 12:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Small req

Can you delete the old revision of this as it contain my name in the exif..--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 07:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 12:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Wozu

...schreibst Du mich überhaupt an, wenn die Löschung des Logos ohnehin bereits beschlossene Sache ist und Dich meine Antwort ohnehin nicht interessiert? --Steindy (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Auf deiner Disku geantwortet. --Túrelio (talk) 21:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Admin conflicts

Dear Admin Turelio,

Thank you. I was scared that I had caused a wheel war between Jcb and Abigor but all I wanted was clarification on Abigor's status on Commons, nothing more. I have seen Admin wheel wars on wikipedia and it is very nasty. Now I see Abigor attacking Jcb...and the petty attacks never end sadly. I suppose this conflict has been going on between these two users for some time and will continue. As for me, I think it is best to just stay out of the way...and mark images and tag copy vios. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Marilyn Monroe White Dress.jpg

I do not know if the statue and the photo here are both derivatives or if it is OK....since the photo may focus on the dress? The uploader also uploaded another image but that focuses on the dress. That one passed flickr review. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Ich glaube, mich zu erinnern, daß in Berlin am Sony-Center dieses Foto dauerhaft angebracht ist? Jaja, auch etwas grenzwertig ;) --Ralf Roletschek (talk) 07:02, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I've filed a DR. At least the photography in the image is likely a derivative; otherwise we would surely have it already in Category:The Seven Year Itch. May be, somebody in Berlin should try to catch it. --Túrelio (talk) 08:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair use images

Dear Turelio,

All these images are non-free fair use copyrighted images. The uploader doesn't know Commons cannot have non-free images here. Many of these images were uploaded today. Just to let you know. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Leoboudv, taken care of. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 08:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: No problem. What a pity. This user was warned yesterday to stop uploading copyvios by MartinH and he uploads more today on July 9. Some people learn nothing. Goodnight from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Userjerone2

Userjerone2 hello turelio please look this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts

UserJerone2 Hello turelio please look this image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Breanne_Benson_2011.jpg this image a copy for this site http://www.themoviedb.org/person/148923

Hi Jerone2, thanks for notifying. However, it is likely the other way round. The image on themoviedb.org seems to be a copy of our image. --Túrelio (talk) 08:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

UserJerone2 Hello Turelio please look this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts has a benn a silly vandalism

May be, but that is :en wikipedia where I am not an admin. --Túrelio (talk) 08:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Userjerone2 hello turelio one question this user gohe007 administrator yes or no

When you go to his userpage User:Gohe007, you can see that he is not an admin on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 09:01, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Waldo Samuel Lovett Self Portrait.jpg & File:Paulus Moreelse - Vertumnus and Pomona - WGA16211.jpg

Shouldn't these 2 images be deleted be deleted as unused duplicates? Just curious. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure,  Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you for your help here. I only tag obvious cases whenever posible. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Redirects

Here we go again! :)

Please keep the redirects {except for misleading and new uploads). Redirects should be kept, for downstream users. It doesn't even take any additional effort if you use the big green "process duplicates" button (if you use QuickDelete).--Nilfanion (talk) 22:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done for the first time, though the background process has still some black-box flavor to me. Especially in the moment when the descriptions of both files are shown side-by-side, it's not clear which one belongs to which file and what actually happens when I make the next click. --Túrelio (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I have to agree black-box voodoo isn't exactly fun. I'm pretty sure clicking the "process" button deletes the dupe, edits the file to make any changes you made in those boxes, orders Delinker (if necessary) and creates a redirect (so does all the steps required). I suppose you could poke DieBuche if there's any usability changes you can think of--Nilfanion (talk) 11:50, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

In addition, the "process duplicates" script doesn't work with files, that have already been emptied, as for example File:China Railway 25B 200908 418.jpg or File:Dumetella carolinensis -Cape May National Wildlife Refuge, New Jersey, USA-8.jpg. Also, when tagging as "badname" there is not similar script available or shown. --Túrelio (talk) 09:27, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Chippendales post show.jpg

Você se confundiu com essa imagem e apagou essa por engano. Olha para as mulheres, elas estão em poses diferentes. Mizunoryu (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure whether I understand you correctly, as I don't read Portuguese. But, File:Chippendales post show.jpg is really identical to File:ChippendalesLasVegas.jpg. --Túrelio (talk)

Oh, sorry. I meant you got confused about these two images. They are similar, but not the same. Look to the women in this one and the women in this one. They are different. I was uploading the first one, and I got a message telling it was deleted because they were the same. Mizunoryu (talk) 15:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. However, trust me, File:Chippendales post show.jpg is/was identical to File:ChippendalesLasVegas.jpg, not to http://www.flickr.com/photos/mulmatsherm/2290605424/. As an admin I can still view deleted images and in this case I've compared them really cautiously. --Túrelio (talk) 15:17, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I thinks the notice it's because the iamge I told you i's different is the first version of the remaining one. SO I uploaded it again. Sorry for the trouble. Mizunoryu (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Flickr images needing human review

Hi Turelio, can you please look into this matter. Three images I uploaded two days ago from Flickr (Sculptures from a sculpture park in Brazil with Fop applicable) are stuck in the Flickr review, perhaps because I had to turn them 90 degr. Two are already used in articles on nl.wiki and the third one is needed. File:Ahearn Torres Inhotim Brumadinho 05.jpg, File:Ahearn Torres Inhotim Brumadinho 06.jpg and File:Brumadinho Paul McCarthy Boxhead.jpg. Nobody seems to be there. Greetings,--Gerardus (talk) 06:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Danke,--Gerardus (talk) 10:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Da flow

Hi, can you control the user activity in Special:Contributions/Da_flow? If you read my user talk I think you find a problem. Thanks for your attention :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 15:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Kategorisierung Bilder

Hallo Túrelio,

danke für Deine Nachricht! Ich habe das inzwischen auch (vollständig) verstanden, glaube ich zumindest. Ich habe mich glaube ich auch deshalb so 'unkorrekt' verhalten, weil es in der Kategorie (der geographische Ort, den die Bilder betreffen) mit ihren Subkategorien ein wenig Chaos bzw. Unsauberkeit gibt. Ich würde das insofern ganz gerne mal aufräumen, konkret: die Unterkategorien sinnvoller machen und die Dateien entsprechend zuordnen. Macht man irgendentwas kaputt (Verlinkungen etc.), wenn man die Kategorisierungen modifiziert und Bilder sauber zuordnet? Nee, oder?

Edit: Nächste Frage: Welchen Sinn macht es, einem Foto ausschließlich eine Kategorie zu geben, die hochspezifisch ist, nämlich den spezifischen Namen eines Gebäudes trägt, das noch nicht mal einen Artikel hat? Da macht es doch eher Sinn, das Foto die Überkategorie "Gebäude in OrstnameXYZ" zuzuweisen, und die Kategorie "GebäudeXYZ in OrtsnameXYZ" zu entfernen, oder nicht? Danke für Deine Hilfe! --Da flow (talk) 20:52, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Da flow, bin momentan in Urlaub, weshalb es etwas gedauert hat. Grundsätzlich gilt: wir sind keine Bürokratie, sondern es geht darum die Dateien auffindbar zu machen. Andererseits sollen allgemeinere Kategorie nicht unnötig mit Dateien vollgestopft werden, weil eine Kat. mit >100 Dateien i.a. das Auffinden eher erschwert als erleichtert. Wenn ein Foto z.B. ausschließlich eine bestimmte Kirche zeigt und es bereits eine Kat. für diese Kirche gibt, sollte das Bild i.a. nur dort einsortiert werden. Man kann dann zusätzlich prüfen, ob die Kat. der Kirche selbst ausreichend kategorisiert ist. Wenn es keine Kat. für diese Kirche gibt und es auch nur ein Foto davon gibt, würde es zunächst ausreichen, die Kat. Gebäude in ... hinzuzufügen. Wenn irgendwann 2 weitere Fotos der Kirche vorliegen, wird man natürlich die spezifische Kat. für diese Kirche erstellen. Wenn auf dem Foto aber auch das Ratshaus des Dorfes zu sehen ist oder ein auffälliger Brunnen, sollte man die hierzu passenden Kat. selbstverständlich auch hinzufügen.

Zu deiner obigen Frage: Kategorien aufräumen gerne; beim Umbauen, also z.B. Ersatz einer bestehenden durch eine neue, selbstkritisch überlegen, ist meine Idee wirklich besser? und schauen, ob event. alle Kat. in der "Umgebung" von genau 1 User erstellt wurden; falls ja, wäre es nicht schlecht, diesen einmal anzusprechen bzw. deinen Verbesserungsvorschlag zu unterbreiten. Ist das vorgeschrieben? Nein; es erspart im Zweifelsfall aber unnötige Verstimmungen. Bzgl. möglicher Links zu WP-Artikeln: sofern auf der vorhandenen Kat.-Seite kein Interwiki-Link besteht, kann es sich lohnen, freihändig zur passenden Wikipedia zu springen und dort den Artikel aufzusuchen, zu dem das Link liegen sollte. Oft sind die Links WP->Commons erstellt worden und nicht umgekehrt, was natürlich schade ist. Ein in Kategorien sehr erfahrener User ist Foroa. Gruß. --Túrelio (talk) 07:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Túrelio, ganz herzlichen Dank für Deine schnelle und ausführliche Antwort! Neinnein, es ging mir auch nicht um Bürokratie, sondern umgekehrt genau um einfache Auffindbarkeit und dafür sinnvolle Gruppierungen, anstelle von 356 Unterkategorien, die niemandem wirklich helfen. Bin jetzt mit jemandem aus dem Kategorie-'Kiez' in Kontakt und wende mich bei weiterem Bedarf an Foroa. Schönen Urlaub Dir und nochmals sorry für die Umstände! --Da flow (talk) 08:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Breanne Benson Photo

Thank you for alerting me! Toglenn (talk) 07:29, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 10:45, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Weiterleitung löschen

Hallo Turélio, könntest du bitte die Weiterleitung File:Rostock_Kroepeliner_Strasse_93_2011-05-01.jpg löschen, der Name wird für die Verschiebung der Hausnr. 94 auf 93 benötigt. Gruß. --Schiwago (talk) 10:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Hat anscheinend in der Zwischenzeit schon jemand anders erledigt, oder? --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Im Prinzip schon, allerdings wird bei mir in dieser Liste immer noch die alte WL angezeigt (d.h. die Proportionen sind bereits vom richtigen Bild, Inhalt aber verzerrt auf das vorher weitergeleitete (Firefox). In IE wird das Bild nicht angezeigt (Cache geleert). Verstehe ich nicht so ganz. --Schiwago (talk) 17:07, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Dürfte mit dem aktuellen "Thumbs"-Problem zusammenhängen. --Túrelio (talk) 17:58, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

That's OK

I've kept it on my watchlist. :-) -- PoliMaster ^talk/_spy 09:00, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Ashcroft soj.jpg

Why did you not run the delinker when you deleted this image, or delete the derivative image File:Attorney General Ashcroft.JPG? --Closedmouth (talk) 15:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, do you really expect that I know details of a deletion from June 22? Anyway, when an image is deleted the DeLinker runs automatically. Likely I didn't delete the derivative because I had no knowledge of its existance, as the description of the uncropped didn't have any link to it. The image hadn't been tagged for speedy by me, but by Karppinen. --Túrelio (talk) 16:11, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Louvre 16.jpg

My definition of DeMinimis is where the new building is maybe 10-15% of the picture but here the Louvre pyramid is about 30% of the picture. Its really very prominent and its hard to see how Commons can keep it under De Minimis. But its your decision. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

No, this wasn't a "decision", just a thought, may be wishful thinking ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 07:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

• That's fine. I'll leave a note in the regular DR by Ben and let the community decide. Its not a big deal to me. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Chitkul Moutain.jpg

Hi there, just saw that File:Chitkul Moutain.jpg has been deleted, due to name change, but Asim is husband of Anurupa Chowdhury and Asim uses her account. KuwarOnline (talk) 09:38, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I've temporarily undeleted the image. See my comment on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Please delete this image, some how the copyright hasnt been changed by author. KuwarOnline (talk) 16:28, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

A new DR

I didn't file this DR. It was filed by a brand new license reviewer...but I think what he says is correct. How many images by this uploader are potential copyright violations and not own work? There are already 2 professional images taken with 2 different cameras: Canon and Sony. It looks really suspicious. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Likely all copyvios. I've tagged most with no-permission. --Túrelio (talk) 08:01, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

• OK. Thank you, Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Droits sur la photo de Charle Cliquet

Turelio, bonjour.

Je viens de recevoir le mail de Sophie Cliquet qui autorise l'utilisation de l'image de Charles Cliquet, son grand-père, sur Wiki comme sur tout autre site ou production.

J'ai envoyé le mail à l'adresse que tu m'avais donné.

Merci pour tout.

Pierre Moins, Alias --Fonquebure (talk) 17:54, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I have added the OTRS-pending tag to the image to prevent premature deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Masiela Lusha photos

Hello, I am the owner of four of Masiela Lusha's photos. She is my ambassador for our program, Outdoor Ambassadors Youth Program:

Masiela Lusha profile.jpg
Masiela Lusha answering questions.jpg
Masiela Lusha meeting fans.jpg
Masiela Lusha greeting a fan.jpg

I can provide all information: location, date, time, and event description. Please do not delete, as I would rather not have to upload again.

Janice Belson

Update: I just forwarded my proof to permissions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPray20 (talk • contribs) 21. Juli 2011, 18:34 Uhr (UTC)

Ok. I've tagged the 4 images with OTRS-pending. --Túrelio (talk) 18:35, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

User:NebMaatRe

ist verstorben. Kannst Du - auch wenn er hier auf Commons wenig aktiv war - seine Seite schützen und ihn vielleicht auf Commons:Deceased contributors eintragen? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 17:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Hab ich gemacht. Falls du weitere Informationen hast, die öffentlich sind oder gemacht werden dürfen, kannst den Eintrag auf Commons:Deceased contributors ja noch ergänzen. Danke für den Hinweis. --Túrelio (talk) 18:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Danke Dir! --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:06, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

User Jerone2

hello turelio one question how much contribution do I need to become an administrator so my question is — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerone2 (talk • contribs) 22. Juli 2011, 00:20 Uhr (UTC)

Surely far more than you have now. In addition, it is not only/mainly a question of contributions, but of contributions in the meta area. --Túrelio (talk) 09:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Good afternoon

Herewith I would like to ask you for your support regarding the articles which I placed in Wikipedia English version. In the English version of Wikipedia I replaced the article about Aviadvigatel issued by me and translated by Aviadvigatel translators.

BilCat participant replaced this article with the previous old one explaining that “ … it was an unattributed, poor translation of Russian article with few sources…”. In the same way the article about PS-90A engine placed instead of Aviadvigatel PS-90 article, was deleted from Wikipedia English version (the PS-90 engine has never existed, it was named as PS-90A engine from the very beginning). Besides redirection was deleted which I made from Aviadvigatel PS-90 article to Aviadvigatel PS-90A article. Renaming of the article from “Aviadvigatel PS-90” to “Aviadvigatel PS-90A” which I made was also rejected by participants BilCat and Dave1185.

Nobody answered to my discussion opened by me at Aviadvigatel PS-90 page. Please, can you give me advice about my further actions in this situation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solovei777 (talk • contribs) 22. Juli 2011, 10:29 Uhr (UTC)

Replied over at :en, as it has no relation to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 09:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

If you really must admonish...

... Willyvice (talk · contribs) after his block, you should restore his talk page access. He/she might want to respond. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

O.k., I'll try the risk. If I read the blocking page right, this was already done by Odder very early this morning. --Túrelio (talk) 07:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Ice hockey players

Hi Túrelio, why did you nominate this picture and some other pictures? The image passed Flickrreview so it just looks like a case of {{Flickr-change-of-license}}. Multichill (talk) 11:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Multichill, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Steve Montador.jpg for the background. Likely more than 100 images of this Flickr user had to be deleted in the last weeks. In cases, in which her images were the only ones of a player, I nominated the most used/best one for fair use consideration on :en etc. --Túrelio (talk) 15:10, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Foto

Warum soll das Bild gelöscht werden File:Sternwarte Hannover im Betrieb kleiner.jpg??? --AxelHH (talk) 09:37, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Weil es laut diesem OTRS-Ticket eine URV sein soll. Ich selbst habe keinen OTRS-Zugang und es deshalb auch nicht gelöscht, sondern nur dich benachrichtigt. Am besten fragst du den OTRS-Mitarbeiter, der den o.g. Edit getätigt hat. --Túrelio (talk) 10:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

File:President Barack Obama signs the condolence book during a visit to the Norwegian ambassador's residence in Washington, D.C., July 26, 2011.jpg

This image was posted on the Norwegian Foreign Affairs flickr page and failed flickr review. But the camera metadata says its a US White House photo and David Lienemann is a US Government White House photographer. I cannot find this image on the US White House flickr page or the US White House photo web site; however I see that Lienemann takes official photos where the US VP Biden is attendance and this AFP article makes it clear that both Biden and Obama was at the Norwegian ambassador's residence to sign the condolence book. Maybe the photo was released privately--but the photo might be PD since it was taken by a US Government employee? What do you think? --Leoboudv (talk) 22:13, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Your assessment was correct. I've removed the problem message by Flickreview. --Túrelio (talk) 13:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

• OK. Thank you. --Leoboudv (talk) 19:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

File list

Tùrelio Hello, I added the sources, sometimes the drawings are directly without the use of digital original photographs, sometimes they are taken photographs of paintings by the artist himself, is it good? File list:[[38]], best regards--Falcom (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I fear File:GERARD DEPARDIEU.jpg is a problem, because the original image is from a (C) site. If the original photo was not released under a free license, the "afterimage" version is an unlicensed derivative, despite the license on Flickr. --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok and what is the problem with File:BEYONCE, Afterimage.jpg and File:MICHAEL JAKSON, Afterimage.jpg? Best regards--Falcom (talk) 21:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Obviously all these "afterimages" were made from original photographies. This requires a permission from the original photographer. If there is no permission, such a derivative work is unlicensed, a.k.a. illegal. The Flickr user as well as any other re-user is at risk of being sued by the original photographers. --Túrelio (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Not all, I know that sometimes the artist draws directly on paper by hand, after it scans the drawing and reworking with photoshop, I know I give you a lot of work, sorry, it's complicated With these files:File: Joconde, Mona Lisa, afterimage.jpg File:PENELOPE CRUZ HUILE.jpg File:Anamorphose.jpg File:Anamorphosis.jpg File:Anaglyph 3.jpg I think it's no problem, they are photographed by the artist paints himself--Falcom (talk) 21:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you know who is the person shown in File:Anamorphosis.jpg? About talk) 18:34, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I probably deleted some of your text on it by mistake--Falcom (talk) 09:04, 2 August 2011 (UTC) In this paintingFile:Anamorphosis.jpg , the represented person is anonymous, purely imaginative and ThisFile:PENELOPE CRUZ HUILE.jpg is a painting painted by hand without photo starting --Falcom (talk) 08:37, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry again for all this work I give you, and I prefer to ask permission here to other files in the future, if you agree, I worked hard enough today . Good night and thank you--Falcom (talk) 21:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

161st Infantry Regiment

Please see the note I left on the file's talk page, regarding your PROD of the file. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied on file talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 15:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hello Túrelio,

Thank you for removing File:Plan ligne Haut-Bugey.png. I created by mistake Commons:Deletion requests/File:Plan ligne Haut-Bugey.png, can you delete it also  ?

Thanks, Jejecam (talk) 20:10, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Rollback right - when to use

Hello, recently I requested this right at COM:RFR. I'm not sure when to use it. For example would it be a good idea to use it this edits since they are nonsense? Thanks in advice. -- RE rillke questions? 14:07, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Rillke, du kannst mit mir deutsch sprechen ;-). Ich habe "Rollback" nie beantragt, habe es aber vermutlich automatisch, falls es sich dabei, z.B. [39], um die Option "zurücksetzen" (bei deutsch als Voreinstellung) handelt. Grundsätzlich könntest du es bei dem von dir genannten Beispiel einsetzen, musst bei DRs aber darauf achten, wirklich noch alle Vorgänge zu erwischen, sonst verbleibt nachher doch ein Rest. Bei seriellem Vandalismus einzelnen Dateien oder Seiten lässt es sich natürlich unkompliziert einsetzen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Kannst Du mir das mal am Beispiel dieser IP demonstrieren? Ein Klick und alles ist rückgängig gemacht? Wie schon geschrieben, ich habe es erst heute beantragt, also verbleiben noch 7 Tage in denen ich es nicht einsetzen kann. -- RE rillke questions? 14:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, da hatte ich dich falsch verstanden. Also hier, falls du das sehen kannst, habe ich die Disku von Silenus ge"rollbacked". Ditto mit der DR auf der Bildseite. Die DR als solche habe ich regulär geschlossen, weil sie jetzt schon zu lange her war. --Túrelio (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank. Deine Links kann ich nicht sehen (Berechtigungsfehler), aber das hier. Die Tokens würde ich nie veröffentlichen, habe sie mal ausgeixt. Wenn die gebraucht sind, stellen sie glaube ich keine Gefahr dar, aber man weiß ja nie... Danke! -- RE rillke questions? 14:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Sue Gardner

Hello Tùrelio, anyone wants to delete this file[[40]], why? It's the same principle as Jimbo--Falcom (talk) 14:19, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't know, may be, because she's known here. But now the image seems to have been accepted. --Túrelio (talk) 14:23, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Fritz Ketz uploads

Hallo Turelio, vielen Dank für Deine Hinweise. Mein Problem ist, dass ich nicht recht weiß, was ich und wie ich es machen soll um die erforderlichen Permiessions zu geben. Wie Du ja gemerkt hast bin ich der Sohn und Erbe von Fritz Ketz, alle Bilder, die ich uploade befinden sich in meinem Besitz, so dass ich auch alle Rechte daran habe. Die Fotos der Bilder habe ich selbst gemacht. Das Foto meines Vaters habe ich natürlich nicht gemacht, aber es befindet sich nur in diesem Abzug im Nachlass meines Vaters, ein Fotograph ist nicht mehr eruierbar, da es aus dem früheren Bekanntenkreis meines Vaters stammt, kein Negativ vorhanden, kein Name bekannt. Vielleicht kannst Du mir weiterhelfen? Danke Droemann 91.16.160.95 20:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich würde auf dem Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard nachfragen, was sie in diesen Fällen unternehmen. Eine registrierte Domain hast Du ja glaube ich nicht. Ich wäre durchaus zu glauben bereit, dass Du die Rechte hast, zumal die Bilder noch nirgendwo veröffentlicht wurden. Grüße -- RE rillke questions? 20:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Mit der Genehmigung das ist ganz einfach: geh auf Commons:E-Mail-Vorlagen, kopiere dir die umrahmte "Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber)", füge den/die Dateinamen (oder die komplette URL) der davon abgedeckten Datei/en (eine Permission reicht für mehrere Bilder) und den Namen der gewünschten Lizenz (empfohlen: CC-BY-SA 3.0) ein, setze das Datum und deinen Realnamen samt der Angabe deiner Beziehung zum Künstler darunter und maile alles an permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org. Der Inhalt dieser Email wird nicht veröffentlicht, sondern kann nur von unseren OTRS-Mitarbeitern eingesehen werden, die die Genehmigung prüfen und dann ein sog. OTRS-ticket (eine Art o.k.-Nr.) ausstellen und auf den davon abgedeckten Dateien anbringen. Das erspart weitere Löschanträge und Nachfragen. Bzgl. des erwähnten Portraitfotos: könnte es jemand aufgenommen haben, der noch lebt? Steht auf der Rückseite des Abzugs der Name des Photostudios? --Túrelio (talk) 20:59, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Und was bringt uns das, wenn wir eine E-mail von user@yahoo.com o.ä. erhalten? -- RE rillke questions? 21:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich kenne seine Emailadresse nicht. Aber selbst wenn es so sein sollte, ist es dann Sache von OTRS nachzuhaken oder ggf. eine andere Bestätigung zu verlangen. Wie ich oben schon geschrieben hatte, ging es mir primär darum, weitere unnötige LAs zu verhindern, davon lau/liefen nämlich schon einige. --Túrelio (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Bitte nach Versandt der Mail hier Bescheid geben. -- RE rillke questions? 21:39, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

---

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:J%C3%B6rn_Uwe_Droemann.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mohn_9-6-72.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mohn_18-6-68_X.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mohn_8-6-71.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mann_mit_Stock_70.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:M%C3%A4dchen_29-3-61.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lesende_73.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Klematis_22-6-70.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Junger_Mann_mit_Pfeife_(M._E.)_63.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iris_21-6-72_X.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iris_8-6-71.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iris_1-6-71_X.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbstblumen_28-9-70.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbstblumen_1-9-75_X.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbstb%C3%A4ume_29-10-62_b_X.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbst_2-11-81.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbsb%C3%A4ume_29-10-62_a.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Getreidegarben_19-8-63.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Getreidefeld_17-8-62.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Getreidefeld_9-8-62_X.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Getreidefeld_13-8-63.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Frau_in_Rot_73.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_-_Signatur.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Frau_in_Blau_17-1-64.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Frau_in_Blau_1-5-71.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Frau_H._20-4-60.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_D%C3%A4nemark_Limfjord_24-8-72.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_D%C3%A4nemark_Limfjord_18-8-72.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Christus_am_Kreuz_22-9-67.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Baumbl%C3%BCte_19-5-79.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Baumbl%C3%BCte_7-5-62.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_Alb_(letztes_Aquarell)_1-11-82.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Selbst_1-11-45.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Ketz_ca._1950.jpg

Schon einmal die Adressen zu den Bildern. Einfach per kopieren und einfügen in die Mail. -- RE rillke questions? 21:19, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Skript für Freigabeerlaubnis

Hallo, Túrelio, was denkst Du über ein Skript, das automatisch die nötigen Informationen sammelt und eine OTRS-E-Mailvorlage generiert? -- RE rillke questions? 21:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Wenn es einfach zu bedienen ist und keine spezielle Softwareumgebung benötigt, wäre es sicher eine Hilfe. In den meisten Fällen geht es aber eh nur um 1 oder 2 Dateien; so eine lange Liste wie hier ist eher die Ausnahme. --Túrelio (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Ausgerechnet ich treffe immer auf die Ausnahmen ... -- RE rillke questions? 22:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

permissions needed at <User_talk:Johnbkidd&diff=0&oldid=57421607>

Hi again (10th Aug 2010) in holidays with family - sorry for slow responses.

You can delete at 10:35 on 2nd Aug... File Tagging File:His Highness Sheikh Saud Bin Saqr al Qasimi, the Ruler of Ras Al Khaimah.jpg - as the second file I posted now has full permissoins - I hope arranged properly and linked to Flikr. This file you also posted with warning.

Also - please delete file noted on 09:59 1st Aug File:5631549510 936334130f s Demetris.jpg as I will re-load it properly (I hope).

===============================

Hi (older message to you)...

thanks for your scans... May I present an e-mail I sent to Permissions @ Wiki... to you for completeness?

>>> COPY FOLLOWS Sirs

I have this 'permissions e-mail' from the Horasis.org organizer of the Global Meetings (Arab, China, India, Russia & Horasis) - Dr F-J Richter.

>>> COPY FOLLOWS Dear Prof Kidd,

this is to grant permissions for all photos and data loaded on the Horasis-flickr account and other media sources to you, as the principal editor of Horasis-entries on Wikipedia.

Best regards Frank-Jurgen Richter

Dr Frank-Jurgen Richter Chairman Horasis: The Global Visions Community http://www.horasis.org

Thurgauerstrasse 40 CH-8050 Zurich Switzerland richter@horasis.org fon +41 79 305 3110 fax +41 44 214 6502

>>> END COPY

This 'permissions' applies specifically to 1 File Tagging File:4669326746 c41785aede Danilo.jpg 2 File Tagging File:5631556598 165d4e0b6c s Igor.jpg 3 File Tagging File:5631549510 936334130f s Demetris.jpg 4 File:5631549510 936334130f s Demetris.jpg 5 File Tagging File:His Highness Sheikh Saud Bin Saqr al Qasimi, the Ruler of Ras Al Khaimah.jpg 6 File Tagging File:His Highness Sheikh Saud Bin Saqr al Qasimi, the Ruler of Ras Al Khaimah speaking at the 2010 Horasis Global Arab Business Meeting.jpg

In my UserTalk - http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johnbkidd&diff=0&oldid=57421607

Where you ask for specific permissions.

I hope this aspect is now OK and finalised. If not - please continue our chat.

John Kidd Johnbkidd (talk) 17:04, 2 August 2011 (UTC)johnbkidd

Kind regards John Kidd Please reply using this ID in AOL or j.b.kidd@aston.ac.uk

>>> END COPY

I hope you find this OK. Bye- John Johnbkidd (talk) 17:04, 2 August 2011 (UTC)johnbkidd

Sorry, too much routine work with blatant copyvios on the last 2 days. Will try to reply tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Files dileted

Hello!There is much confusion in the work of Dimitri Parant with afterimage Too many users delete files without thinking, for example here: PENELOPE CRUZ HUILE.jpg TYTANE N.jpg and TYTANE p.jpg Three aspects must be seen:

• 1 The artist directly by hand on canvas and draws from a photo or not , but often the result has nothing to do with reality.
• 2 The artist creates a digital drawing directly on the computer without utilisation of original photo.
• 3 The artist creates a digital drawing from an original photo and most of the time the original source of the photo is specified--Falcom (talk) 08:02, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

IP 94.236.128.220

User Name33432 Hello turelio please block this user Pln9mg reason vandalism this user is a upload one file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ryder_Skye.jpg please look this file

What is the problem with File:Ryder Skye.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName33432 Hello Turelio please look this Username: Pln9mg

User ID: 326240

Registration date: 01:04, 16 July 2008

First edit: 01:21, 16 July 2008

Total editcount: 1

Distinct page edits: 1

Page/edits (avg): 1

Deleted edits: 0

please block this user Pln9mg

Why should this be a reason for a block? If you have evidence that his single upload is a copyvio, then say so. --Túrelio (talk) 10:01, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Flickr review bot

I sent this message to Lupo and indirectly to Bryan about the flickr bot. But I see Lupo has been away for a while. My question is the same as to Lupo: if the flickr review backlog is 60+ images, are we allowed to mark images--if the flickr bot has ignored them for days--if Bryan does not respond to my E-mail within one or two days? As you know, soon the backlog will be 70+ then 80+ then 90+ images and so on if Bryan doesn't fix the problem with the bot. Or should I wait? What is your opinion? Maybe you know how to E-mail Bryan through Common's procedures? I just saw that contact address on a picture by Bryan but don't know if it has changed. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Hopefully you know how to contact Bryan through Common's procedures if nothing happens in a day or two. I see the flickr review category backlog is now over 60 images. Maybe my E-mail will reach him...I don't know. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Try the chat: #mediawiki

BTW Toolserver "Database Error: Unknown database 'commonswiki_p' (sql-s4) on sql-s4/commonswiki_p" and API throws a lot of 502 and 504 errors. That's why the bot has serious problems. -- RE rillke questions? 09:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Regrettably Bryan has been away from Commons since 5 months. However, when I contacted him for a CD problem in february he replied and reacted rapidly. --Túrelio (talk) 10:06, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SA Partridge profile.jpg

The image in question is my own work, and I released the rights to it when I uploaded it using the wizard, subsequently I have put the request into COM:OTRS and requested an undelete. Charl P Fourie (talk) 12:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification; I had seen it already on COM:UR. However, I would like to hear an explaination for the presence of your upload in the identical resolution on http://www.lastfm.de/music/S.A.+Partridge/+images/42484081, posted by Sirentscream on 22. Feb. 2010. --Túrelio (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Shibe Park photos

ww2censor is behaving in an incompetent manner. Or is that considered perfectly OK on commons? It certainly is not considered OK in wikipedia. It's bad enough that he managed to get a picture zapped last week despite consensus to the contrary. Now he's trying to zap FREE photos on the grounds that the guy can't "prove" he took them himself in 1943. Using that logic, you should delete every personally-taken photo in Commons. Deletionist nirvana! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Falcom

Hello Turelio, can you make your comment here? thank you [[41]]--Falcom (talk) 17:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Administrator?

UserName33432 Hello Turelio who is user Horz administrator yes or no — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.132.239 (talk • contribs) 20:53 (UTC)

See Commons:Administrators with a list of all administrators. --Schwäbin (talk) 21:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, da scheint ein Störer unterwegs gewesen zu sein (ich fall immer auf solche angeblich Hilfe Suchenden herein), ich bin mir nicht sicher, wie man den Stör-DR wieder aufhebt. Einfach revertieren macht ja die diversen anderen Einträge, die so ein DR auslöst, nicht wieder ungeschehen. Wie gehst Du da vor? --Schwäbin (talk) 07:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Schwäbin, das geht mir genauso ;-). Vermutlich bin ich bei sowas zu gutgläubig (vielleicht als Ausgleich dafür, dass ich mir als admin bei den vielen URV-uploads keine Gutgläubigkeit leisten kann). Bzgl. deiner Frage: einen komplett angelegten DR/LA sollte man m.E. besser "formal regulär" schließen (wenngleich sofort nach Erkennen), damit die im Prozess angelegten Links und Unterseiten auch geschlossen werden. Das Schließen einer solchen DR ist m.W. auch durch nicht-Admins erlaubt. --Túrelio (talk) 08:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Da ich nicht weiß, wie man einen LA regulär schließt, bitte ich Dich darum, das zu tun. Danke! --Schwäbin (talk) 08:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Dankeschön. Hab versucht nachzuschauen, wie Du das gemacht hast, aber wahrscheinlich können es (sinnvollerweise) wirklich nur Administratoren. --Schwäbin (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Unser Freund ist zurück und hat Deinen Namen angegeben für ein Flickr-Review. Keine Ahnung, ob er das nur behauptet oder ob es stimmt. --Schwäbin (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Danke für den Hinweis; Mathonius hatte das schon revertiert. Und, nein, diese Datei wurde nicht von mir, sondern vom inzwischen anscheinend wieder aktiven FR-bot "gereviewed". --Túrelio (talk) 18:20, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName33432

UserName33432 Would you like to mark these 1 images from flickr. Two of them have not been marked for almost 2 full days now and Bryan has not responded to my E-mail. I marked some unmarked flickr photos but these are good photos that should maybe be marked by an Admin. The bot is still not working correctly http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbirdshockeyfan/6004406422/sizes/l/in/photostream/

UserName33432 Hello Turelio One question who is created page The New Worst Witch

These 2 images

Would you like to mark these 2 images from flickr. Two of them have not been marked for almost 2 full days now and Bryan has not responded to my E-mail. I marked some unmarked flickr photos but these are good photos that should maybe be marked by an Admin. The bot is still not working correctly.

• File:Bridge at summit, Langkawi.jpg

 Done

• File:Olympique de Marseille 2011.jpeg

Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: The second image has an interesting problem. Who owns the rights to the photo: is it the photographer--Mustapha Ennaimi--or PHOTO SOLEIL; the camera metadata has 2 different names here? I see the flickr bot has now passed it but this is a Big problem because it says the copyright holder is Photo Soleil. There was another photo with the same issue. I first passed it and then reverted my pass because of this note. You must make a decision here on this second image...or else someone else will. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

How about contacting the photographer directly m.ennaim [at] menara.ma ? --Túrelio (talk) 10:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

• I'll file a DR on the second photo and let the uploader contact this person. Regards. --Leoboudv (talk) 19:23, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Copyright files

I don't know whether you want to carry on the discussion on this talk page or on mine, but I just want the images deleted from the Commons. The images are on sites such as Oclumencia and do not belong to me. It would be best to remove them from the Commons altogether. PhotoShoot19 (talk) 11:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied. PhotoShoot19 (talk) 16:19, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll pop this here: Discussion is on my talk page. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 19:39, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I did what you asked. Will the images be deleted now? Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

{done}}. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I am following on from my initial disussion. I would like you to delete this file: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:David_yates_hp7.JPG The image is not a copyright issue, but I am leaving Wikipedia and I would like this image to leave with me. It's just a personal preference. Thank you. PhotoShoot19 (talk) 20:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

This would be rather painful, as it is the best of all images available on Commons. I tend to open a regular DR; but I'll sleep over the question. --Túrelio (talk) 20:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

But the Commons has plenty of other images. I know this one is HQ, but the Commons doesn't need it. Anyway, I'm signing out now. I'd rather my works be deleted before I leave Wikipedia, but it's up to you. PhotoShoot19 (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

By the way, Photoshoot is an alternate account. I will not being using this one either from now on. I am not bothering with the Right to Vanish process, I'm just merely placing "retired" on my user page. I want the images removed as I will not be active on Wikipedia from this day forward. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 11:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of empty NoUploads categories

Hi Túrelio, I just wanted to let you know that I've undone some of your deletions of empty categories, because the category description pages were tagged with {{NoUploads}}. These categories are important for warning users about artists whose works are still in copyright and identifying copyright violations. Please do not delete them - instead remove the speedy deletion tag. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 21:41, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, no objection. However, a permament message like "do not delete, even if empty" in such cats would be hepful. --Túrelio (talk) 21:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

We have {{Go away}}! Killiondude (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but this {{Empty category}} might be sightly more "neutral". --Túrelio (talk) 21:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the upload of image files

Hi Túrelio,

Firstly, thanks for your reviews. I had uploaded the below images :

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Akash_2011&redirect=no

File:Yogacharya Dr. Ashoke Kumar Chatterjee receiving D.Litt .jpg
File:Yogacharya Dr. Ashoke Kumar Chatterjee science of the soul.jpg
File:Yogacharya Dr.Ashoke Kumar Chatterjee 2.jpg
File:Yogacharya Dr. Ashoke Kumar Chatterjee Hyderabad seminer.jpg 
File:Science of Prana Vibration.jpg
File:Yogacharya-while-writing-purana purusha.jpg
File:Yogacharya ji sitting.jpg
File:Purana Purusha book.jpg
File:Yogacharya Dr.Ashoke Kumar Chatterjee and Yogivar Satyacharan Lahiree mahashaya.jpg

You reviewed the pages below and commented to add the permission details from the copyright holder of those files.

Please let me know if mail communication from the copyright holder - [(Copyright © 2011 Yogiraj Shyamacharan Sanatan Mission.)] will suffice.

Please let me know fast as the deadlines for deletion are coming soon. Within that time I have to arrange for the permissions.

Thanks and Regards. Akash Akash 2011 (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Anders Behring Breivik.jpg

Dear Túrelio, thanks for correcting me. I really appreciate that. :) I've changed the nomination to a reqular deletion request. Kind regards, Mathonius (talk) 15:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. However, I took the freedom to copy your initial speedy-rationale to the second upload of this user, which was really a re-upload of the DR-deleted image. --Túrelio (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Onesse et Laharie

Hello, the statue, part of a war memorial, was made in 1925 by fr:Henri Charlier. Cheers, --Jibi44 (talk) 16:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 19:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

A discussion has been held on Commons:Bistro, the picture will be deleted shortly. Thanks for advising me. Regards, --Jibi44 (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Flickr Images

Hi,

Before I leave Wikipedia, I would like to give the Wikipedia article David Yates a proper high quality image to use in the infobox. Now that I am familiar with the licensing and copyright policies, I would like to upload an image to the article from Flickr. The image is not mine and so I would have to contact the author of that work to ask permission to use it on Wikipedia. Is that correct ? How do I do this ? Would I have to create a Flickr account to ask permission of the author ? If the Flickr image is "all rights reserved", could I still ask the author for permission ? Please help. Thank you. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

O.k., good idea. Though you may mention Wikipedia as the rationale/reason for your request, you should not use Wikipedia in the context of permission, because we don't accept "permission for Wikipedia". We need a release under a free license. If you can convince the photographer, there are 2 possible ways to do it. 1) The Flickr user may change the copyright setting on Flickr temporarily to a Commons-acceptable license, i.e. CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, both are available on Flickr. At the same time of this change, you should upload the image to Commons and add {{Flickreview}} template. You should then watch over the image and when it has been reviewed by the bot, which should ideally happen within 1 hour, you can notify the Flickr user, that he can change back the copyright status on Flickr to the initial value. 2) If the Flickr user doesn't like that procedure, he can directly issue a permission to Commons (via you). For that you should first ask him, whether he is willing to do that. If yes, upload the image to Commons and add {{OTRS pending}}. Then you need to prepare the permission email: go to Commons:Email templates, copy the boxed "Declaration of consent for all inquiries", enter the filename and the license of choice and mail it all to the Flickr user and ask him to read it, date it, sign it and to mail it back to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. One of our OTRS volunteers will then check the permission and issue a "ticket" to the image. --Túrelio (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your help. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, a quick question. Can you look at this page? The first image I uploaded was an upload error and I uploaded the proper image (which is currently being used) under the same name. Is it possible for you to delete the first image ? Thanks Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:49, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I have recently made some crops to that particualr image. If it's possible to delete the previous versions of the image, I would be grateful. Once again, thank you. Goodbye. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 21:49, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Rachel Weisz 2010 TIFF.jpg

I have seen that you reviewed today the picture, and confirmed that it was licensed under CC-BY-SA-2.0. I have checked the Flickr page a while ago and I've found that indicates that the rights are reserved. (I did not add the speedy deletion tag at the bottom)--GDuwenTell me! 02:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

That's a Flickr problem. A Flickr user can change the licensing of his uploads without leaving any visible trace of the formerly different licensing. Therefore we have the Flickr-review process, to document the license status at the time of upload. --Túrelio (talk) 07:42, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, OK. It was just to make sure, probably the user changed the license the same day. It's part of the commons now anyway.--GDuwenTell me! 15:58, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Transformers 3 moscow cast.jpg

Is this image OK or is it a potential flickrwash? The flickr account has 3 images and one is a derivative. The photographer is named but I don't see this photo on his web site. However, if you think it is OK, then I will accept your decision. It just looks a bit suspicious, nothing more. --Leoboudv (talk) 06:19, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Very likely Flickr-wash, already used in June http://wearemoviegeeks.com/2011/06/michael-bay-cast-moscow-world-premiere-interviews-from-transformers-dark-of-the-moon/. --Túrelio (talk) 07:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: OK, It is a flickrwash. I will support your DR. What surprises me is how you locate these copy vios. I only have TinEye. I used TinEye here and it says..."no identical images found" from X million images but you located the image somewhere else. Maybe you have a better image search engine than, I assume. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Google images. TinEye is nice and more specific, provided they have the image in their data base, which is still small. --Túrelio (talk) 08:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

• OK. I will try Google images next time. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:57, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

¿Por qué?

Hola Túrelio, ¿Se puede saber por que me ha borrado imágenes mías? Por favor respóndeme con urgencia. --Almju (talk) 17:09, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

Hola Almju, I haven't deleted them by myself, but tagged them for deletion. Reasons are different: File:2009 DS36.png was found to be a crop from a larger original image ([42], [43]) by a space agency (not the NASA and therefore not free). The .png files, such as File:WCL driver on LFS.png, were screenshots from the non-free game en:Live for Speed. File:Pirmin strasser.jpg, not yet deleted, is missing a reliable source entry. --Túrelio (talk) 15:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

No!, this screenshot is from the part Demo (Free so) of this game. --Almju (talk) 17:18, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

The Demo may be "free to use (as a game)", but unlikely "free from copyright"; these are very different things. However, if you find a document/statement from the game company saying that the Demo is copyright-free, I will gladly undelete the images. --Túrelio (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Now I went by myself to http://www.lfs.net/?page=screenshots to look at the screenshots. This page still carries the "© 2002-2011 Live for Speed" note. --Túrelio (talk) 15:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Me parece una vergüenza, encima que les estamos haciendo publicidad, NO ESTAMOS SACANDO NINGÚN BENEFICIO DE SU OBRA, además es de interés general. --Almju (talk) 17:33, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

You could contact the office of "Live for Speed" and ask them if they are willing to grant us (and the world) some of their screenshots under a free license. May be, you are lucky. Because I have done this with File:TheoVanGogh.jpg, we now have the only free image of van Gogh. --Túrelio (talk) 15:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: "Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use"

"Fair use" is tolerated on :en wikipedia, but not on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 15:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, now the file File:Pirmin strasser.jpg, is from http://www.udalmeriasad.com/ do not have author and the copyright of the web it's: © 2008 Web oficial del equipo de fútbol UD Almería S.A.D., What's happens now? --Almju (talk) 17:46, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

Please give a link to the sub-page where this image appears. --Túrelio (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Was removed from the web. --Almju (talk) 17:51, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

May be it was removed because it was already a copyright violation on that page. The image was shot using a professional camera "Canon EOS-1D Mark II", which only increases the likelyhood that it belongs to a commercial photographer, which will sue re-users for copyright infringement. Overall, I see no chance to save this image. You might look on Flickr or elsewhere to find a free-licensed replacement. --Túrelio (talk) 15:58, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: Press at any Player and see the background http://www.udalmeriasad.com/udalmeria/index.php?Itemid=59&id=8&option=com_content&task=blogsection

But I don't see Pirmin Strasser. --Túrelio (talk) 16:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, you might ask "UD Almería S.A.D." whether the photo of Strasser belongs to them and, if yes, whether they grant it to us under a free license. --Túrelio (talk) 16:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

¿Me puedes explicar por qué estas fotos no están borradas?: File:Rallycross blackwood lfs.jpg y File:Feint new Skin.jpg--Almju (talk) 18:48, 7 de agosto de 2011 (UTC)

As you can see on the description page, the uploader of the first image obtained a permission (see the OTRS-ticket). I've nominated the second image for deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 17:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The Pirmin Strasser image can be found at http://udalmeriasad.mforos.com/26119/10105989-filial-temporada-2010-11/?pag=5#91013379 and http://www.donbalon.com/web/estadisticasdb/cromos/2010-2011/6101.jpg. --Rosenzweig τ 17:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 22:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Ookaboo

Hi again,

I'm trying to move on from Wikipedia but I recently came across the only site I can find which has the deleted Commons images from myself (Hallows Horcruxes and PhotoShoot19). The site is called Ookaboo, which is a site that uploads Creative Commons images. The deleted images can be seen here and here. I've tried contacting them about removing the images, but I've had no response. The site uses Wikimedia Commons as the source for the images, but obviously the files are not here since they've been deleted. Do we just leave the images on Ookaboo or do we try to ask them to remove the files again ? Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:30, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

If you have sent them a note recommending to take the images down, IMHO that's all you can do. It's up to them now. --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the quick response. Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

By the way, this won't interfere with my real life will it? Hallows Horcruxes (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

"Hallows Horcruxes" is hardly you real name or did you go to school in Hogwarts? To be sure, assuming a worst-case scenario in which a re-user is sued by the rights holder, his/her lawyer (or a judge) might ask the WMF to disclose the IP data of the user who uploaded the copyviolating image. While that is very unlikely, it's not absolutely impossible. Therefore my urging to notify the external re-users. Wikimedia projects aren't a problem, as they fall likely under the provider/hoster clause of the DMCA. IANAL. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Chen Jing

Category:Chen Jing *räusper* .... glaubst du ich lege die zum Spaß an? ;) Man kann es auch mal kurz in die History schauen. Irgendwie nervig. Hier kommt eins de:Wikipedia:TFPCOM#Tsor.2C_en.2C_Chen_Jing. Dass ich es noch nicht übertragen kann, wurde mir leider erst nach dem Anlegen der Cat klar. Wenn du magst, kannst du mir ja sagen, was du von der Sache hältst: User_talk:Multichill#Commons:Deletion_requests.2FTemplate:ITTF_.28deleted_by_you.29 Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 21:57, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, aber bei der derzeitigen Menge an speedy-markierten Leer-cats geht das kaum. Ein Blick in die History hätte mir auch wenig geholfen, denn auch du könntest ja mal irrtümlich eine cat anlegen oder es dir anders überlegt und dann ausnahmsweise vergessen haben, sie zur Löschung zu markieren. Wenn eine cat erstellt wurde und der Inhalt noch etwas auf sich warten lässt, sollte man in die Beschreibung einen Hinweis setzen, manuell oder z.B. {{Empty category}}. Hab sie jetzt wiederhergestellt. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Dank dir - habe den Hinweis noch ergänzt. Du löschst also ohne Blick in die History? Hmmm... Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 00:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

So pauschal trifft das nicht zu. Es kommt vielmehr darauf an. Die momentane Flut speedy-markierter Leer-cats geht auf genau einen, übrigens deutschsprachigen Benutzer zurück, der in den SLA auch seinen Namen einkopiert hat. So etwas würde kein Vandale machen. Abgesehen von einer Anmerkung bzgl. cats mit der NoUploads-Vorlage hat sich seit Tagen keiner bei ihm beschwert. --Túrelio (talk) 06:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Achso, ja okay. Die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass ein Vandale die Sig fälscht ist gegenüber dem möglichen Schaden vertretbar. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 23:34, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

File:KARL Bd1.jpg

Hi Fabrice, without transferring the OTRS-ticket from http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:KARL_Bd1.jpg the file will likely be deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 09:40, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Túrelio, it's the first time I transfer a file from another project. If I simply copy {{OTRS|30. Oktober 2006|2006103010007881}} from de.wp, will it be sufficient? Likely not. Would you please tell me how to do proceed? Thanks. [Wenn es dir lieber ist kannst du mir auf deutsch sprechen, ich verstehe es auch besser als englisch, kann es leider nicht so gut schreiben]. Fabrice Ferrer (talk) 16:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Fabrice, das übliche Ticketformat ist hier {{PermissionOTRS|id=xxxxx}}, wobei xxxx für die o.g. Nr. steht. Falls du selbst kein OTRS-Volunteer bist, wäre es nicht schlecht, auf Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard einen OTRSler um "Bestätigung" des Tickets zu bitten, rein formal. --Túrelio (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Image propriety

Hello excuse my english.

Concerning property of painting. If I am the son of the painter, which is dead, how do I prove I'm the heir, and to whom? Thank you --FaustoOlivares (talk) 10:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Mail this statement (mentioning the real names of your late father and yourself and your username on Commons) please to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and ask to get an OTRS ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 10:30, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Sent this message to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org: " Hello, may i ask you to read this, please :

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:T%C3%BArelio#Image_propriety

Image propriety

Hello excuse my english. Concerning property of painting. If I am the son of the painter, which is dead, how do I prove I'm the heir, and to whom? Thank you --FaustoOlivares (talk) 10:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC) Mail this statement (mentioning the real names of your late father and yourself and your username on Commons) please to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and ask to get an OTRS ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 10:30, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

My late father's complete name : Fausto Olivares Palacios My complete name : Fausto Olivares Gerardin My username : FaustoOlivares

thank you for your help in this matter. " Thanks--FaustoOlivares (talk) 10:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello again, as far as I understand, I made a mistake on the license of this work. Could it be that? I am waiting anyways for the answer from permissions-commons. I also wrote something on the image discussion page. Thanks --FaustoOlivares (talk) 12:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I have right now changed a sentence i the summary of the image, to precise. By the way, will i have the same problem with the other images? As i understood, i could write the five or six of them under the same OTRS bill. True? --FaustoOlivares (talk) 12:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes. As I wrote you earlier, all works of your father are copyrighted until 70 years after his death. The copyright is now with his immediate heir(s). Therefore, we need a written permission. A totally different thing are photos of your father, such as File:Fausto Olivares Palacios en Jaén.jpg. Was this really shot originally by you? Finally, due to your similar names you should be very precise in what you write into the author entry. For example, in File:Fausto Olivares Palacios - Carnaval.jpg you wrote author=FaustoOlivares (you), which is strictly wrong. You may be the photographer, but you are not the author of the image. So, you should put your father's name into the author entry, or write Fausto Olivares Palacios (painting) / Fausto Olivares (photo). --Túrelio (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for all advices. I have received this from permissions :

Dear Fausto Olivares Gerardin: Please let Túrelio know that your ticket number is 2011080810006757 and ask him to determine whether this is sufficient for the images. Sincerely,Aaron

Will this be enough? Should I do this with all images I upload (there won't be a lot more, though). Thanks again. --FaustoOlivares (talk) 23:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Governor_NewMexico.jpg

As you have instructed me, I have forwarded my permission emails from the New Mexico Governor's office to OTRS. How do I know if this email is sufficient to meet the WikimediaCommon's requirement? Would you please help me? Kyong H. Lee Khlnmusa (talk) 13:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

If you have already sent the request, it would be too late now to change anything. You can find a template here: Commons:Email templates#Declaration of consent for all inquiries. Anyway, the OTRS-volunteers will check all permissions coming to permission-commons@wikimedia.org and will tell you if they need more. --Túrelio (talk) 13:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Permiso

Buenas tardes, acabo de recibir autorización para publicar en Wikipedia un foto, ¿Que hago? ¿Que pongo en: "Permiso"? Gracias por su atención. --Almju 8 Agosto de 2011 15:12 (UTC).

See Commons:Modelos de mensajes and Commons:OTRS/es. --Túrelio (talk) 13:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

OK all right, message sent, but one more thing, What license y should choose? Thanks. --Almju 8 Agosto de 2011 15:30 (UTC).

Commons:Marcas de derechos de autor, enough to choose from? Most recommended is CC-BY-SA 3.0; the spanish version (CC-BY-SA 3.0-es) is here. --Túrelio (talk) 13:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

But CC-BY-SA 3.0 is for an own work, and isn't my own work, Really should I choose that? --Almju 8 Agosto de 2011 16:22 (UTC).

No. For the choice of license, it doesn't matter whether it is own work or not. What is important is, that only the rights holder can release the work under a specific license. Therefore the permission. --Túrelio (talk) 14:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Please also be aware that the copyright holder (the photographer, painter, artist) must send permission (see Commons:Modelos_de_mensajes) to the support team. It is not sufficient to give „autorización para publicar en Wikipedia“ only, but the picture must be free for use anywhere. --Schwäbin (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

All right, thank you. Something more, How much time they take to respond the OTRS messages? Grettings. --Almju (talk) 18:16, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Depends. Usually some days. --Túrelio (talk) 18:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Aguilera Madame Tussauds.jpg & File:Christina Aguilera Super Bowl.jpg

I did not understand what information is missing. I can't use commons xD--2811Butterfly (talk) 20:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

In both cases you gave as source only "Flickr.com". This is totally useless; with that information nobody can check the image. You need to provide full source information, i.e. the Flickr page, where this image is shown with its full data set. --Túrelio (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I added informations --2811Butterfly (talk) 20:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

O.k. Flickr-review bot needs to run. --Túrelio (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thank you :) --2811Butterfly (talk) 20:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Arnold Schwarzenegger T-800 (Madame Tussauds).JPG

I hope so, this one: http://www.flickr.com/photos/koe/77363025/ was shot in London and the background looks the same (the red sticker "fire hose" and something like the door)~~

Jack Sparrow (Madame Tussaud's).JPG

I hope so, because the picture's owner has a lot only "European" pictures.~~

License information for File:Ceciliarosa.jpg

As requested, the license information for ceciliarosa.jpg:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ceciliaw2009/4497285584/in/set-72157623579206150

With regards Reiltar

Thanks. However, it would still be a copyvio on Commons as it is (C) All rights reserved on Flickr too. --Túrelio (talk) 07:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I see. If I have understood things right, I need to have the owner of the rights email wikicommons and declare that it is OK (using the formula) for the picture to be on wikicommons? 15:34, 10 August 2011 (GMT+1)

Well, no, not exactly. We do need the image be released under a specified license (of the users choice, provided it's Commons-compatible), a simple "o.k." to someting isn't enough. See Commons:OTRS for details and Commons:Email templates for a permission template. The easiest way would be to ask the Flickr user if he/she could change the license on Flickr temporarily to CC-BY or CC-BY-SA (both available on Flickr). After this is done you should upload the image again and let our Flickr-review bot run. After it has confirmed the license, you should notify the Flickr user that now he can change back the license to the initial one. --Túrelio (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I think I can manage that. Thank you for your help! /Reiltar 16:03, 10 August 2011 (GMT+1)

User:Vladimir2623

Hi, I've noticed your message on User talk:Vladimir2623. He already has some deleted files here, and a lot of his files will be deleted soon in ruWP (his uploads in ruWP - practically all are copyvios with wrong license like cc-zero or PD-user). In ruWP we are testing abuse filter instead of blocks for copyvio uploaders who have useful contribution in articles. So, after he has ignored our messages in ruWP not to upload any image he found, User:Vladimir2623 was added to this filter. Now he is not allowed to upload files in ruWP and try to continue his activity here. I think user doesn't want even to try to understand the principles of copyright and Wikimedia Foundation Licensing Policy, so user can be blocked because of uploading copyvios even now. Dmitry89 (talk) 12:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the background. --Túrelio (talk) 12:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Missing permission

Hallo Turelio, ich habe neulich für Kollegen hier etwas hochgeladen, was noch ein OTRS braucht, eine Architekturzeichnung, siehe File:MPI Hirnforschung 01.jpg - das braucht noch die Freigabe des Architekten - wie kennzeichne ich das? Einfach mit "Missing permission"? - Das Architekturbüro könnte auch schon eine Mail an das OTRS-System geschickt haben. Vielleicht machen die das auch erst, wenn es wirklich in der Datei drin steht. Ich habe keinen direkten Kontakt mit dem Büro. Ist auch von einem bekannte Architekturbüro, das einen WP-Artikel hat und kann insofern mehrfach verwandt werden. Grüße Cholo Aleman (talk) 16:55, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich hab das OTRS-pending mal hinzugefügt. Dadurch wird aber nur signalisiert, dass hier eine solche Genehmigung fehlt bzw. unterwegs ist. Eine solche Genehmigung einholen musst du schon selbst bzw. die "Kollegen" für die du es hochgeladen hast. --Túrelio (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Dyma photo

Thank you!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Wax images: Derivative copyrighted 3D art

Dear Admin Turelio,

Aren't wax statues 3D art which are, by nature, derivative and copyrighted since they are modern art? I notice someone uploaded many images of 3D art from the US today but they place them in this category here.

Like these images all taken in the US:

• File:Alfred Hitchcock (Madame Tussauds).JPG
• File:Clint Eastwood (Madame Tussauds).JPG
• File:Indiana Jones (Madame Tussauds).JPG
• File:Indiana Jones (Madame Tussauds).jpg
• File:Vito Corleone.JPG
• File:Johnny Depp 2008.jpg

There are a lot more flickr images but the US has no FOP for modern 3D art. One is of Shrek--taken in London--but Shrek as a cartoon character is copyrighted. In fact, I think most of the images in this category should face a mass DR. But I don't know how to file one. I suspect they would be all copyrighted. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:11, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I had seen some of them already and wondered where they had been shot. In short, wax statues from Tussauds London are o.k. (thanks to UK. FOP exmption), whereas Tussauds locations in the US (no art FOP) or Germany (no indoor FOP) aren't. --Túrelio (talk) 09:41, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Thank you for your help and your comments. I have made coments in many of the DRs you filed. I passed one which was taken in the Netherlands. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Muxtar_Maniyev.jpg

Hi Wertuose, on what rationale/evidence is this edit of yours based? --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. At first I want to say that I'm an administrator in Azerbaijani Wikipedia and one of our users has uploaded this file to Commons by mistake. He thought that it's that person which is specified in the name. And as you can see this file isn't used in any article. So, please delete this file if you can do it. Wertuose (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks; deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 22:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

"wethouder" pictures

Hi Túrelio,
I saw you just removed the duplicates I marked. With respect to the pictures I nominated from the same uploader: this page states that "personal use, that means non-commerical usage, of the content of this site is allowed The municipality of Rotterdam holds copyright on municipal information at www.rotterdam.nl, like posted texts, logo's and pictures." (translated from the heading "auteursrecht"). Was my nomination right because of the NC remark or should I undo the nominations?
Best regards, JZ85 (talk) 08:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

IMO your nominations were correct, as the available information suggests there's a problem. I've notified the uploader on her :nl talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 08:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Dirtsandwich - photo credit question

Hello Turelio,

I am not Nick Smith, though he is my wife's brother and my associate of twenty years. I am the representative for the group in the photograph (The Womack Family Band) and Nick Smith volunteered to take some pictures of them in July of 2011 (for their upcoming tour posters). When seeking a photo to contribute to the Wikipedia article "The Womack Family Band", I thought this one the best that was no longer in use. Both the photographer and the band photographed were present when I contributed the image to the Wikimedia Commons community.

I see that you provide a great service to Wikimedia users by contributing a great deal to the site. Thank you for your time and energy, Turelio.

- Dirtsandwich

Replied by email. --Túrelio (talk) 18:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Laika_monument.jpg

If I wanted to upload this image to en. What license would I use?

Image in question: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Laika_monument.jpg

--Craigboy (talk) 11:41, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I assume it is a recent work and thereby still copyrighted. We would not accept it on Commons, as Russia has no FOP exemption, but on :en it might go under fair use, provided you have at least 1 article, where you "need" it. For details see en:Wikipedia:Non-free content. --Túrelio (talk) 12:08, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

hehe

Sometimes you are too fast for me ;-). Thanks for all the work you do. Moros y Cristianos 12:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 12:18, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName33432

Hello Turelio One question At what license to upload photos

Hi 33432, why don't you open an own account, instead of operating as an IP? Anyway, I think due to language problem, you might find better help from my admin-colleague User:Spiritia, who is bg-native speaker. --Túrelio (talk) 07:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

UserGame54353

Turelio Why

Please read User talk:Túrelio#UserName33432. --Túrelio (talk) 20:40, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

_________________________________________

UserName33432 Hello Turelio what a license to upload a photo of me not to delete?

File:Yogacharya_ji_sitting.jpg

Hi,

Although I have provided the licence long back, still it's showing that the permissions are not given. Also the notice tells that the photo will be deleted !!

Please look into the matter .

Direct link : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yogacharya_ji_sitting.jpg

Regards. Akash 2011 (talk) 03:48, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, when I tagged the image[44], it had no license. But the main problem is something else. You claim to be the author of the image, but at the same time you sourced it to a website that carries a clear (C)-note "Copyright © 2011 Yogiraj Shyamacharan Sanatan Mission." That is somewhat contradictory. Now, did you really shoot the original photography? --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeda.Oficial

Hello
You looked in the flicker, there is alicença.

Hi, the license on Flickr is "(C) All rights reserved". That means uploading it to Commons under a free license is a copyright violation. Besides, please sign your comments with --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 21:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Christine Baranski.jpg

IMO - right end effect (deletion), wrong reason. FanPop actually took it from Wikipedia - see File:Christine Baranski at Met Opera cropped2.jpg. Since it's a smaller version of what we have, I was going to remove it as a scaled-down duplicate... Tabercil (talk) 21:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for the background. --Túrelio (talk) 21:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Other speedy deletions

Hi Túrelio. I didn't saw your warning here, but I was the one who solved it. The problem was this speedy; it was transcluded on all the POTD-pages. I deleted the speedy and nulledited all the other pages. Kind regards, Trijnstel (talk) 09:16, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. It wasn't the first time of such phenonemon, so I wasn't that surprised. --Túrelio (talk) 09:35, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Luis_Pastor._en_20minutos.jpg

This photo is taken from a Spanish newspaper, 20 minutos, published by Creative Commons license

http://www.20minutos.es/

See and comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Luis Pastor. en 20minutos.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 18:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapelle Notre Dame de la Roque - Villeneuve (04).JPG

I disagree with copyviotagging it, and i think you might reconsider your deletion : uploader is most likely to be the author, there are two accounts Rainbow0413 (talk · contribs) and Vanille0413 (talk · contribs). First uploaded images with free licensing, the second uploaded a watermarked version of the image, and herbythime tagged it copyvio. There's a talk started on User_talk:Rainbow0413 (and on my own talkpage), whatever is decided, i think those images should not be speedydelete but rather put into a mass DR, as it is not an obvious case.--Lilyu (talk) 14:36, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

O.k. As nothing is final on Commons, I recommend you to deal with this user(s) and tell me the conclusion/agreement. --Túrelio (talk) 14:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, please undelete the following three files :

• File:Tour de l'Horloge - Sigonce.JPG
• File:Cabriès (13).JPG
• File:Chapelle Notre Dame de la Roque- Villeneuve (04).JPG

per User talk:Rainbow0413 (uploader) and my talkpage (discussion with tagger)

I was told there was only 5 files deleted, so only 2 will remain deleted. If there's more files concerned, please tell me.--Lilyu (talk) 10:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind Túrelio - I've undeleted. I was probably hasty tagging them with hindsight. We will look at getting the watermark removed to save future queries. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I was offline today until now anyway. --Túrelio (talk) 19:40, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Iamamiwhoami_live_at_Way_Out_West_2011.jpg

Hi there, you recently deleted the image I uploaded to Wikimedia as it was not under a free license. I realised the error I made, and requested that the author change the license on Flickr. He has done so, and it is now under a CC-BY-SA 2.0 license. How do I go about re-uploading the image since it does not allow me to? Borderings (talk)

Has already been reviewed without my intervention. --Túrelio (talk) 21:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Strange

Hello

I think it's strange. Without log in in http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Vineyards_of_Cahors&uselang=fr, there is only 24 pictures. When we log in, there are the complete pictures. Is it normal ? Thanks. Ddfree (talk) 13:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, when I tried it today, I couldn't reproduce the problem. In both scenarios (logged-in and logged-out) 78 image thumbs were shown. --Túrelio (talk) 09:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

My first rename of file

Dear Túrelio,

A couple of days ago I have got the filemove right. I have just used it for the first time.

I have renamed the misidentified Impatiens walleriana (São Luís - Brasil) to Catharanthus roseus (São Luís - Brazil)01.

Could you please check whether I have followed the procedure correctly. Thanks in advance for your helpful advice, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 14:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Everything seems fine with this move, Réginald. --Túrelio (talk) 08:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Dear Túrelio,

Thank you for your help,

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:50, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Personal gallery data base error

Hi Túrelio, need your help again because for quite some time I cannot access my gallery, there is a permanent data base error notification. How can this be resolved? Greetings and thank you, Osioni (talk) 10:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC) Today the link to my personal gallery doesn't respond at all. Osioni (talk) 08:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Osioni, I know the problem :-(. As of the last weeks there are a lot of problem like, which don't seem to go away. You might take a look at Commons:Village pump, whether there is already an entry about that and, if not, open a thread. Our coders do read that page. If that leads to nothing you might considere filing a bug report at Bugzilla, try here: Commons:Bugs. --Túrelio (talk) 09:02, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Lenguajes inapropiados... de mi parte y de la otra.

Turélio, se que estoy haciendo mal las cosas, poniendo mensajes ofensivos. Pero el tema, no es solo porque esta persona pretende destruir el trabajo que tanto me costó realizar, sino porque así como exige y pretende ser respetado, también debería tener algo de respeto por el otro. Lo que quiero decir es lo siguiente: ¿Tu crees que frases burlescas como "Ugh, this is so bad", pueden venir de una persona respetuosa? O sea, no me pueden pedir algo que no le piden a este personaje. No digo que dejen las fotos como están, si deben ser borradas adelante. Lo que pido, es que este personaje sea ubicado y respete el trabajo o no se burle del error de los demás. Gracias por tomarte tu tiempo para leer mi pedido. --Diego HC (talk) 11:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hola Diego, if you refer to my colleague Martin H., he has surely no intention to destroy your contributions. But the community and especially the sysops have to take care that we detect files suspicious of being a copyvio, in order to protect the copyright of the real authors, but also to protect Commons and our image re-users, who might get taken to court for copyright infringement. In my country, using an unlicensed image belonging to Getty Images agency may cost you more than US-$ 1000. Currently we are flooded with copyvios by mostly new uploaders, many of whom blatantly claim "own work", even when it is clearly copied from a website. This and our overall workload may result that some of us get angry against every uploader of suspicious images. I am sorry, if that happend to you, but admins are humans too; surely there was no bad intention. Anyway, I really wonder what I shall think of this upload of your: File:Tury y Chávez.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Lesley-Ann Brandt photo

Darling, The e-mail with the permission for this image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lesley-AnnBrandt.jpg has been sent at the same time when the image was uploaded! Please, check it first! Thank you!

Besides that fact that copyviolators also often add an OTRS-pending tag to their uploads, the image carries a clear watermark "(C) All rights reserved" and will hardly be acceptable in that version. Anyway, a no-perm tag doesn't mean speedy deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

FYE

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Aspersive_accusation_of_User:T.C3.BArelio --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

License?

I needed an edited version of a picture of Jim Caviezel to be used in an article. - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jim_caviezel.jpg . So, I downloaded, edited and then uploaded it on Wikimedia Commons under the same license as was the original one. - http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Jim_caviezel2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 . Today I got a message which says that "File:Jim caviezel2.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation." How is that possible? Is there any way how to use a picture in an article which has a ratio 4:3 with the ratio 3:5? I did not find any help on Wikipedia:Picture tutorial - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PIC#Avoiding_stack-ups The problem is that I need the picture to be 237 x 332 pixels instead of the original 500 x 332 pixels. Thank you. Jasooon (talk) 09:28, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jasooon, that was indeed a somewhat unlucky chain of events. The original image File:Jim caviezel.jpg, that had been on Commons since 2008, was only today found to be "All rights reserved" on Flickr. Now, the problem with Flickr is that the user can change the licensing for his uploads on Flickr without leaving any visible trace. I.e., a user could put his image on Flickr initially under a free license and after some days or years could change it to "All rights reserved". It might be that the same happened with File:Jim caviezel.jpg. Regrettably this image has never been run through our Flickr-review bot, that was developed to counter this Flickr problem. As of yet, the image is (C) and cannot remain on Commons. This includes any crops of it, as your File:Jim caviezel2.jpg.

About the image ratio, sorry, I have no idea. You might ask that at COM:VP. --Túrelio (talk) 12:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Re:File

Hi, yes but they are cropped! So that: how you can understand that they are particular photos? In fact, I did not upload the photo, but a little, little part of the photo. I could make that photo! But, in conclusion, it is never possibile?--Pelusu (talk) 22:20, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't really understand what you are saying. If a photo is protected (fully copyrighted), then you are neither allowed to use it in full nor in part. If you need a photo of that particular person, then you have either to search for a really freely licensed photo or shoot one by yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 22:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Sum 41.jpg

Hi! Can you delete the version of this file that is clearly a cr infringement? And is there a page for cases like that? I didn't find one. --NoCultureIcons (talk) 10:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, no, there is no special page. However, in such cases you can tag the image page with the usual copyvio or speedy tag and specify in bold that only the version from ... shall be deleted. In addition, one should notify the overwriting uploader that overwriting existing files from other users is not allowed. --Túrelio (talk) 10:40, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Fotos Kinderheilstätte Harzgerode

Hi Túrelio! Vielen Dank für deinen schnellen Kommentar. Die Bilder sind leider auf Privatgelände gemacht (abgezäunt), der Bau ist mit 22 ha Gelände umgeben und nicht öffentlich einsehbar. Es besteht aber eine Schöpfungshöhe, da er denkmalgeschützt ist und einer der wenigen Bauhaus-Krankenhausbauten in Deutschland ist. In den Archiven "Bauhaus architecture" etc. fehlen diese Bilder leider. Es besteht m.E. ein öffentl. Interesse. Der aktuelle Besitzer hat wahrscheinlich nichts gegen eine Veröffentlichung. Was ist der nächste Schritt?

Danke für die Rückmeldung. Kommentare bitte immer "unterschreiben" mit --~~~~. Das mit dem "öffentlichen Interesse" ist gut und ehrenwert, für die Urheberrechtsklärung aber irrelevant. Der aktuelle Besitzer hat kein Urheberrecht am Gebäude, das haben vielmehr die Nachfahren des Architekten. Wenn du die herausfinden (und überzeugen kannst), wäre das die absolut beste Lösung. Falls das nicht geht, müssen wir versuchen, ein paar Experten zu gewinnen, die für jedes einzelne Objekt die Schöpfungshöhe abschätzen. Dort, wo eine solche besteht, muss dann wohl leider gelöscht werden. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Epipactis palustris-01-Kaernten-2008-Thomas Huntke.jpg

Antwort auf: "Hallo Huntke, so ganz verstehe ich deinen Wunsch nicht. Es gibt auf Commons keine Bild-Version vom 22.02.2009; siehe Dateiversionen. Oder meinst du die Version mit dem Datumstempel 22:08, 1. Jul. 2010?"

Hallo Túrelio, ja, sorry die Datei meine ich. Ich hatte das falsche Datum aus der Beschreibung des Bildes, war ein früherer Upload. Bitte Datei von 01.06.2010 löschen. Danke! --Huntke (talk) 06:35, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Erstmal danke! Trotzdem bin ich verwirrt. Wenn ich auf "The original description page is/was here" klicke, lande ich wieder bei der alten Version mit den Metadaten. Aber nur, wenn ich nicht angemeldet bin, ansonsten komme ich zur Dateiversion von gestern. Hintergrund ist wohl der, dass ich die Datei ursprünglich auf Wikipedia hochgeladen habe, diese dann von einem user nach commons kopiert wurde. Irgendwo auf Wikipedia steckt anscheinend noch die alte Version. Auf dieser Seite sehe ich die alte Version, wenn ich mich vorher abmelde: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Epipactis_palustris-01-Kaernten-2008-Thomas_Huntke.jpg

Ergänzung: Sehe die alte Version nur mit dem Internet Explorer. Klingt irgendwie nach Browser-Cache - nur bin ich mit dem IE noch nie auf der Seite gewesen... ???!

Gruß, Thomas

nach BK: Äh, woran machst du jetzt fest, dass es die alte Version ist, am Bild oder an den Texten auf der Seite? Die Seite, die dir beim oben beschriebenen Ablauf angezeigt wird, ist m.W. nur scheinbar auf :de, wie ja auch im Kasten direkt unterm Bild angegeben wird: "Diese Datei und die Informationen unter dem roten Trennstrich werden aus dem zentralen Medienarchiv Wikimedia Commons eingebunden." --Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

TH: Unter "Dateiversionen" steht "aktuell 22:08, 1.Jul.2010". Dann tiefer unter der Überschrift "Metadaten" eine Tabelle mit den alten Metadaten. Ich habe das gerade nochmal an einem anderen Rechner ausprobiert, es geht auch hier genau nach dem obigen Ablauf: 1. abmelden, 2. Internet Explorer, 3. zu http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Epipactis_palustris-01-Kaernten-2008-Thomas_Huntke.jpg", 4. auf "The original description page is/was here" klicken, das führt zu http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Epipactis_palustris-01-Kaernten-2008-Thomas_Huntke.jpg mit der alten Version und der Metadatentabelle. Schräg!

Also wenn ich auf File:Epipactis palustris-01-Kaernten-2008-Thomas Huntke.jpg gehe (über die sprechen wir doch, oder?), dann werden überhaupt keine Metadaten angezeigt (der Abschnitt existiert nicht einmal) und im Kasten Dateiversionen wird die Version vom "01:17, 18. Aug. 2011" angezeigt. Dasselbe gilt auch wenn ich im Abschnitt "Ursprüngliches Datei-Logbuch" auf das Link "The original description page is/was here" klicke. Wohlgemerkt, alles ausgeführt im als admin angemeldeten Status via IE 8. Im unangemeldeten Status via Opera 11.5 ist es aber dasselbe, außer dass - wegen der fehlenden Zeitzonenkorrektur - ein um 2 Stunden früheres Datum (23:17, 17 August 2011) für die Version angezeigt wird. Meiner Klarheit halber, es geht dir nicht um die unter "Ursprüngliches Datei-Logbuch" befindlichen Logs, in denen u.a. dein Vorname auftaucht. Das ließe sich manuell entfernen. --Túrelio (talk) 12:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

TH: Ok, jetzt ist dort auch die aktuelle Version zu sehen, die Metadaten sind weg. Keine Ahnung was das war. Auf jeden Fall Danke für Deine Hilfe. Damit ist es dann wohl wirklich...

 Done. --Huntke(talk)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Motherteresa.JPG

I hope that you will remove the deletion tag attached to the image. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ähemm, what deletion tag File:Motherteresa.JPG? --Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

You tagged File:Motherteresa.JPG for deletion fearing the prayer to be copyright violation. But in the link cited ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Motherteresa.JPG ) I made it clear that the prayer is available @ Wikipedia itself and it was written by ST Francis centuries ago. Do you remember? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I do. But did you look at File:Motherteresa.JPG? Do you see a problem tag? No, because is was removed 10 days ago. --Túrelio (talk) 10:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 05:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Desfile na Avenida Alves Pereira (Jequié) - 1928.jpg

Hello Turélio, I don't know what is the thing with this Gomes Netto, but he can't claim any copyright over a photo published in 1928, which is now PD under Brazilian law. Cheers,-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 08:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

You are correct. Don't know why he does that. I asked him directly about it. --Túrelio (talk) 08:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

He has been doing that for quite a while, he says he uploaded it "by mistake" or something, he tried this before with Martin H. However, mistake or not, it's a very valuable historical photo documenting Carnival in Brazil in the early times. The only reason it's not in use is because people at wiki-pt probably don't even know it's here (it was badly categorized).-- Darwin ^Ahoy! 08:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, then it would be better if the images were in use, as we do often delete unused images on request of the uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 08:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Done, it's in use now... Amazing as it is, being the home of Brazilians, wiki-pt does not even has an article on the history of Carnival, or on Carnival of Bahia - people there seems to be more interested in the petty samba groups from their own barrios than anything else. Anyway, that's another story, what's important is that it's in use now. :) -- Darwin ^Ahoy! 08:29, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Flickr file

Hello Túrelio

Can you have a look and decide whether it will be deleted or not. I think they are about copyrighted character File:Angel Cat Sugar Messestand 2009.jpg File:Angel Cat Sugar Messestand 2010.jpg Thank very very much. Best Regards--Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 12:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I've left a comment at the uploader's talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 12:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

please delete this files

hi, please delete this files http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zbaszyn_zespol_zamkowy.JPG and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zbaszyn_browar_zamkowy.JPG they are wrong uploaded. There is a wikimedia error and this files aren't linked to wikipedia.

 Done. Please, always sign your comments. --Túrelio (talk) 13:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Modifications

Hi Túrelio, how are you? I had fear because in the baseboard of the pages of the book it has written: "direitos reservados" - rights reserved. But it is of 1930, and is legal today in Brazil, because it has 70 years more than. P.M.J. is "Prefeitura Municipal de Jequié" - Jequié City Council, and the coat is public domain. See you later. Thursday, 08/18/2011, 21:39 (Horário de Brasília - UTC−03:00). Gomes Netto.

Thank you

I used the Commonist, and I forget to put the cetegory, so..., but thanks. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 14:46, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 15:13, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Questioning

Hi there, you flagged several images that I uploaded, saying they were the wrong license or no permission was proven. In one case, it's a photo taken by me, of a 100-year old photo of my own grandfather, which was hanging on the wall of my grandfather's house. So how do I prove I have given permission to use a photo taken by myself? Other than by checking the box in the Upload application?

In other cases, the copyrights have long expired on 100-year old advertisements.

An and in other cases, the files are official photo portraits by universities of faculty members, or by federal governments of bureaucrats or military officers. Are those not public domain?

Thank you, OttawaAC (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

O.k., look at File:Canadian man fur coat 1910.jpeg. You claim to be the author and you claim it to be own work. None of both is true. (reproducing a 2-dim original doesn't make you the author) You entered the upload date into the date entry, which doesn't make sense; it should be the date (year) of the original. The date of your reproduction can be read directly from the EXIF data. You CC-BY-self-licensing is likely wrong if the original is already PD and as you are not the author. Most important is to determine the true copyright status. As the original is obviously in a frame, you should take the print out and look whether the is any information on its backside; date, description, country where photo was shot, name of the photographer or the photo studio. Besides, you categorized the imge into "Fur fairs in Frankfurt am Main". Is there any relation to Frankfurt? In the same manner you should check all other problem-tagged uploads. Thereafter we can look again, what the most appropriate license might be. --Túrelio (talk) 07:58, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the deletion from Commons, of the erroneous Tingidae file. Nice cat btw! :-) JonRichfield (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Status of my Wikimedia Referendum 2011 Vote

Hello. Yesterday I tried to vote in the image filter referendum, a referendum to gather more input into the development and usage of an opt-in personal image hiding feature.

But there was sudden internet disruption after I pressed the "submit vote" button.

Please let me know @ my talk page if my vote has been recorded because I am told that I can vote only once.

Your kind gesture in this regard will help me in contributing constructively to the Wiki Projects, which is also my intention, aim and effort. Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, my voting page tells me that I have already voted and that I can send the form again and my previous vote will be overwritten then. Why don't you try that? --Schwäbin (talk) 07:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, I have now voted by myself, so that I know what the regular procedure is. After clicking on the vote-button, were you shown a separate page confirming your vote, that consisted mainly of a squared block full of PG code? If not, I would recommend to try to repeat your voting. Being an admin gives me no more authority than you to see into the records of a secret poll, which is performed by a Wikimedia-independent organization. --Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 09:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Questionable uploads from "UED77"

Hi. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. The problem was that one of the the upload guides in Portuguese included my username and the name Cesáreo Fraile Izquierdo (which is someone else's), and some uploaders copy-pasted that verbatim into the file descriptions. I have since replaced most references to my name, but the problem isn't completely solved. I will work with other translators of help pages to make sure this cannot happen again. —UED77 (talk) 10:23, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

5 years of good work - 5 Jahre gute Arbeit

Apfelküchli passend zur Jahreszeit

Dear Túrelio,

for your efforts protecting commons against copyvios and vandalism and also being kind and helpful in case of questions or tasks, I would like to thank you.

Hallo Túrelio,

für Deinen großartigen Einsatz, vor allem um Commons gegen Vandalen und Urheberrechtsverletzungen zu schützen, sowie das zur Seite stehen, wenn es Fragen und Aufgaben gibt, möchte ich mich bedanken.

• So, das hast Du dir wirklich verdient :-) Ich teile so etwas normalerweise nicht aus, weil ich es persönlich nicht mag. Aber wie ich lese ist es hier erwünscht. Uf wiedrluagn -- RE rillke questions? 20:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank, Rainer. Schade dass MediaWiki noch keine Schnittstelle zum nächsten Backofen hat. --Túrelio (talk) 20:30, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Turm am Thurn-und-Taxis-Platz

@Category:Turm am Thurn-und-Taxis-Platz: Hallo Túrelio, es wäre mE sehr sinnvoll, wenn man in der Löschbegründung die neue Kategorie verlinken würde. :) ... nur als Hinweis, falls du daran noch nicht dachtest. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 14:14, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

An meinem 5. Commons-Geburtstag hätte ich mich zwar mehr über eine Torte o.ä. als erste Nachricht auf meiner Disku gefreut, aber als admin ist das wohl zuviel erwartet ;-).

Nun, ich habe die Löschung nicht beantragt und deshalb die edit-summary nicht selbst formuliert. Wenn infolge Skriptfehler garnichts in der edit-summary erscheint (kommt gelegentlich vor), dann setze ich natürlich manuell etwas hinein. Hier stand immerhin "content moved to Cat:Nextower (due to namechange)", womit die neue cat zumindest irgendwie benannt, wenngleich nicht verlinkt ist. Ich versuch in Zukunft drauf zu achten. --Túrelio (talk) 18:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Kuchen ist unterwegs zu dir

So ein Mist - nun habe ich vergessen bevor ich eine Nachricht an dich schreibe auf dein Krönungsdatum zu achten. ;) Ich bitte zutiefst betrübt um Enschuldigung und habe meine Arbeiter beauftragt dir ein vorzügliches Kuchenstück zuzustellen und bedanke mich damit für deine fleißige Arbeit! Wow - 5 Jahre schon! :)

Es denkt halt nicht jeder daran, dass ein Link sehr praktisch wär - dann bleibt es leider am Admin hängen. War ja nur eine Anregung - wenn du meinst es kostet zu viel Arbeit und bringt zu wenig, dann achte einfach nicht darauf. Ich persönlich achte darauf. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 22:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Krönungsdatum noch nicht, nur das Prinzengeburtsdatum. Hier, schon von vor deinem letzten Edit, mit "Widmung";-). --Túrelio (talk) 06:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Hehe, danke für die Widmung. Und bitte sehe meinen Hinweis/Vorschlag/whatever doch etwas positiver, als du ihn offensichtlich auffasst. Er ist wirklich nicht negativ, sondern nur als Verbesserungsvorschlag gemeint. Wenn du soetwas nicht möchtest, dann sage mir das und ich werde versuchen dir soetwas zukünftig nicht zu sagen. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn du mir mitteilst, was du für verbesserungswürdig hältst.

Achja: was meinst du mit "1 content issue" in deinem Abstimmungskommentar? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 20:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Nein, so negativ seh ich das schon nicht. Der "1 content issue" ist derzeit noch quasi das Hauptthema auf deiner Userseite (ob das nach deiner Wahl noch angemessen/sinnvoll ist, solltest du selbst überlegen, was nicht heißen soll, dass man als admin seine persönlichen Überzeugungen aufgeben müsste). Letzteres war aber nicht der Grund der Erwähnung, sondern um auszudrücken, dass dieser Meinungsunterschied, über den sich die Leute hier manchmal die Köpfe eingeschlagen, micht nicht von der Pro-Stimme abgehalten hat. --Túrelio (talk) 21:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Achso, danke, das Thema meinst du (wusste nicht (mehr?!), dass du, deiner Aussage entsprechend, auf der "Gegenseite" bist). Danke für dein Vertrauen/Zutrauen. Ich habe mir vor der Wahl schon über meine Benutzerseite Gedanken gemacht, mich aber explizit dafür entschieden sie so zu lassen. Und voraussichtlich wird sich das nach der Wahl auch nicht ändern (nicht auf jeden Fall, weil ich dann hier Admingottheit bin). Ich gehe davon aus, dass sich nicht wenige Abstimmende über meinen Userseiteninhalt im Klaren sind (entweder erst zur Wahl oder schon vorher) und ihn somit billigen oder gar gut finden (soll ja auch vorkommen ;-) ). Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 23:14, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Kuchen ist unterwegs zu dir

Nett, dass mein Bild so gut ankommt. "Kuchen ist unterwegs" ist so exotisch als Intepretation, da wäre ich nie drauf gekommen - Chapeau ! :-)

mfG--Alfredte (talk) 20:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)alfredte

Hat gut geschmeckt ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Own work?

Is this uploader's images own work in your opinion? The uploader has 1 copyright violation...but that is not the issue. The problem is the picture's resolution is so small that even a low resolution camera will take pictures at a higher resolution than this? I wonder if its truly own work. It seems as if this person is uploading images for 1 wiki article. I guess taht is OK but given the images supertiny size, I doubt it is really own work. The images look like they were taken from a brochure or a website...not a camera. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

 Comment:This image below is in black & white while the other photos by the uploader are in colour:

• File:Dusit history.jpg Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

All copied from hotel website. The b/w one from a press kit pdf file. --Túrelio (talk) 06:11, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• Thank You. I thought it was all a copy vio. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName334321

UserSpray21321 Hello Turelio delete them and why the pictures say one reason — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.121.141.253 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 22. August 2011 (UTC)

Can you explain what you meant, please? BTW, please read COM:TALK -- RE rillke questions? 17:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Turelio There are two identical pictures in the Commmos Please look this page http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Eva_Longoria there a two indentical pictures Number 3 and 4

No, they are not identical. Look at the mouth/lips of the depicted. --Túrelio (talk) 10:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName334321 Hello Turelio one question why others can upload pictures and I do not

Because you are not logged in and there is no registered user named 334321. I would recommend that you go to this page and choose your language in the upper box. Then read about how you can join Commons and how you can sign your comments. --Schwäbin (talk) 12:07, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName334321 hello turelio how to get a picture with bot — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.121.141.253 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 23. August 2011 (UTC)

Do you want to fetch a batch of images? Your questions look more disruptive than helpful. I suggest, you go to COM:HD and ask your questions coherently. -- RE rillke questions? 17:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Rainer, Du kannst Dir die Mühe sparen... --Schwäbin (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Dear Túrelio, I completely support Rillke's apple pie. Thank you for all your wonderful work! Have a great day, Mathonius (talk) 07:04, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Dank je wel! --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Please, unblock file File:Guzeriev.Ogonek5.jpg

Please, unblock file File:Guzeriev.Ogonek5.jpg - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Guzeriev.Ogonek5.jpg permission -

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 #2011081910004194. 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=2011081910004194 Find other files from the same ticket:

--Виктор Горький (talk) 09:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Eddie Ng at Evolve MMA in Singapore.jpg

The owner of Evolve MMA has sent an email to: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to confirm he gives permission for this pic to be released and I have updated the information to reflect this. Thanks for your assistance. --Sadoka74 (talk) 09:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 13:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Gata.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Gata.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

High Contrast (talk) 11:03, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Das Ding (die automatisierte Nachricht) ist auch falsch programmiert. Nicht der Bearbeiter der letzten Version, sondern der ursprünglich Hochladende muss benachrichtigt werden... --Schwäbin (talk) 11:27, 26 August 2011 (UTC) kann leider kein Wort programmieren

Momentan werden alle uploader benachrichtigt. Manche nehmen's gelassen andere werden böse ... Könnte man leicht ändern, aber das hat dann wieder den Nachteil, dass man evtl. nicht gewarnt wird. I.d.R. überschreibt man ja nur (Retusche, SVG fix, ...), wenn es keinen Löschgrund gibt. -- RE rillke questions? 11:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Na, wenn alle benachrichtigt werden, ist das immerhin besser als meine Vermutung. --Schwäbin (talk) 12:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Oops, gut zu wissen, dass alle in der version-history benachrichtigt werden. Da werde ich die Skriptversion von no-perm und no-source selbst auch vorsichtiger benutzen müssen. --Túrelio (talk) 12:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Wie gesagt: Es ist ziemlich einfach möglich das zu ändern. Wäre denn eine "custom option" (eine Zeile Code, die man mit in seine JS packt) erwünscht? -- RE rillke questions? 12:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Erwünscht schon; nur bin ich gerade mal froh vermuten zu können dass "JS" wohl Javascript bedeuten soll, das wars dan aber schon ;-(. --Túrelio (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ja. Sorry. Ja die Abkürzungen. Ich war kürzlich in Frankreich, da haben die noch viel schlimmere... Es sollte JavaScript heißen. Wenn Du fragen hast, dann scheue dich nicht mir diese zu stellen. -- RE rillke questions? 12:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, meine monobook.js, wo solcher Code — lang zurück liegenden Erinnerungen zufolge — wohl reingehört, ist hier. Du kannst die erwähnte "custom option", sofern sie gerade bei dir herumliegt, dort gerne hineinsetzen. --Túrelio (talk) 12:59, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Nur mal doof gefragt: Wäre diese Sonderlösung via eigenem .js denn sinnvoll? Ich habe die Funktionen ja über die Helferlein aktiviert, ich denke, es wäre gut, wenn die „offizielle“ Funktion auch so arbeitet, wie es die meisten Anwender erwarten. Auch, wenn das möglicherweise heißt, dass wir noch Jahre drauf warten müssten... <seufz> --Schwäbin (talk) 13:40, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich hatte Rainers Ausdruck "custom option" zumindest so verstanden. --Túrelio (talk) 13:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich habe folgendes vor: Eine Änderung durch einen Admin an MediaWiki:AjaxQuickDelete.js vornehmen zu lassen, so dass in die eigene JS nur eine Zeile nach der Art var AjaxQuickDeleteNotifyOnlyInitialUploader = true; eingesetzt werden muss. Ansonsten müssen wir erst lang und breit diskutieren, was denn der Nutzer nun erwartet. Ich finde es so wie es ist nämlich nicht schlecht. Ist ja eigentlich nicht schwierig, so eine Meldung von seiner Disk zu entfernen. -- RE rillke questions? 19:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich muss mich korrigieren: Das Skript benachrichtigt nur denjenigen, der keinen Revert durchgeführt hat. Ich vermute, die Manipulation in der Versionstabelle hat das Skript durcheinandergebracht, kann mir diesen Fall aber nicht recht erklären. Mysteriös. -- RE rillke questions? 18:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Da hat eine Zeile Code gefehlt. Nix mysteriös. Reverter werden nicht mehr benachrichtigt. -- RE rillke questions? 20:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Sehr gut. --Túrelio (talk) 20:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Duplicated photos

Hello Turélio!

I noticed you reverted duplicate tag in File:San antonio tex 1939.jpg‎. Would you mind explain why is so diferent of File:Aerial view of San Antonio. Texas, and the surrounding plains, 12-1939 - NARA - 512843.tif? I don't want to do the same mistake again.

Thank you.OTAVIO1981 (talk) 13:18, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, there were actually 2 problems. You had, likely without intention, made an overcross double duplicate-tagging: jpg->tif and tif->jpg, which might - in the worst case - have led to the deletion of both files. That was the main reason why I reverted both of your dupe-taggings. Besides of this, this tagging made really no sense, because already when viewing the thumbs, you see that the jpg has overall worse quality, less detail, less gray, so it should never replace the better tif. What might be acceptable is replacing the jpg by the tif. However, I am not totally sure whether all our projects render tifs. Therefore, you should manually replace File:San antonio tex 1939.jpg in 1 instance on each separate project by the tif and look whether the image is correctly shown. If yes, you might re-tag this file as dupe. --Túrelio (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I thought both files should be tagged and someone else would decided if it's correct and replace/delete the worst picture. Next time, I'll tag just the worst picture. Thanks for your explanation. Regards, OTAVIO1981 (talk) 18:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Copy

Hello,

Do you have a copy for File talk:Cathédrale de Reims et Palais du Tau.jpg ? Ludo (talk) 08:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I have the newspaper issue. I could mail you a scan. --Túrelio (talk) 08:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes thanks. wiki.ludo(at)gmail(dot)com

Ludo (talk) 08:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Irene

I don't know where to respond to comment message, so thank you. I appreciate it.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

No need to response. Take care! --Túrelio (talk) 14:34, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

RE: aglow.jpg

I sent you an email, I did get expressed permission to utilize this photo. Thanks!

Anthony

Pbanto (talk) 22:12, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied by email. --Túrelio (talk) 22:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Revistas Aventuras na História.JPG

I put the magazines on the table, and snapped the photo with the camera. Note: Sorry if my English is not good.

pt:Coloquei as revistas na mesa, e bati a foto. --Rafael Wiki (talk) 22:28, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

O.k., thanks for the feedback. I think at least the image on the cover with the mafiosi[45] (lower left) is still copyrighted. By taking a photo of the cover, you have made a so-called derivative work, which violates the copyright of the painter of the original image. The fact that the editor of the magazine got permission to print this image on his cover, does not mean that derivatives or copies of the same image can be distributed under a free license. The other cover images may be already old enough to be out of copyright. So, I would recommend you to repeat your photo without this Mafiosi magazine issue. --Túrelio (talk) 22:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

New message

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at Allan kirtley's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mathonius (talk) 00:12, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Commented. --Túrelio (talk) 18:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

This Deletion request

Hello Turelio

Could you please close it. This image is a clear copyvio and meets the criteria for speedy deletion but it has been abandoned so long. Thank you very much--Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Already done by mattbuck. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

zwei Logos

Moin Túrelio,

sorry, dass ich dich hier im Hinterzimmer so überfalle...

Könntest du dir eventuell die beiden DRs zu zwei Logos einmal anschauen? Der Uploader hat schon ein speedy reingeknallt (recht sicher wegen der CC-0-Lizenz, das ist eine abstruse Freigabe für Logos des eigenen Hauptprodukts), auf de.WP liegen die beiden Dateien inzwischen als Bild-LogoSH. Dass mir 178.198.54.36 unlautere Absichten und Lügen vorwirft macht die Sache nicht schöner...

Danke, Rbrausse (talk) 17:34, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Hab mal Kommentare in beiden DRs hinterlassen und werde sie, sofern es keinen Widerspruch gibt (scheinen ja alle dafür zu sein) vielleicht morgen löschen. --Túrelio (talk) 18:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

dankeschön. Das letzte "Sorgenkind" aus dem Abacus-Umkreis ist dann die Redundanz dieses Punkte-Rasters: File:AbaLogo.jpg und File:Aba Logo.jpg. Ersteres würde ich wegen der CC-0-Problematik löschen, das Design ist primitiv genug, dass PD-textlogo selbst auf commons funktioniert (wenn es nicht reicht: Verwendet wird das Ding nirgendwo, wenn beide Links rot werden würde sich niemand beklagen :)). Rbrausse (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

FoP

As far as I know, it is in the Commons project scope to "be realistically useful for an educational purpose." It is a requirement for publishing content here. In a broad sense, as in our scope educational means informationsl implicitly, all public news content published here fulfills the requirements of the Spanish law. Barcex (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

If I would print this image onto a T shirt or onto a coffee cup, would this be covered by FOP of Spain? Likely not; and that's the problem. However, I concede that the first section of our FOP-Spain entry reads somewhat misleading to me; as IMO it only refers to media (strictu sensu), but not to us (Commons/Wikipedia). As this is not an urgent matter for me, I first could put up our FOP-Spain entry for discussion on Commons talk:Licensing, using this image as example. --Túrelio (talk) 19:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Ford Expedition

Hello, I was thinking that you deleted that image I, that other day, uploaded. --RoyPack August 28, 2011

Yes, because it was considered a duplicate of File:2007-Ford-Expedition-EL-Limited.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 05:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for File Deletions

Hello. I request you to kindly delete the following file which I had uploaded:

• Boy on Camel RearView.jpg (file)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boy_on_Camel_RearView.jpg

• Boy on Camel.jpg (file)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boy_on_Camel.jpg

• ShazTamkanatAutographedPostCard.jpg (file)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ShazTamkanatAutographedPostCard.jpg

Regards,Hindustanilanguage (talk) 08:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, without a reason, Túrelio will find it difficult to delete. Please read this help page to find out how to ask for file deletion. --Schwäbin (talk) 09:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I uploaded the files. The boy who shown in the pictures on Camel - his father says that he has no problem with the photos that I have taken but requested me to take them off from the web. In the ShazTamkanatAutographedPostCard.jpg, I forgot to delete the addressee's name and hence would like to request speedy deletion. Please delete these files at the earliest. Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 10:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I would recommend, you put the deletion template plus reason into the files and any admin coming across your request will then take care of it. (I am not an admin) --Schwäbin (talk) 11:02, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Danke fürs Kümmern. --Túrelio (talk) 12:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Bilderklau von User:SimeonSollberger

Hallo Túrelio,

du hattest den o.g Benutzer zwar schon mal angesprochen, aber dennoch lädt er weiter Bilder hoch. Ich glaube auch nicht, dass er überhaupt eine Fraigabe erteilen könnte, da alle bisherigen Bilder den Anschein haben, als stammen sie aus der Werkstatt eines professionellen Fotografen. Daher ist fraglich, selbst wenn die Freigabe einginge, ob das Urheberrecht überhaupt beim User liegt. Gruß, -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 11:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Wo st 01, ich habe aufgrund des Widerspruch das speedy in einen regulären LA umgewandelt. Das ist hier unproblematisch, weil bei diesem Foto m.E. keine schnelle Verbreitung zu erwarten ist. --Túrelio (talk) 12:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Ja, danke. -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 13:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Delete these 20 panoramio images

Dear Turelio, Can you please delete these 20 old 2008 uploaded panoramio images. I revoked my pass because the permission was only for wikipedia. Today when I check the copyright owner's permission statement on the file's talkpages the permission statement is gone too....even though I had translated them from French into English in 2010. But as I said the permission is only 'for wikipedia' which is a restriction...as Admin Lupo would say for images uploaded before 2009. I think now that its better to just delete them all. I hope you can help. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Admin Lupo just said here not to worry...that the 20 photos will be deleted in the end. But if they will be deleted anyway, why not delete them now? No harm is done to Commons as most of the 20 images here are either barely used, unused or replacable. Its your decision...of course. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll look into it later. --Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• OK. Just consider my proposal. If you wish not to act, that is OK too. Just look at the photos first. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

File:San Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer - Iglesia de la Vera Cruz.jpg

Hello. I don't know the name of the artist, and yes, it is permanently installed there. The place is a public church. --Carlos yo (Discusión) 21:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. However, we will have to check whether interior space is really coverd by FOP exemption of copyright law of Chile. --Túrelio (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

File:A whisper to Jenn Turcott.jpg

Hi, could you please review your deletion of File:A whisper to Jenn Turcott.jpg

I've uploaded a number of self-created images to Commons. My upload and declaration made them free images. I coincidentally also uploaded them to FlickR. On FlickR, I normally mark everything as "All Rights Reserved". It's easier that way. This image wasn't taken from FlickR, so there should be no FlickR review. Many free images are listed on other websites as "All Rights Reserved". This doesn't make them unfree if the owner of the rights freely releases them (as I did). Once rights are released under CC, they can not be taken back. Sadly, somebody has been going to my self-created images and adding a FlickR review tag to them. The same issue also effects hundreds of other images I've uploaded, so I'd like some kind of consistant approach to this. I'm obviously not going to personally upload hundreds of images on here and/or FlickR. So, they'll have to be deleted if there isn't a reasonable resolution. --Rob (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I too am wondering what is the ruling on this issue, as it has caused some confusion. -Aaaccc (talk), 29 August 2011 (UTC)

@Aaaccc, this resulted from your FR-tagging of the image[46] (likely not visible for you, as image still deleted). --Túrelio (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Oops, it seems you just gave me the warning, but somebody else deleted it. I'll put the message there. --Rob (talk) 00:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. In addition, I even challenged the negative FlickrReview-result (resulting from the FR-tagging by Aaaccc) by adding the comment "As the uploader clearly is the Flickr user himself, it should be no problem." from 18:23, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[47]. Furthermore, see [48]. --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I restored the image. What do we do for the template in this case? Yann (talk) 07:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

That's what we have OTRS for. Don't know what OTRS requires from Flickr users, but in Rob's case, mentioning in his Flickr profile that he's also active at Wikimedia Commons as User:Thivierr might be a simple way to establish the connection. Then Rob could file an OTRS release covering all (past and future) image uploads from Flickr account thivierr uploaded here by User:Thivierr. Once the OTRS ticket is processed, add the appropriate OTRS tag to all (new and old) uploads by Rob. That should be sufficient to prevent similar problems in the future. Lupo 09:57, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Images

You have deleted a few of my images: File:Cup (Qero).jpg, File:Ceremonial Knife (Tumi).jpg, and File:Head of Old God, Huehueteotl.jpg. I have emailed a consent form from the photographer as well as the institution to OTRS. My images were flagged on 8/28/2011 and were deleted only 2 days later. I had responded that I did have permission from the institution and the photographer, but my images were swiftly deleted despite that. I understand that Wikimedia cannot just take the word of editors that images have been released, but it would have been appreciated if you had given me time to make the proper corrections before deleting my images. Thank you. ArtLibrn2011 (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of that sort actually means only "hiding" from regular users. The images are not really gone. Every admin can un-delete it with 2 clicks, when there is good cause to do so. When I deleted these images, they were tagged as copyvio, which means speedy deletion. There was no information on the image page or their talkpage that you had sent permission to OTRS. After sending permission to OTRS, we always recomend to tag the image with {{OTRS pending}}, because admin and OTRS volunteers (those who can work on these permissions) are not the same. --Túrelio (talk) 20:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Gala Inc/gPotato/Kikugawa

Hi. Thanks for your good work on Wikimedia. I have just sent in permission notices emails to permissions-commons(at)wikimedia.org. I am very new to Wiki and have been trying to follow the rules. You were just so fast on flagging them! Some of the images are even on my userpage and not published yet on Wiki (the Satoru Kikugawa article that is). Anyway, I hope I have followed the rules by sending the email to wikimedia. I am in charge the company's branding, image and communications. Let me know if there is anything else I can do to say within the guidelines of Wikimedia. Danke.

Hi, you should add to all those image for which you sent a permission to OTRS, the following: {{OTRS pending}}. This will prevent them from being deleted prematurely. --Túrelio (talk) 07:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I have added the OTRS pending to each image. I also added the source of the images (on my company's corporate and gaming websites). Sorry if I made extra work for you! I'm still learning but trying to follow the rules! Mtstaffa (talk) 08:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 08:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. So I have received confirmation emails from OTRS for all of the images I have uploaded recently. As I am new, I was wondering if you should remove the flag/warnings about my images on my talk page (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mtstaffa). I don't know how it works, but it seems that they are still flagged by you for deletion after 7 days, but if you click on the actual image files, they are all approved with valid permission usage. I'm just checking with you to make sure they won't be accidentally deleted by you or some bot in a week. Danke! Mtstaffa (talk) 07:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Re:File:Arrecife. Lanzarote-21.jpg and File:Arrecife. Lanzarote-20.jpg

I don't know the author of the sculptures. In spain, works permanently located in parks or on streets, squares or other public thoroughfares may be freely reproduced, distributed and communicated by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes. Thanks--Miguel Bugallo 15:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

See {{FoP-Spain}}--Miguel Bugallo 15:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I know about FOP. However, it is morally appropriate (and eventually even legally required) to mention the original artist, especially with recent works. --Túrelio (talk)

Ok, but it's not moral appropiate to me, perhaps to Commons, and I, and you, and we, are commons--Miguel Bugallo 16:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

(poor english) I can walk by the street and photograph, publish the photography, independent of meeting the author. (es) Pienso que tengo ese derecho: En España la calle es de quien la pasea, y es un hecho que puede ser derecho porque nuestra legislación así lo permite--Miguel Bugallo 16:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for your kind support during this and the previous year. Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:40, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Tireless Administrator Barnstar

			The Tireless Commons Administrator Barnstar
			I hereby award Administrator Túrelio this special barnstar for the extra huge contributions as Administrator on Commons. Well done and keep going! Mit freundlichen Grüßen -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

For more than a year, Túrelio has been consistently the most productive Administrator, doing about 13% of all Administrative actions.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Compliments bravo! :) Antonio g60 (talk) 11:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

First 3-country (Belgium, Netherlands, Germany) meeting in Aachen

Dear Túrelio,

Thank you for your invitation to the 3-country meeting. Unfortunately I have already another appointment with friends this date.
Would this appointmentment be cancelled in the meantime, I would then try to come to Aachen.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please, unblock file my files

Please, unblock these files as I have received OTRS approval for each file:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Business_gPotato_logo.jpeg (OTRS ticket #2011083010006143)
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satoru_Kikugawa.jpeg (OTRS ticket #2011083010006143)
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GPotato_logo.png (OTRS ticket #2011083010006143)
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satoru_Kikugawa_signature.gif (OTRS ticket #2011083010006143)
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satoru_Kikugawa_signature(no_background).gif (OTRS ticket #2011083010006143)
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kikugawa_signature.gif (OTRS ticket #2011090110000988)
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GPotato.com_Screenshot.png (OTRS ticket #2011083010006143)

Danke! Mtstaffa (talk) 01:33, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Túrelio is away from Commons for a couple of days. All of the files above appear to be available for all uses, so if you believe there is a problem, please explain more fully.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Our OTRS colleague Adrignola has already taken ov er and confirmed all the files. --Túrelio (talk) 08:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for all your work, insight and help teaching me all the rules. Glad everything is sorted now. Mtstaffa (talk) 01:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for deleting the three files which I had requested. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 05:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Replacing of flags due the CommonsDelinker

Would you please explain this action of replacing the flags with File:Flag_of_Croatian_Republic_of_Herzeg-Bosnia.svg? The flag have wrong colours and is not a copy or scaled down variant of the removed file. User who uploaded the flag mentioned above has already been warned not to put them on bs.wiki. If possible please answer on bswiki or meta. Thanks --WizardOfOz ^talk 21:17, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry hab übersehen wem ich schrieb drum auf en. Nicht desto trotz sind die Dateien die dieser benutzer hochgeladen hat alle samt mit falschen Lizenzen versehen und fast alle falsch gefärbt. Gruß --WizardOfOz ^talk 21:24, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Túrelio is probably off line for the next day or two -- I'd be happy to help, but please give me a link or someplace to start, as I don't understand the problem.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Kat verschieben

Hallo, ich habe heute die Category:Air traffic control angelegt. Leider ist diese Kategorie zu eng gefasst. Könntest du sie nach Category:Air space verschieben? Danke und Gruß, -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 10:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Wo st 01, bist du dir da sicher? Ich habe zwar keinerlei Beziehung zu diesem Thema, aber bereits beim 1. Blick fiel mir auf: diese cat hat eine Reihe von subcats, die ebenfalls "traffic control" im Namen tragen. Zudem finde ich "Air space" ziemlich nichtssagend. Der Sinn unserer Kategorien ist es ja bei der Suche zu helfen. Nur mal so als erste Gedanken; nichts endgültiges. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Ja, Air Traffic Control ist eigentlich alles, was mit dem Fluglotsenwesen zu tun hat. "Control zones" beinhaltet nur die "Kontrollzonen um die Flughäfen. Die Kategorie sollte auf Kontrollierter Luftraum oder Luftraumstruktur in Deutschland verschoben werden. -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 12:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke

dass du so oft so schnell aufräumst. --Martina talk 21:05, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Gern geschehn. Am Donnerstag habe ich übrigens etwa 3 Minuten auf Hamburgischem Boden geweilt, beim Umsteigen vom Zug aus Köln in den nach Kiel. --Túrelio (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

So schnell hätten wir nicht mal direkt am Bahnsteig einen Kaffee geschafft. :-) Bist du eigentlich bei der WikiCon dabei? --Martina talk 21:42, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Leider nein. --Túrelio (talk) 22:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Liborio Bellomo.jpg

Can you not have this image deleted without a proper deletion discussion. It clearly does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion as there is evidence that it is an FBI image and therefore in the public domain. The person who nominated it for deletion gives no evidence that the image is not in the public domain. He claims the image belongs to the New York Police Department, but gives no evidence to support this claim. --Ted87 (talk) 01:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. However, the same about missing evidence goes for you. You'll have to provide more robust evidence for the claimed PD status. --Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Ted87 (talk) 20:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

thank you

thanks for the guideline that you ve given, im new in uploading stuffs here in commons, next time ill do better, thank you and take care Eutoniummolecule talk 11:05, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 06:59, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

von Invitto (talk · contribs)

Es ist ja schön wenn Ihr Superprofis meint alles zu wissen! Ich weiss nicht ob Du schon mal bei ner Messe und ähnlichem warst, wahrscheinlich nicht. Wenn doch dann müßest eigentlich wissen das es allgemein üblich ist, das man dort mit Warenproben,Informationsmaterial,Pressematerial etc. eingedeckt wird. Insofern ist es nur logisch das von den von Nissan verteilten Pressematerial auch Photos bei der von Dir angegebenen Seite anzufinden ist. −− 10:06, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Invitto, mir ist nicht kar, was du mir eigentlich sagen willst, außer vielleicht Ärger abzulassen, dass deine sämtlichen Uploads gelöscht wurden — übrigens die wenigstens von mir.

Aber egal, nehmen wir mal File:Niisan NV 400.jpg, das du am 4.9.2011 unter der Angabe "eigenes Werk" und "author=Invitto" hochgeladen hast. Wie kommt es dann, dass das absolut identische Foto in gleicher 300x200-Auflösung bereits am 24.9.2010 auf der Seite http://www.transport-online.de/Gueterverkehr/News-Nachrichten/Fahrzeug-und-Technik/64706/Nissan-Neuer-Transporter-kommt-naechstes-Jahr-Der-3-5-Tonnen-Transporter-NV400-wird-Nissan-im-kommenden-Jahr-a.html stand, und zwar mit der Angabe "Foto: T.Pietsch"? Haben die dein Foto geklaut und dann sogar noch eine Urheberrechtsberühmung begangen? Da müsste dein Rechtsanwalt ja begeistert sein. --Túrelio (talk) 10:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Siehe auch User talk:Lupo#Invitto... Lupo 10:49, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Habe Invitto gerade auf unbestimmte Zeit geblockt, nachdem er sich nun noch ein Flickrwashing-Konto zugelegt hat und via dieses Bilder hier hochgeladen hat. Könntest Du bitte auf de-WP die Sache weiterverfolgen; Invitto lädt auch dort solche Bildchen hoch. Lupo 06:21, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Ich bin auf :de aber nur normaler User. Hab Saibo mal angesprochen. --Túrelio (talk) 06:52, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Würzburg

Hallo Turelio, könntest du bitte File:Fürstbischöfliche Residenz in Würzburg.jpg und File:Festung Marienberg in Würzburg.jpg gegeneinander "austauschen", die Bezeichnungen sind genau falsch herum. Grüße --Bjs (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done: File:Festung Marienberg in Würzburg.jpg and File:Residenz Würzburg 2011.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke! --Bjs (talk) 20:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Use of images

Hi

You have been very helpful in the past and I need your help again.

I am writing an article which I shall be posting on wikipedia concerning the ecclesiastical sculptor Nathaniel Hitch.

Some of his works are in Wales and I found some excellent photographs of the works on a website. I approached the website to ask if I could use the images and they said yes.

I then uploaded the images to wikicommons and said that they go into the public domain. in other words I made no effort to Protect the copyright and stop anyone using the images for commercial purposes.

The original owner of the images has had second thoughts and although they are happy that I use the images in my article They do not wish to run any risk of the images being used elsewhere without their permission.

I do not think this is possible and would appreciate your advice.

if I am correct and the images cannot be used in wikipedia and copyright retained, would it be possible to Send you details of the offending images and ask you to delete them? There are about five images involved. Perhaps I can remove them myself?

Many thanks

Weglinde (talk) 11:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh my, was the rights holder uncomfortable with the images being put into public domain or in general with being used elsewhere? If the first was the problem, the images might be put under one of our recommended licenses (such as Creative Commons-Attribution-ShareAlike), which leaves a little bit of control for the rights holder, as any re-user has to credit the author/rights holder. As far as I know, :en wikipedia does not allow Wikipedia-only images, except in cases of fair use, which require that there is no free replacement image available. However, fair-use image have to uploaded locally at :en. --Túrelio (talk) 14:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I think he was worried about any commercial type use elsewhere and has now asked for a licence type similar to Flikr Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License. Hope you know this type of licence. I suspect this is not possible. Please confirm and if as I suspect the image owner cannot have the sort of protection he wants please advise how I can get the offending images removed. Weglinde (talk) 14:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Weglinde, may I assist? On Commons, we can only accept free licenses (please read this help page), Wikimedia Commons accepts only free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, anytime, for any purpose. [...] Media licensed under non-commercial only licenses also are not accepted.

To be safe as uploader ≠ copyright holder, it is recommended to have the copyright holder send permission according to this template to the support team. Since they have to specify the intended license in that permission, you make sure they know about the possibility of commercial use. --Schwäbin (talk) 17:06, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

@Weglinde, if they cannot agree to any license without no-commercial-use restriction, you can either put {{Non-commercial}} on the image page or open a regular deletion request. --Túrelio (talk) 18:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Schwäbin and Túrelio. Thanks for your advice. The copyright holder would only be happy to cede non-commercial use so clearly I cannot use the images in my article. I now want to delete the images from wikicommons. Please advise how I open a regular deletion request. Thanks again Weglinde (talk) 21:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

As you didn't disclose to which image this problem refers, let's take your File:Buxton War Memorial 2.jpg for example. Left to the image you should see 3 "boxes" in a column, the lowest one with the header "tools", depending on your language preferences. The 6th entry should say something as "propose for deletion". Click on it and see. If the mentioned box or entry is not present (depending on your personal preferences configuration) you have to do it manually. Open the image oage for editing and enter {{Delete}} and add behind the word delete |1=<reason for deletion> (without the < brackets). After saving you will get further instructions. --Túrelio (talk) 06:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Looks as though copyright holder prepared to compromise and would be happy with "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike". Please confirm that I can change the nature of the licence on any given image and that if that is "Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike" then I can use the image in a wikipedia article. Look forward to your answer. My fingers are crossed!

Weglinde (talk) 10:58, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but the NoCommercialUse restriction is a no-go on Commons (and likely also on :en). In case you didn't know that by yourself already, didn't Schwäbin express that quite clearly in her above comment? --Túrelio (talk) 11:02, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

No need to be rude! If I had understood this from Schwäbin's comments I would not have asked the question. "if you didn't know that by yourself already". Again if I had known the answer I would not have asked the question. Anyway just forget the whole issue. I will try to withdraw image. Weglinde (talk) 13:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if you took this for rude. But, a few hours before putting your question, you had written by yourself "The copyright holder would only ... cede non-commercial use, so clearly I cannot use the images in my article", thereby showing that you did know that NoComm is not allowed. Therefore, your question made no sense to me. --Túrelio (talk) 13:38, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. I withdraw remark. I was getting frustrated! Can we try again- If you look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bodelwydden_Church.jpg You will see the licence selected was Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. I would like to change this to Attribution ShareAlike 3.00 unported (CCBY-SA 3.0) Is this possible and how is it done. The copyright holder said he woulod be happy with this licence. It was my mistake to introduce the word "non-commercial".

Weglinde (talk) 17:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Please let the copyright holder himself send permission directly to the support team and they will set the license as specified by the copyright holder (permission according to this template). I recommend not to change that yourself. --Schwäbin (talk) 18:25, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I am a little confused since the picture you are referring to states that you took the picture yourself... --Schwäbin (talk) 18:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay I shall tell the copyright holder to approach the support team. I understand your confusion but I made a mistake in saying that I took the picture myself.......

Weglinde (talk) 19:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I have added a OTRS-pending tag to File:Bodelwydden Church.jpg to prevent premature deletion and replaced the "own" by the name that you had put behind your username, assuming that this was the real photographer. So, when the photographer has sent his permission to OTRS, an OTRS volunteer will check it and replace the pending tag by an OTRS-ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

1931 map

Hi. I was not aware that the word has some bad rep. However, I did this on purpose. The population census actually lists them as evangelicals, not as protestants. That's interesting, I would think. A similar weird thing appeared on the montenegro language census for 2003 - they have both bosnian and bosniak languages listed on there! So unusual things pop up from time to time. Anyways, here is the 1931 census according to srez units, http://pod2.stat.gov.rs/ObjavljenePublikacije/G1931/pdf/G19314001.pdf , so you could jump down to page 5 and 6. There it shows evangelical, not protestant. When I first made the map I missed that. (Lilic (talk) 17:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)).

The pdf doesn't help as I don't read cyrillic. Anyway, it is hardly thinkable that a government statistic really records subgroups of confessions. Please tell me what are the other "groups" listed besides "evangelicals". I assume this is only a language issue. --Túrelio (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:VIAF inter project linking

Hallo! Ich benötige Deine Hilfe. Kannst Du bitte bei es: die Diskussionen zur Vorlage:Normdaten verfolgen? Kennst Du jemanden der special:PrefixIndex/Commons:VIAF_inter_project_linking/viaf.user.js_Greasemonkey-Skript eine spanische Übersetung machen könnte? Gruß aus München Gangleri ‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 09:27, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, hätte ich gestern bloß nicht gefragt ;-). Im Ernst, so viel spanisch kann ich nicht. Admins User:ALE! und User:Aliman5040 haben hohe Babelwerte für de + es. Native-es findest du in der Liste auf Commons:Administratoren. --Túrelio (talk) 13:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Drumzo is Jonathan Rashad

Yes, I know Jonathan Rashad personally and if you read the comments here, he says that he is Drumzo. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 20:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

O.k., thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at Adrignola's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re : Pierre Bockel

Bonjour, Ce sont des photos remise par la famille de Pierre Bockel, issues d’une vidéo personnelle. Très cordialement , --Ctruongngoc (talk) 09:40, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Merci. O.k., but we need some evidence for their permission/licensing. Please send the email communication that accompanied the still images to permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org. See also Commons:OTRS/fr. In addition, as it is not your work, you should correct 1) the author entry from your name to the name of the real photographer/filmer; 2) the source entry from "own" to "Family of Pierre Bockel", and 3) removed the self| from the license tag as you are not the rights holder. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Je m’occupe de faire le nécessaire rapidement, mais je dois à nouveau contacter la famille. Merci de m'accorder un sursis. Cordialement, --Ctruongngoc (talk) 09:59, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. I have added OTRS-pending, which gives you enough time. --Túrelio (talk) 10:05, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Merci pour Pierre Bockel, c'était une homme de valeur, et ce serait dommage de ne pas avoir une photographie de lui. Bonne journée ! --Ctruongngoc (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Regine Velasquez flickr photo

why it is in criteria of speedy deletion, it clearly states that the owner of this image in flickr is letting everyone to download his/her photo and i dont think that i put the wrong license, hence its not a copyright violation

What do you read on http://www.flickr.com/photos/benzchiu/3537406772/in/photostream/ in the right column under License? Stop complaining and stop uploading copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 13:36, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

M.Theresa

Hallo. Leider - ich weiß nicht, der Autor dieses Werkes. Viele Grusse. MOs810 (talk) 18:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 20:27, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - block

A puppeteer who is getting bored with me blocking him :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:20, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

His next IP 79.191.249.53 (talk · contribs). --Túrelio (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Ist es sinnvoll IPs unbegrenzt zu sperren? -- RE rillke questions? 20:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Vermutlich nicht. Bei diesen speziellen Typen haue ich wegen Gefahr-im-Verzug erstmal auf den Not-Aus-Taster. Korrigieren kann man dann nachher noch. --Túrelio (talk) 20:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Ja, das ist richtig. Gibt es eigentlich eine Möglichkeit mit einem Knopfdruck alle Änderungen des Nutzers, die noch nicht überschrieben sind, rückgängig zu machen? -- RE rillke questions? 20:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Ist mir zumindest nicht bekannt. Wenn es nicht zu viele Änderungen sind, ist das ja auch nicht unbedingt nötig. Zumindest bei Vandalen, die üble Nachrede u.ä. betreiben, ist m.E. das schnelle Stoppen vordringlich. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

@Herbythyme, for how long shall we block such IPs? --Túrelio (talk) 20:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

They are dynamic - a day max I guess, thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:51, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Saadia Mandel

Hello, Saadia sent the requeted mail to the permissions. I hope that every thing is o.k. now. --Yoavd (talk) 14:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Amusement Girls 2.jpg

Hello Túrelio, I'm puramyun31. I uploaded File:Amusement Girls 2.jpg, and you reviewed the file. why the speedy delection tag by Warfieldian still has been remained? --Puramyun31 (talk) 12:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, the image was "reviewed" not by me, but by our Flickr-review bot. You should ask Warfieldian whether his tag can be deleted now. --Túrelio (talk) 15:49, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Wieso revertierst du meine Änderungen, sperrst die Bilder und sprichst unbegründete Drohungen aus?

Kannst du bitte begründen warum du meine Verbesserungen an den Bildern rückgängig gemacht hast? Das meine ich durchaus ernst, im Sinne des Projektschutzes. Wieso also dieses unbegründete Vorgehen? -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 13:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

"meine Verbesserungen" - gehts noch? Das ist Vandalismus und das weißt du genau. Dass er wikipolitisch motiviert ist, macht ihn nicht besser. Papp deine vermutete Filtersperrennachricht auf ein derzeit unbenutztes Bild und keiner hat was dagegen. --Túrelio (talk) 13:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Protest führt man aber öffentlich und nicht im Keller. Befürwortest du also die Niederschlagung von Protesten im Sinne derjenigen die die Projektziele unterjochen und schießt auf die eigenen Autoren? -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 14:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Niabot, ich fand das mit der Filterumfrage auch unter aller Sau und habe von meinem demokratischen Recht Gebrauch gemacht, das bei und mit meiner Stimmabgabe kundzutun. Jetzt aber auf Bilder sowas draufzukleben, das ist Selbstjustiz in meinen Augen. --Schwäbin (talk) 15:16, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Wieso sollte das Selbstjustiz sein? So was nennt man einen recht schnell mundtot gemachten friedlichen Protest, oder gibt es Opfer zu beklagen? -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 15:58, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Request for Deleting Files

Hi Túrelio, I have great sympathy for Mrs Ruby Kolhe for the trauma she claims to have undergone ( http://www.indiareport.com/India-usa-uk-news/latest-news/762643/Maharashtra/1/20/1 ). But I am surprised to see that she is posting her marriage certificate and all postmarital problems on Wiki Commons. Pls check the following files:

• File:RubyLalitKolhe_Marriage_Registration_Certificate.jpg
• File:RubyLalitKolhe's_Hindi_Marriage_Certificate.jpg
• File:Ruby_Lalit_Kolhe_Second_complaint_to_Women_Commission_Page_3.jpg
• File:Ruby_Lalit_Kolhe_Second_complaint_to_Women_Commission_Page_2.jpg
• File:Rubu_Kolhe_Hindi_Page_3.jpg

Can we take Wiki Commons as a forum to resolve our personal grievances? Should these files not be deleted? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage,

as the case seems to have gone public, some of the material might be in scope. However, none of the files is actually in use. As a speedy deletion might not be the best in this case, I would recommend you to open regular deletion requests for the files. This will allow for some discussion and potentially useful input from others. --Túrelio (talk) 06:36, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Can you please guide me in the steps for making a regular deletion request please? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 11:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Go to the file page, select the tool box on the left menu and click on Nominate for deletion. Fill in your thoughts/reason why the file should be deleted. Bots will do the rest (incl. notification of the uploader). --Schwäbin (talk) 11:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Favor requested

Hi, Túrelio, I would like to ask you to do something I don't dare doing myself. The category name TsurugaokaHachimangu is a misspelling, and should be Tsurugaoka Hachimangu. Could you fix that? Thanks. - Urashimataro (talk) 23:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Process started. --Túrelio (talk) 06:38, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. - Urashimataro (talk) 13:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Kategorie verschieben

Da ich gesehen habe, wie viele unbearbeitete Fälle in der Kategorie "zu verschiebene Kategorien" sind, kontaktiere ich Dich direkt. Könntest Du Dich bitte um den "Verschiebewunsch" auf Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Halle kümmern? Im Sinne des WLM-Wettbewerbs. :) Schöne Grüße --Yoursmile (talk) 09:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Das ging ja fix! Dankeschön! --Yoursmile (talk) 09:22, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Unessecary removal of discussion content/reverting by admin Túrelio

I just want to inform you, that i added this section to: [49] -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 18:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Opinion

I would like some advice. [50]. I was called a troll and such. He does that often. He has done that on multiple projects for quite a while. He accused me of socking the other day when the IP was an Australian IP, and my real life identity is well known (I'm in the DC area). He keeps making really nasty comments like that, and they are incredibly hurtful and ignore any real discussion. He has done similar on Wikipedia to others. The image itself was created to inflame and is bad especially when people that he is involved at are making some rather nasty claims about people from other cultural backgrounds (some were bad mouthing "American imperialism", others were talking about "Chinese censorship", etc.). Why is it breaking down to such accusations and ignoring any merits? He has the votes to keep the image, which is clear, so why does he have to resort to such nastiness? How can this be dealt with? Ottava Rima (talk) 21:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

You should stop whining and commenting on everything doesn't fit in your point of view. Have a happy day.

PS: I said that you play the role of a troll, not to be one. Quite a difference. It was also the first time...

PPS: If you want to talk to me, visit my discussion page (苦情処理係) -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 21:46, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I have a better idea without reading this at all: Just ignore each other. -- RE rillke questions? 21:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Hard to ignore someone who makes false claims about sock puppetry in hopes that an admin would block without checking first. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

You're claiming bad faith without giving evidence. That's not helpful. Rd232 (talk) 14:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, at least for the first statement there is clear evidence[51], i.e. Niabot made a SP claim against an US-based user despite anybody could easily verify that the IPs were from Australia [52], [53]. --Túrelio (talk) 14:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

That is not evidence of bad faith, unless, possibly, it is known that the user is highly competent in such matters. Rd232 (talk) 19:38, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, then we have rather different opinions. Writing "you should perform a check user on Otava Rima" when refering to 2 consecutive vandal/troll single-edits and all the "competence" you need to know is to click on the WHOIS-link on the IPs page and IPs page (i.e., 2 clicks from the page history) is clearly showing the intent to associate a user (who is even realname-identified) to wrong-doing despite easy accessible evidence to the contrary. --Túrelio (talk) 20:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm confused. Is there a good faith explanation for calling a long term user a "troll"? And where did I accuse anyone of bad faith? I said his comments were hurtful. Even if he intended them for the best reasons, they still hurt. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering how someone can be so insisting in assuming bad faith. (See log below) -- ／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 苦情処理係 22:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

<redacted after a complaint>

Nächste Gelegenheit

Nachdem die WikiCon angesichts der Menschenmenge lustig, spannend, aber auch etwas hektisch war, empfiehlt sich unbedingt, de:Wikipedia:10. Fotoworkshop schon mal vorsorglich auf die Beo zu nehmen. Grob angedacht ist der März 2012. Eine wirklich nette Truppe in überschaubarer Größe, spannende Themen, breit angelegtes (selbstgemachtes) Programm mit Theorie, Bildbearbeitung, Fotopraxis inhouse und draußen, eine schöne Location, lecker Catering (mittags bring in und abends Restaurant), überschaubare Kosten und bei WM D/A/CH eine unkomplizierte Erstattungsbereitschaft der Teilnahmegebühren (inklusive Hotel und Essen) und der Reisekosten. Würde mich freuen ein neues Gesicht - genau genommen deins :-) - dort anzutreffen. --Martina talk 22:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

+1 ! --Schwäbin (talk) 07:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die nette Einladung, obwohl es die :de-Seite noch nicht gibt. Oder meintest du diese? --Túrelio (talk) 20:44, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Nee, es gibt sie tatsächlich noch nicht, obwohl sie normalerweise innerhalb von Stunden nach dem vergangenen Workshop aufgemacht wird. Ich war aber ja beim letzten (Innenhof)workshop nicht dabei, zudem ist das eine komplizierte Seite mit Unterseiten und so, da lass ich mal die Finger von... Aber auf die Beo kannst Du's trotzdem legen, dann kriegst Du es mit, wenn sie eingerichtet wird und bist live dabei! :-) --Schwäbin (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Falls du sie nicht auf deine Beo genommen hast: 10. FWS ist jetzt online, inkl. Terminwunschkonzert. :-) --Martina talk 20:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Persönlichkeitsrechte

Hallo Túrelio,

könntest du dir bitte mal diese Bilder ansehen und mir deine Meinung dazu sagen, ob hier die Persönlichkeitsrechte der abgebildeten Kinder verletzt sind? Gruß, -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 10:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Wegen File:Kind liest einen Comic.jpg hatte ich den Uploader schon angesprochen. Die anderen sind m.E. grenzwertig, scheinen aus der Schweiz zu stammen. --Túrelio (talk) 10:12, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Hab für das obige Bild jetzt einen LA gestellt. --Túrelio (talk) 18:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

You have unread message(s) on my talk page

You can read it here. again, new comment--Someone35 (talk) 14:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Replied on talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Error

Hola Turelio.

Todas las fotografias del usuario Piragüismo Aranjuez tienen licencia Creative Commons Genérica de Atribución/Compartir-Igual 3.0. y han sido realizadas por nosotros.

Hay muchas de ellas que has marcado para ser borradas, por favor revisa los motivos al haber algun error.

Gracias. Piragüismo Aranjuez (talk) 20:36, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Hola,

sabo muy poco castellano, sorry. Let's try in english: the problem with most of your uploads is not the license, but the authorship. For example File:SEVILLA 75 7º.jpg: source=Socios del Club Escuela de Piragüismo Aranjuez; author=Club Escuela de piragüismo Aranjuez. What does that mean? A club cannot shoot photos, only photographers, single persons, do that. Who has shot these photo? You need to provide his or her permission. See Commons:OTRS/es for details. --Túrelio (talk) 20:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Permissions

Hello.

Yesterday send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to license my images.

Gratelful check whether everything is correct.

Thank you. Piragüismo Aranjuez (talk) 16:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

CheckUser nominator

Hello Túrelio

I am thinking of nominating you for CU right on Commons. If you agree, please notify me to create the nomination page. Thank you --Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 04:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hoangquan, thanks for your confidence. However, as we currently have 7 Checkusers for Commons, I think there is no need for more (:de wikipedia has only 3). I'll think over it. --Túrelio (talk) 10:12, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Hero Kids-Chapter 01.png

Hello Túrelio, I was just about to replace {{Copyvio}} with {{Npd}} when you deleted File:Hero Kids-Chapter 01.png, because this user previously managed to arrange OTRS permission for his uploads (for example, see this diff). Would you please consider restoring that file? Kind regards, Mathonius (talk) 10:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Lakhanpur in Kathua is thegateway to Jammu and Kashmir.jpg

About [54]: well, yes, the "link isn't working", because I already deleted the en-wiki copy as an obviously invalid non-free file. The uploader had a whole bunch of images with completely random copyright statements; this one, he first uploaded without any source/licensing info at all on en-wiki, then as "own work" here, then again on en-wiki claiming it was a "Newspapercover of daily excelscior" [55]. How any of those claims relate to the copyright watermark "[O?]ANANTH" in the image I have no idea. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

O.k.,  gone. --Túrelio (talk) 10:17, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Move

Since I can't move things into category namespace, can you fix this? I believe the creator misspelled category. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for the hint. --Túrelio (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, I tried to do a speedy delete. However, the instructions are wrong here. It should not be {{speedydelete|reason}} but {{speedydelete|reason=}}. For some reason, the template's instructions (on this page suggest to put {{speedydelete|1=}} but the template's actual parameters allows for |reason= and that seems to make more logical sense. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

When I add it manually, I usually use {{speedy|1=}} (so even without the "delete"). --Túrelio (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That will make things a little more cleaner. :) I assume most people use a script to tag. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but there is no "script" for derivatives and for "out of scope", for example. --Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you! -- Clemens 20:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yinlingspeaks.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yinlingspeaks.png

The image in question is from here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FUVuQMtE0g&feature=player_embedded#! a political campaign video.

I simply wish to give it the proper licensing for screenshots. It has come to my understanding that screenshots can be used if there is no alternative to portray the subject. Like this image for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nagato_RINNEGAN.PNG It is high resolution, but it stays because there is no alternative MikamiLovesDeleting (talk) 22:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I tried to give it the Template:Non-free video screenshot licensing, which was used here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Old_Gregg.jpg, but it did not show MikamiLovesDeleting (talk) 22:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That is because here at Commons we do/can not allow "fair use" (as your non-free video) content, as opposed to english wikipedia. So, you might try to upload it locally at :en. --Túrelio (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

May you provide the link to the site where I can upload locally? MikamiLovesDeleting (talk) 22:56, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Upload. --Túrelio (talk) 22:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

COM:AN/P

Hi Turelio,

Would look into my request here? Thanks. --  Docu  at 07:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Docu, sorry, today I hadn't the nerve for that. --Túrelio (talk) 22:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Галерея

Здравствуйте у меня тут какая то ошибка подскажите пожалуйста как её можно исправить? С уважением -- Дагиров Умар (talk) 19:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Вот A database error has occurred Query: SELECT cl_to as cat FROM categorylinks LEFT JOIN u_daniel_cache.commonswiki_nontopics ON namespace = 14 AND title = cl_to where cl_from = 15179593 AND id IS NULL Function: getCategories Error: 1146 Table 'u_daniel_cache.commonswiki_nontopics' doesn't exist (sql-s4). Дагиров Умар (talk) 19:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't read cyrillic and don't understand toolserver code either. --Túrelio (talk) 20:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, ich nehme an, er wollte sich über das seit Wochen nicht funktionierende Wikisense Gallery-Tool beschweren und ist beim Falschen gelandet – da muss er mit Daniel reden... --Schwäbin (talk) 08:06, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Seine letzte Antwort bedeutet lt. Google "Vielen Dank", weshalb Trycatchs Antwort wohl zielführend war. --Túrelio (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Когда инструмент на тулсервере не работает, используйте встроенный инструмент Викисклада -- Special:ListFiles/Дагиров Умар ("загрузки" или "uploads" в верхней панели на страничке вклада). Trycatch (talk) 20:58, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Большое спасибо. Дагиров Умар (talk) 22:51, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

GAMBIT

I did nothing out of the ordinary when I uploaded the GAMBIT image - that garbage with Flickr? Don't know where it came from. Photos were NOT from Flickr, but the standard way to upload to commons put the tag in there. Tdrss (talk) 04:04, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Now, could you add an URL/website into the source entry of File:GAMBIT on launchpad.png. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

my brother

Do not be afraid, my brother, Bayda city is the first town liberated on February 17 and returned the security situation and normal for the region of East Libya, and the media, sometimes in large amounts in the security issue ..--ليبي صح (talk) 08:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

O.k. --Túrelio (talk) 08:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Failed panoramio images from 2008

Dear Turelio,

Can any of these images from 2008 be deleted by you? Maybe the two "Zriba" images whose DR expired yesterday. Or can you file a Mass DR on them? I don't know anything about Mass DRs. The thing is they were originally failed in mid-2010 by ZooFari or Electron. I originally passed them because I thought the permission statement was OK since 2008 (or older) images didn't need OTRS permission as Lupo said. But as I noted in the image's talkpages, Lupo now also says that the permission must be general and not limited to wikipedia. Worse still, the original permission statement on the panoramio link I quoted has disappeared. So I revoked my panoramio pass and think that its better to just delete. Most of them are not heavily used except for the panoramic image of Sousse, Tunisia. The panoramio account doesn't appear active and I have no panoramio account anyway, only flickr. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Perhaps this other 8 day old panoramio DR can also be closed as delete here? The image isn't even used anywhere. I thought someone would tag these failed panoramio images with npd or DR but I guess I was wrong. Anyway I can't delete them. Thank You Turelio, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

A little prayer

Hi Turelio, can you move Category:Oratories in Italy by diocese as my request? Thanks :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 09:20, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :-)--Threecharlie (talk) 13:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 06:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

File:SavondeMarseille.jpg

How could you used a speedy delete about a simple picture of soap ? for your information, « Savon de Marseille » is not a company name, just generalist product name as whisky from scotland. So, i'm not agreed whith you decision, and ask you to do youn best to do it back. In fact, before to deleted it, you may first discuse about a eventualy delation. Véronique PAGNIER (talk) 05:25, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, it had been speedy-tagged by an OTRS volunteer as "French Soaps Ltd claims the copyright of this image, refer to OTRS ticket 2011092110017567". Such requests are to be taken seriously, because if not followed they might result in legal problems and because our OTRS volunteers usually know their job. As I am not on OTRS, I can't look into the ticket. Anyway, you might wait what Fæ has to say. --Túrelio (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

It appears here -- https://www.frenchsoaps.com/base.htm. It may be "a simple picture of soap", as Véronique says, but it still has a copyright, the company that owns the copyright, French Soaps Ltd. has issued a takedown notice, and we have complied.

Also, Véronique, please note that copyright violations may be deleted on sight, without discussion, so this was entirely within our rules.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Schwäbin

Hi Túrelio, I really appreciate the proactive approach of your friend Schwäbin. Sometime back when I made some queries to you, he took the initiative and responded to them, although the queries were addressed to you. Yesterday I noticed that one of the files which I uploaded a month back, probably did not meet the general characteristics of Commons image and hence I uploaded a newer version of this file. I tried to discuss the same thing to Schwäbin on his talkpage directly. I thought of getting some response about the current / previous upload. It appears that he feels both files need to be deleted and he marked them for deletion. What surprises me is that atleast he could have passed a message to me on my talkpage before initiating the deletion process. After all, I communicated this matter to him. Anyway, I appreciate his zeal and look forward to more fruitful cooperation with you and Schwäbin, with high regards and friendly spirit, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:51, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, I've seen that you are already in direct communication with User:Schwäbin, who is actually a she. As she told you already, so-called regular deletion requests (DR), as opposed to speedy deletions, such as "your" Commons:Deletion requests/File:Panna Lall Ghosh Postcard.jpg are really open-ended. Admins and other users do indeed sometimes use this form of DR to get more input/opinions from other users, when they think something might be not o.k. with an image, but aren't sure about. --Túrelio (talk) 15:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank for the gender clarification. I've already posted a clarification message on her talkpage. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:40, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

deletion my files

Hi. i uploaded several pictures last day . all of them have PD-Iran permission because all of them over of 30 years ago published in iranian media like magazine and newspapers. unfortunately one user made a mistake and labeled to all my files (cpyright violatin) and some of them deleted. but all of them have true permission and i have to upload them again.

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miladkhoshtip98 (talk • contribs) 24. September 2011, 13:46 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Miladkhoshtip98, though I haven't deleted all images requested for deletion, the deletion request seemed plausible to me as the was no evidence of pre-publication. As you had already some contact with User:Monfie, who tagged them for deletion, it might be better to continue communication with him in order to check out what additional information might be needed. As soon as this is clear, you might ask for un-deletion, instead of re-upload. --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

OK.thanks for you didn't mind to all User:Monfie's tags and keep them.i answer to User:Monfie in my talk and i continue communication with him if it is necessary.User:Monfie lebeled to all of them without any logical reason but for example this file has been deleted , before had been uploaded in other language of wiki like this and also this and this that tagged (cpyright violation) there are in other wikis 1 2 . all of those pictures had been published for public in iranian media and i saw them in old historic documents and old archive of iranian media , you trust me.i will return later in a better time and occasion just i hope the rest of my files not delete until that time . thanks again--Miladkhoshtip98 (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

UserBrick31321

Hello Turelio I stop to upload pictures I want to ask only one question of the cadets admin Toglenn these winter pictures

Oh, you again ;-). I don't really understand what you are saying. Probably better to comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Breanne benson2122131.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 09:35, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Deine Reverts

Warum hast du diverse Kat-Bearbeitungen von mir revertiert? Es handelt sich bei den betroffenen Kats um leere Kategorie-Cluster, die zwar teilweise sehr verzweigt sind, letztlich aber z.T. auf sich selbst verweisen, ohne irgendeine Datei zu enthalten. Ich denke solche Kats sind eher ärgerlich als hilfreich, oder? Gruß --Nonoh (talk) 19:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Wenn du ein speedy-tag mit der Begründung "empty" setzt, die betreffende Seite/cat/wasauchimmer aber garnicht leer ist, wie es bei allen reverts der Fall war, dann ist der angegebene Löschgrund eben nicht vorhanden. --Túrelio (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Was war denn nach deiner Ansicht der Inhalt der Category:Wasserstadt Limmer (Hannover), worin besteht der Sinn beispielsweise dieser Kategorie über ein noch nicht existentes Neubaugebiet, wie sinnvoll sind überhaupt Kategorien, die keine Dateien enthalten sondern nur auf andere Kategorien verweisen, die wiederum u.a. auf die Ausgangskategorie verweisen und wie hätte ich deiner Meinung nach meinen Löschantrag begründen sollen? stirnrunzelnderweise --Nonoh (talk) 22:23, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

File:David-Luna.jpg

Hey, sorry for the error, pasted the wrong url; Have changed it to the right one now. :) _→AzaToth 11:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks,  gone now. --Túrelio (talk) 12:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The Barnstarfeather

	For all your input
	For you Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

reply

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AShtdy.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=60136728&oldid=60045727 --Vssun (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Samiksha Singh.jpg

I came across these uploads from this SPI on en.wiki -- en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Panditejashri. A lot of copyvios under PD-Self uploaded over the past couple of weeks. The Ashishraikar one was not one I was tracking and only came by it as a result of checkuser. This particular image has been uploaded on quite a few sites [56] etc, I just chose the best resolution one, but I'm not sure of the other dates. I'll have to take some of the other uploads from the editor to DR as I can't find possible sources. Do you want me to jsut add this one to the list and remove the speedy? cheers. SpacemanSpiff (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the background. I've speedied Samiksha Singh.jpg now. Most of the other uploads of this user look also fishy, though I faced the same problem as you, TinEye wasn't that helpful here. --Túrelio (talk) 07:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Tineye is not very effective for many Indian websites, Googleimages is a bit better. But even with Google, I haven't been able to find earlier dates (most are undated, and wayback archives don't exist). I'll do a mass DR for the four left over images. cheers. SpacemanSpiff (talk) 12:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Opel Kapitän 1959

The photograph of the cat with the real life looks to be beyond fault -- I'd say well chosen if I have identified the "look" correctly.

I am here because 14 hours after you deleted the subject category, I am recreating it. If you choose to delete it again, I will not re-create it again.

The reason I am re-creating it is because 1959 is part of the navigation template I made for Opel and its Kapitän. The special P1 and P2 models are a pain. Cadillac, the other category I have been constructing has the same problem. Some Eldorado's are Fleetwood also, for example.

(the enclosed is mention of a bunch of problems I am looking at:

Opel is like Honda (which I am not even thinking about constructing right now) and made motorcycles and automobiles at the same time. So Opel vehicles, unlike Cadillac, are separated into an automobiles category and that too is under construction.

General Motors could have divided their frigidair line (refrigerators) and called a model of those Cadillac -- I am really glad that they didn't. I was told that there was a time when most refrigerators were made by General Motors and it was more common to call the device a "frigidaire" instead of a "refrigerator" -- that was long ago though.

Ford made chainsaws and they were called Ford, but I am not constructing or thinking about those categories now either.)

About Opel Kapitän in particular. It is a problem that the <Brand Year> is often also the <Model> but not always. I am going to handle this by putting those <Brand Year>'s which are not also the <Model> into only the category "by year". I chose Opel to start with for a number of reasons, being kind of small and not complex was one of those reasons but it is difficult to see that this was the truth right now.

So, a re-cap via links:

1. Category:Opel Kapitän 1959 using Template:VehicleBrandModelYear
2. Category:Opel 1959 automobiles
3. Category:Opel 1959

Not all of those have templates right now, but probably/maybe will.

A personal note: you were mentioned on my talk page as a person who knows when and what to delete here. It is the reason for the lengthy explanation now.

It is also the reason that I kept out of the battlefield of the deletion nominations as often as I did. That the people doing the deleting would delete or not, based on if my nomination was accurate or not. That the crappy personality based battles there would be a waste of my time.

It is knowing that there are experienced eyes and brains reviewing before deleting that made the opportunity to battle to be understood by me as a waste of time.

That was a thank you in three paragraphs. -- Queeg (talk) 22:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

generations

The Cadillac models are separated into generations. I think that Kapitän needs that also.

Being that most of Opel's history belongs to the Germans, do you have some feeling about this? de.wikipedia separates them by year of form 'YY. With that form, the company was not looking to beyond 1999.

I am going to leave Opel until I can get a comment from someone from Opel's motherland about it and work on Cadillac (being from its motherland). -- Queeg (talk) 22:27, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Queeg, I'm somewhat puzzled over this "complaint", as my deletion of the cat Opel Kapitän 1959 followed your own speedy-tagging {{badname|Opel Kapitän P1}}, which then seemed plausible to me. Anyway, I have no personal opinion for or against this cat. So, feel free to recreate it. One of our category experts is User:Foroa. You might contact him, if you are unsure. --Túrelio (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

This was not a complaint. Not even an attempt to disguise a complaint. I suppose it was more of an apology for re-instating a recently deleted category.

I have met Foroa: User_talk:Queeg#Just_to_say_....

I think I asked for your permission, as a German, to use "generations" for Opel automobiles instead of year to define changes to the model (German wikipedia uses years ('YY) and English wikipedia uses generations).

And I thanked you for being reason enough to not "wallow in the trash" at the nominations for deletions. -- Queeg (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, therefore I had written "complaint" ;-). Though being German, I'm not very interested in cars and therefore don't have a strong opinion about the one or the other way. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Zero-project - e-world.jpg

Hi! Please restore this file. It was published under CC-3.0.BY-SA as all works done by Zero-project (the music and the album covers -> see: Category:Zero-project) and published at Jamendo service -> [57]; particulary here -> [58].

The "License.txt" (comes with compresed file you can download from Jumendo from here -> [59]) says:

Track | License URL

----------------------------------------------

01 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

02 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

03 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

04 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

05 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

06 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

07 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

08 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

09 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

10 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

11 | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

artwork | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

See the last position artwork - it is about the album cover. And please be careful in the future do not mistake his works license. Regards Electron ツ ➧☎ 08:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Already this morning I've deleted a lot of copyviolating album covers. You can't expect me to know beforehand whether one special group provides their covers under a free license, which is rather an exception, as the artwork is not necessarily made by group members themselves. Anyway, after uploading the 80 MByte zip archive, I was able to read the release statement and will now undelete. However, I would rather recommend you with such uploads to clearly write into the description, that 1) the artwork itself has been released under a free license by the rights holder and 2) where the evidence for this can be found. --Túrelio (talk) 09:09, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

OK. But I thought that it is a known fact that the license publishe here [60], into the "Your rights on this album" frame covers all files (the music and the art works) that were included in the music album. Jamendo in not an unknown service. It is the service very similar to Commons but concentrate on free music. Maybe there is need a template to chack files that came from Jamendo (e.g. similar to template:flickrreview)? Electron ツ ➧☎ 09:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

If the CC-BY-release for music and artwork is true for all groups/material on Jamendo, then surely a template should be created, which would prevent such unnecessary work. --Túrelio (talk) 09:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

To say the truth I am Jamendo user for a month only and I am not sure about that (but I uploaded some files up to now and all license for a particular file into "License.txt" were of the same kind that the license in "Your rights on this album" frame). OK. I will try to make a review template for Jamendo files. Electron ツ ➧☎ 09:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

be careful: Jamendo provides different CC licences, including xx-ND and xx-NC, both are not usable here on Commons. Rbrausse (talk) 13:45, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

File:The Alquemist.jpg

Esta fotografía es propiedad del propio Paulo Coelho, y la ha cedido a su representante legal en todo el mundo Sant Jordi Asociados agencia literaria, S.L., con sede en Barcelona (España), para más información o para cotejar y corroborar la información facilitada contacten al número de teléfono 93 2240107 o bien al email santjo@santjordi-asociados.com. También pueden visitar nuestra página web http://www.santjordi-asociados.com/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santjo2011 (talk • contribs) 28. September 2011, 11:20 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Miriam,

if you have indeed the necessary rights from the original author, then please mail a statement to our OTRS "department" (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org), where our OTRS volunteers will handle this. If you want to sent a formal permission, go to Commons:Modelos de mensajes, copy the boxed "Declaración de permiso para todas las peticiones", put in the filenames of the related images, put in the name of the license of choice, date and sign it and mail it back to the above email address. --Túrelio (talk) 09:33, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Photos and images about Paulo Coelho and his books

Dear Túrelio, I don't know how I can say that.... I am working for Paulo Coelho, we are Sant Jordi Asociados agencia literaria, S.L., we are the legal representative of Paulo, I have provide all the documents I load with a phone number, and email, and a web. Maybe We are new in wikipedia terms but not with all Paulo Coelho world. We have the need to change the photos becouse what are publicated don't like to Paulo, and we need to make new wiki web for Aleph his new novel in case someone wants to know more abouth that.

I don't know how much I have to do, I also have sent an email to permissions_commons@wikipedia.org explaining that.

what else can we do to not have more problems?

Hi, if you sent an email as explained above, an OTRS volunteer will check whether the permission is sufficient and, if not, contact you directly. If the permission is cleared, then a so-called OTRS-ticket (sort of o.k.) will be put on all related image pages. Please always sign your comment using the following string --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hello, I've noticed that you've deleted my requests twice now for the deletion of this file and also deleted my desired duplicate replacement file. Can you please explain to me why this is, as I don't see the problem, seeing as I am the author of the image and therefore allowed to request speedy deletion at any time (as long as the file isn't being used), but you've gone out of your way to reverse all of this. I only wish to rename Avodart (dutasteride).jpg to Avodart.jpg - can you please at least rename the file without deleting the history (if that is your concern)? The file was nominated for deletion by a single user, but was unanimously overruled. It was only uploaded this month, so it's not too old, and I could have decided to use the desired file name at that time. Please excuse the fact that I didn't check your user page before I noticed the file deletion in your name, so I was unaware you were an administrator, or I would have asked the first time. Thank you Editor182 (talk) 08:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Editor182, sorry, my fault for not communicating directly to you. I preferred File:Avodart (dutasteride).jpg to stay mainly due to the archived DR discussion, which may be helpful for future DRs, and because it was the slightly older upload. The latter reason is also true for File:Dextroamphetamine sulfate 5 mg tablets.jpg, as it was uploaded already in May 2011 and thereby a dupe deletion would anyway require to put a redirect to File:Dextroamphetamine.jpg, meaning that the longer filename would remain as redir. In addition, the latter image does de facto not show the substance dextroamphetamine itself, but a package of tablets. So the longer filename is more descriptive than the shorter one. Beyond that, I have no further stake in this. Is there any special reason (such as filename conflict on a project) why you want them renamed? --Túrelio (talk) 08:35, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for the quick reply. I generally like to keep my file names short, but uploaded longer names in these instances anyway, so although it's a personal preference, I still feel like I'd like to have these files renamed. I have at least one other redirect image, which is completely fine with me. If you could please rename Dextroamphetamine sulfate 5 mg tablets.jpg to Dextroamphetamine and also rename the other file to Avodart (with redirections, if you'd like), that would be the most appreciated. Thanks Editor182 (talk) 08:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

File:New York City Ground Zero map of damage.jpg

08:23, 28. Sep. 2011 Túrelio deleted „File:New York City Ground Zero map of damage.jpg“ ‎ (Copyright violation: Photograph entirely of a copyrighted map)

I do not understand, why this photo was immediately deleted without any prior discussion. It was a photo of a huge poster, which in the year 2006 was positioned on public ground in New York city in front of the ground zero site. It was most likely produced by or at least on behalf of the government and its public exhibition was apparently authorized by the goverment. No source and copyright information were found on or near the poster. How do you know that this map is copyrighted? By whom? --Norbert Nagel 19:35, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Nun, wenn eine Datei eine offensichtliche oder sehr wahrscheinliche URV darstellt, dann ist es normal (und sogar rechtlich notwendig), dass sie sofort gelöscht wird. Da eine nachträgliche Entlöschung kein großer Akt ist, ist das selbst im Fall eines Irrtums der bessere Weg.

Konkret: du hattest das Foto als "own work" bezeichnet, es war aber offensichtlich ein Foto von einem vorhandenen Werk, nämlich dieser Karte, wie es User:Dream out loud in seinem SLA (den ich ausgeführt habe) auch angegeben hat ("Photograph entirely of a copyrighted map"). Im Unterschied u.a. zu Deutschland gilt die Panoramafreiheit in den USA nur für Gebäude, nicht für sonstige Werke. D.h., hätte die Karte in D. gehangen, wäre es kein Problem. M.W. muss inzwischen auch in den USA nicht mehr unbedingt ein (C)-Hinweis an einem Werk stehen, damit es geschützt ist; früher war das wohl mal so. Dass die Karte von Behördern der Bundesregierung produziert worden sei (was Voraussetzung für PD-USGov wäre), ist nur deine Vermutung, für die du keinen Beweis hast. M.W. wahrscheinlicher wurde sie von der Stadt New York produziert, deren Werke nicht PD sind. Wer das Urheberrecht daran hält ist für Commons belanglos, weil du als der Uploader Commons überzeugen musst, dass dein Upload o.k. ist. Der einzige Punkt, über den man eventuell diskutieren könnte ist, ob diese Karte urheberrechtswürdig ist. Allerdings ist die Schwelle dafür in den USA m.W. niedriger als in Deutschland. Du könntest also entweder eine formelle UR stellen oder zuerst einmal einen US-basierten admin, z.B. User:Jameslwoodward‎, fragen, ob er die Karte für Copyright-eligible oder non-eligible hält. Als admin kann er sie auch im gelöschten Zustand anschauen. --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Klarstellung. --Norbert Nagel 21:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Renaming a file

Hi Túrelio, Please rename the file File:ShameemKirmani.jpg to File:Shamim_Karhani.jpg Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 08:18, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

That wasn't possible, as the name was already in use. I choose File:Shamim Karhani autograph.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 08:25, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the insightful renaming. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 08:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

подтверждение авторства

Здравствуйте, Túrelio! Вы написали, что файлы, которые я загрузила могут являться не моими или не имеют права быть опубликованными из-за отсутствия разрешения автора. У меня есть исходные файлы, доказывающие моё авторство (фотографий) и письменный договор, заключенный с каждым художником, чьи работы я фотографировала, в котором они разрешают публиковать фотографии их работ. Напишите мне пожалуйста, куда мне отправить отсканированные копии этих договоров и исходные фотографии, чтобы доказать право на размещение моих фотографий в Википедии. Спасибо. Ptashka-i-pashka (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

take a look at Commons:OTRS/ru, the site describes the procedure for file permissions. Rbrausse (talk) 14:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I couldn't have given a better answer. --Túrelio (talk) 14:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Moldova Stamp Confusion

Hi, Túrelio - would you please be so kind as to review the following File_talk:Stamp_of_Moldova_012.jpg? The research I had to do was rather tedious, but I finally got a breakthrough. I received an email today from Posta Moldova stating the stamp is copyrighted. Further, as you will see on the file's talk page, the Posta Moldova response also affects the PD-MD-exempt template which is currently being used for all Moldova stamps. My explanation is on File_talk:Stamp_of_Moldova_012.jpg the talk page. I originally nominated the image for speedy deletion, but after discussions with CLindberg, I changed it to regular delete. When I received the Posta Moldova email, I changed the tag to copyvio. Carl has been quite helpful in trying to clear up this rather confusing nonfree vs free issue. Thank you in advance. Atsme (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Atsme, same as Carl I favor a regular DR, such as Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stamp of Moldova 012.jpg, because it allows for a more thorough discussion and can be used as reference for future cases. Did you forward the original email from Posta Moldova already to OTRS? Please do so, for the same reason as stated above, and don't forget to mention the file it refers to. --Túrelio (talk) 20:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Photo under incorrect copyright (File:Jose-Chang-Selles-Ogino.jpg)

Túrelio, I not understand why you put my picture as "copyright wrong." The image was scanned by me, is from my family album and the picture is mine. I am the owner of photography. Joseph Chang was the son of the sister of my great-grandmother. I donate this image to WikiMedia . What is the problem? I do not understand I should do. Thanks. --Kuronokoneko (talk) 23:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kuronokoneko, them problem is that you claimed to be the author/photographer, which is not true per your own above words. Ownership of a print has no meaning for copyright as well as scanning or reproducing an existing photography doesn't make you the author/photographer or give your any right over the photography. So, you need to do a research about who really shot the original photography, name and life-dates of the photographer, that is what matters now. Thereafter we can see what more is needed. --Túrelio (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

The photograph was taken on January 16, 1934 (77 years ago), Kobe (Japan) by an unknown photographer (perhaps someone from my family, maybe a neighbor, friend, after so many years no one knows), but the picture belongs to my family and now belongs to me, because I inherited the original photo. Can donate a family photo, taked 77 years ago, in Wiki Commons? How to put this information in the image description? cordially --Kuronokoneko (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

The photography doesn't look like a family or amateur shot, but as an official photo likely made in a photo studio or in the aviation school where he studied. In my opinion, we can completely drop the family aspect, as you cannot donate something (copyright), which you don't have. Beyond that I would like to know a little bit more about the actual photo in your possession; is it a print? Can you view the backside? Is something written or printed on the backside?

Due to its age the photo may be public domain (Template:PD-Japan-oldphoto or Template:PD-Japan) already. However, to know whether this is true and under which kind of PD-status the image may fall, we need to know whether the photo was published and, if yes, at which time earliest. Therefore, you should do some research to find the possible oldest/earliest publication. --Túrelio (talk) 18:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Mark O'Connor photo by Jim McGuire

Hi Turelio, I am currently an intern for Mark O'Connor and i am trying to edit and make his wikipedia page more accurate. He needs to have a photo on his page. I got the photo from his press photos off of his website and I have permission from him to post this on the wikipedia page. I also gave credit to the photographer. Please un delete the photo so that I can keep his page updated and accurate. Thank you.

Fiona Fionakz (talk) 16:34, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Fiona, press photos are per se not free enough for upload to Commons. We need a permission from the rights holder. Provided that the photographer transferred his copyright to Mark O'Connor, he may give such a permission, otherwise you need to get it from the photographer. Please see Commons:OTRS for details and a permission template. The permission needs to be mailed to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

To Clarify, I just need to email the photographer a request for permission, and then email permission-commons@wikimedia.org? Then the picture will become available? I might use a different photo by a different photographer, so This needs to be done before I upload it, correct? Thank you. Fiona Fionakz (talk) 19:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Fiona, the email address I gave you initially was missing 1 character, it's permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. For the permission please use the template under this link. Ideally the photographer should send the permission himself to the above email address. After you got his o.k. (that he will do it), drop me a note. I will then immediately undelete the image, even though the confirmation of the permission by one of our OTRS volunteers may take some time. If you want to upload a different photo from a different photographer, you might first ask the photographer whether he is willing to give permission, then upload the image (add the {{OTRS pending}} tag) and then send the request with the permission template to the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Your assistance please...

I think we may have discussed before some ideas I have about how complicated trimming duplicates can be.

In my opinion File:MP speaks to one of the first 20 Guantanamo captives during processing on January 11th, 2002.jpg is a much more informative title than File:Camp x-ray detainees.jpg.

In my opinion the longer file name is sufficiently more informative that, even if it were not the older file, it should be the name other file(s) redirect to. Former navy photographer Shane McCoy has been quoted on how he recorded a series of very similar, but actually different images on January 11th, 2002. He attached his camera to a monopod, then put his camera in a mode where it automatically took a series of images, then held the monopod and camera over his head so he could photograph the processing of those first 20 captives in a way that wasn't obscured by the tall fence htat surrounded the compound.

I just checked the revision history of the longer file name -- essentially blank. There is a potential problem with the file you decided to keep.

The images McCoy took that day are very widely republished. The DoD realized that mid-level press officers had made a gigantic blunder by distributing these photos, which were originally intended for internal use only, and quickly took them down. Consequently about half the time they are republished they are improperly credited -- either not credited at all, or credited to various wire services, or to leading newspapers. It is a mess, and an indication of how non-professional the photo editors can be -- even at big news organizations. My impression is that those photo editors can be surprisingly oblivious of copyright issues, surprisingly poorly informed, and no one in their management chain really gives a damn if photos are routinely miscredited.

This has represented a problem in the past, not just in general, but with this series of images in particular. Good faith contributors come across instances where one of these images has been republished, but where it is credited to a news organization, and they want to challenge whether the image should be considered PD. Many good faith contributors here take the precautionary principle to such lengths that won't accept good faith assurances that no civilian photographers were allowed to take photos early in the camp's history.

The image you chose to keep has sourcing which I anticipate may result in it being challenged. It was transferred from en.wiki way back in 2006, without explicitly carrying over its original sourcing. If the image you chose to discard had a source field that was still active, and the page at that link properly credited the image to Shane McCoy that would be a very strong reason to make that image and its {{Information}} template the base image. Even if it merely linked to a page that didn't offer a credit at all I think it would be preferable than saying the image was transferred from wikipedia in 2006, when 2006 is too early to go back to the original wikipedia page to try and find the original source.

So, is it technically possible for you to graft back on the original history for the image with the longer name that you replaced with a redirect? If so, could you pleas do so?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Will have to study, how that might be done. --Túrelio (talk) 23:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Bonnie Wright Picture (File:Bonnie CPqSJ.jpg)

What's the deal? The pic I used was a fan pic I took at the BAFTA awards! It wasn't a promo shot and for you to assume that and to delete that was uncalled for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kara Gose (talk • contribs) 1. Oktober 2011, 23:12 Uhr (UTC)

I agree. I searched Google Images for this photo and came to the conclusions that it had not been submitted to the Web before, and that it was taken by someone attending the BAFTAs in 2011. Lots of photographers and fans at that event. Elizium23 (talk) 21:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, "uncalled for" - strong words from somebody who had already 8 files deleted as being a copyvio or without permission. Your recent upload File:RkXyk.jpg was really shot on October 1st, 2011? (I read the BAFTA Awards 2011 ceremony was in June) Why does the file have no EXIF data (same as with Bonnie CPqSJ.jpg)? Why did you use, contrary to our policy, a non-descriptive nonsense name? --Túrelio (talk) 00:03, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

One I did just upload it it wasn't taken on October 1st for one. Two while I've been on here for a while I'm still a newbie and don't post on here much.. Three I've been trying to put pics up seeing what works. I had some pics of my own this time so I thought it would work. Also reason I said it was uncalled for because it was a fan pic and it's obvious it was and for you to say it was a "promo shot" was what it was uncalled for.

Please sign you comments, using --~~~~.

The presence of EXIF data has nothing to do with your experience on Commons, as it is the data that every digital camera/phone-camera automatically writes into the image file.

When I crossed this image, it didn't say "fanpic", but "Bonnie Wright of the Harry Potter film series, at the BAFTA Awards 2011". As of the image quality I still doesn't believe it's a fan pic, it's far from obvious. I recommend you to request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. Other admins may share your claim. --Túrelio (talk) 08:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Your block

Hi, I noticed you did not block it indefinitely. I would, considering it's a long term vandal. --Bsadowski1 07:53, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Oops, thanks, I didn't know him. --Túrelio (talk) 07:54, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Eine Bitte

Lieber Túrelio, ich kämpfe seit Monaten mit bzw. gegen einen ... Benutzer, der unbedingt zwei völlig unpassende Kategorien zu einer Datei hinzufügen möchte: File:Château du Haut-Koenigsbourg - lambris et fresque de Léo Schnug.jpg. Könntest du diese Datei bitte löschen? Da es ein frei verfügbares Flickr-Bild ist, könnte ich sie in einem Jahr oder zwei, wenn der Benutzer ... einfach Commons verlassen hat, wieder hochladen. Als Löschbegründung könnte "request of the uploader" durchaus genügen.

Vielen Dank im Voraus,

--Edelseider (talk) 09:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

@Edelseider, das käme, wenn es nach mir ginge, nur als ultima ratio infrage, weil es ja ein absolutes Armutszeugnis für die "Streitkultur" auf Commons wäre. Den LA müsstest du aber selbst stellen. (Übrigens habe ich ein paar Worte in deinem Posting entfernt, damit Du keine Problem wegen PA bekommst.)

Was die Jahr-in-xyz-Kat. angeht, stimme ich mit dir überein, dass sie bei einem statischen Objekt wie diesem völlig überflüssig ist (und als Überkategorisierung gewertet werden könnte), obwohl bei einer früheren Diskussion dieses Fotos einzelne meiner Kollegen das anders gesehen haben.

An edit conflict. The two contributors are looking for the talk page.

Davon mal abgesehen ist die cat-war über dieses Foto aber wirklich unerfreulich und das betrifft euch beide. Was mich erstaunt ist dass die Disku der Datei leer ist. Also habt ihr entweder nur auf euren eigenen Diskus oder sogar nur via Edit-Zusammenfassungen "kommuniziert". Aus deiner Wortwahl gegenüber Olybrius entnehme ich, dass du das ganze recht persönlich nimmst, trotz der Banalität, um die es eigentlich geht. Für das eigene Wohlbefinden kann es in einer solchen Situation besser sein, mal innerlich etwas loszulassen, ein bißchen Abstand zu nehmen, von einem konkreten Bild oder Bereich oder sogar vom Projekt. (das kann dieselbe entspannende Wirkung haben, wie auf :de den Benutzer:Simplicius/Diderot-Club II von der eigenen Beo zu entfernen) Dann wirst du vielleicht dazu kommen, zu sehen, dass diese Kategorisierung, obwohl eher unpassend, eigentlich doch eine unwichtige Kleinigkeit ist, zumal es ja nicht um eine beleidigende oder verleumdende Kategorisierung (wie z.B. Nazi-Gebäude o.ä.) geht. Das wäre meine 1. Wahl. Meine 2. Wahl (die sich auch an die 1. anschließen könnte) wäre eine ruhige Diskussion, d.h. sachlicher Austausch der Argumente für und gegen die strittige Kategorisierung, auf der Disku der Datei File talk:Château du Haut-Koenigsbourg - lambris et fresque de Léo Schnug.jpg, wo dann auch andere ihre Meinung dazu einbringen können. Eine formale Mediation gibt es auf Commons m.W. bislang nicht. --Túrelio (talk) 13:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at Visuall's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Not exact duplicates

Hi, did you see [61] before deleting File:Mariemont Splitsing.JPG as a duplicate of File:Mariemont Splitsing.jpg, apparently not exact duplicates. --Tony Wills (talk) 10:07, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

When visually comparing both images before the deletion I didn't find any mayor difference; independent of the fact that the uploader himself requested dupe-deletion[62]. --Túrelio (talk) 10:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I have no permission to see the diff that you linked to, but I will believe you :-) :-). From that timestamp he marked it as duplicate before posting the VP message. That's fine, I'm not quite sure what his VP note was really for though. Thanks. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Oops. His dupe-tagging is dated from October 3, 2011, 21:27; clearly after his VP-edit, which I didn't see before the deletion. I've no idea why he did it in this sequence. --Túrelio (talk) 12:38, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Not that it really matters, but the diff link you gave to the dup tagging "http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=File%3AMariemont+Splitsing.JPG&timestamp=20111003192731&diff=prev" dates it as 20111003192731, ie 19:27:31, his VP edit was 19:38. One or other of us is being confused by their time zone settings :-). I think the log clarifies the order :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 20:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

At least when I posted my above note, I was truly convinced of it. But as per [63], it seems it was the other way round. However, already this morning I asked him directly about it: [64]. --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

suppression d'un doublon.

Bonjour, j'ai demandé le 7 septembre la suppression de ce fichier : File:Max Warschawski1.jpg‎.

Comme vous l'avez constaté, il s'agit d'une basse résolution, réalisée à partir d'un tirage de travail non retouché et plein de poussière.

Je vous remercie donc de bien vouloir supprimer cette image pour ne laisser que le fichier propre : File:Max Warschawski par Claude Truong-Ngoc 1980.png qui est la même image scannée d'après le négatif original et en haute résolution.

De plus l'ancien fichier n'est utilisé nulle part dans les projets wiki. Merci, et cordialement --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 08:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Claude, sorry, I don't speak that much French. Could you voice your comment/concern at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Max Warschawski1.jpg please. --Túrelio (talk) 08:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Er meint, das png sei die bessere Version, weil direkt vom Negativ gescannt und mit hoher Auflösung, er bitte daher um Löschung der schlechteren jpg-Version. Diese alte Version sei außerdem nirgend in den Wikis im Einsatz. --Schwäbin (talk) 08:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Übersetzung. Allerdings bin ich weiterhin der Meinung, dass die "alte" jpg-Version besser (schärfer, klarer) aussieht als die neue "bessere" png-Version. Das liegt event. an der MediaWiki-Software, aber wir haben halt keine andere. --Túrelio (talk) 09:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Renaming File:ShahidSiddiqAutograph.jpg

Hi Túrelio, Please rename the file:ShahidSiddiqAutograph.jpg as ShahidSiddiquiAutograph.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hindustanilanguage (talk • contribs) 5. Oktober 2011, 09:16 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, next time please enter the command by yourself, as the syntax is rather easy, see [65]. --Túrelio (talk) 07:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

MW 1.18 update

Offline for now. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

As recommended by Wikid77 at 1.18 issues,
may be we should have got such an announcement on top of every Commons page before the great update-corruption started:

Upgrading to MediaWiki 1.18x, Commons will be basically unusable for this week

--Túrelio (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Ich hab keine Schwierigkeiten, welchen Browser setzt Du ein? --Schwäbin (talk) 09:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

IE 8 unter XP. Wenn ich mir die inzwischen seitenlange Liste der Beschwerden auf :en (Link s.o. "1.18 issues") anschaue, scheint die Version dabei aber keine Rolle zu spielen. --Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Und auch noch monobook. Also mit Firefox und Vector kämst Du ganz normal durch. Vielleicht so lange, bis sich die größten Probleme wieder verzogen haben? --Schwäbin (talk) 09:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Gerade auch einen IE crash unter der (gräßlichen) Vector-Skin (aber mit wieder aktivierten Gadgets) erlebt. --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Wenn Du auch bloß die Hälfte meiner Empfehlung umsetzt ;-) --Schwäbin (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Morgen ist eh erstmal das welterste Wikipedianer-Dreiländertreffen in Aachen! ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 21:16, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Wann meldest Du Dich hier an? Ich muss Dich unbedingt mal persönlich kennenlernen! Viel Spaß in Aachen! --Schwäbin (talk) 21:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Und wo bleibt der Bericht? ;-) --Schwäbin (talk) 14:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Ich wollte noch einen Moment warten, bis vielleicht einer von mehreren Photographen einige Stammtisch-Shots hochgeladen hätte, was bislang aber nicht der Fall ist. Also, es war für Aachener Verhältnisse ein Bombenerfolg, ca. 25 Teilnehmer, nicht nur eine neue (in Bezug auf den Stammtisch) Aachenerin mit gewisser Reallife-Relevanz, sondern auch Gäste aus der Aachener Peripherie: Köln (darunter einige Wikipedia-Urgesteine), Bonn, Niederlande, Belgien und sogar Luxemburg, womit aus dem geplanten 3-Länder- ein 4-Länder-Treffen geworden ist. Ich habe den Eindruck, dass es allen gefallen hat. --Túrelio (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

You deleted a picture that I own the copyright to ?????????????????????

Hello,

Who are you??? Too much time on your hands??? You deleted a picture that I personally took with my camera of myself! I own the copy right and I'm trying to use it for MY wikipedia page. What's your problem? Yeah, I'm annoyed! Please do something else with your time. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norainysmurph (talk • contribs) 09:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC) (UTC)

Calm down. Better you explain why the image File:Jenakraus.jpg you uploaded today, was uploaded already in 2007 by keeracasey to http://www.lastfm.pl/music/Jena+Kraus/+images/596670 and in addition to her MySpace account? --Túrelio (talk) 09:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

pixelio

Hello, the two photos are by some sort of fluke with the Pixelio note was published. I've edited it for upload to Pixelio (trimmed to the essentials, Levels ..). (I did not Commons). Since I am registered with Wikimedia, I've uploaded my (subjective) best possible images in Commons. Since I have the originals on an external backup drive - I have the simplicity of my pictures Pixelio retrieved and uploaded to Commons. The elevator in Lisbon now has no more indication of Pixelio (or?), The Aaron rod carries the hint, unfortunately, in the name - I do not know how I could change that. mfG--Alfredte (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)alfredte

Werd mich später drum kümmern. --Túrelio (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Arthur de Faria

Porque tu apagou as imagens que eu fiz o upload alegando copyright??? Que imagem que eu tenho que colocar então, porra?? E se tu não entender essa pergunta, vai ter que me explicar como apagou as imagens sem ter lido a descrição!!!! E vai então dar um jeito de colocar uma foto no artigo Arthur de Faria da Wikipedia Lusófona. Se pode excluir, pode complementar também!! Dê um jeito!== — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafael1991 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC) (UTC)

Sorry, I don't speak :pt. --Túrelio (talk) 19:10, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

So, how do you delete images if you do not understand the description? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafael1991 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 7 October 2011 (UTC) (UTC)

Please sign your comments!

The source entry, http://twitter.com/arthurdefaria, and the "© 2011 Twitter" on that page is all I need to know. See my comment at File talk:Arthur de faria2.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 19:18, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

And the other? How I provide? Several pictures in the Wikimedia are found in the Google Search! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafael1991 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC) (UTC)

What other? And I do not understand the meaning of your 3rd sentence. For providing a permission, see Commons:OTRS/pt. --Túrelio (talk) 19:33, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I stopped contributing to Wikipedia. It's so hard. Unfortunately.

I am sorry to hear that. --Túrelio (talk) 18:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Plaque on Contalmaison Cairn memorial.jpg

Just wondering why the file was deleted i double checked and it clearly says its available under a commons license. Am i missing something sorry if i am. see [66] [67] Edinburgh Wanderer 22:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Edinburgh Wanderer, that's a not uncommon misunderstanding: not every CC license is allowed on Commons. This image is licensed CC-BY-SA-NC[68]. The problem is the NC-restriction (=no commercial use), as Commons requires all images to be free also for commercial use, at least in regard to copyright. Another Commons-incompatible restriction would be ND (=no derivatives). --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Ried in der Riedmark

Somebody emptying a gallery and writing 'no gallery wanted' in a deletion request is a valid reason for deleting? It's not as if there isn't enough material in the category to hide the war crime memorial a little bit further down the page. -- Cecil (talk) 22:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The edit summary should have said "redundant to Category:Ried in der Riedmark". Anyway, no problem to restore it. --Túrelio (talk) 07:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

This DR

Dear Admin Turelio, I think that this DR should be closed as delete. Even the uploader does not object. Its 7 days old now. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:02, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

See my comment at DR. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Français

Désolé de m'exprimer en français : d'abord, merci des précieux enseignements que vcous me fournissez. Ensuite pour les 3 fichiers en cause, les renseignements utiles ont été fournis en fin de semaine à permission-commons par moi-même et les deux institutions concernées (Comité français Pierre de Coubertin et Fédération sportive et culturelle de France, peut-être pas encore confirmé pour cette dernière ). Merci d'en tenir compte.--Claude PIARD (talk) 08:08, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what pictures you are talking about (you did not link them here), but if you have sent permission to OTRS for a picture, consider putting {{OTRS pending}} into the file. --Schwäbin (talk) 09:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Danke.

I have now added OTRS-pending to File:Guy Fournet - 1976.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 10:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe You stop vandalism. Categories are correct

here and here. There is no dispute, no need discussion when is vandalism. Anyone who has healthy eyes, say that the categories are correct. Toddler is the main character. The soldiers did not aiming to the sky. Believe that I am writing to you because your renown. Your nationality is irrelevant for anything and do not want to annoy you. Only your renown is the reason for writing to you on this. --Starscream (talk) 12:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

User Martin H and user High Contrast already responded. Here is the dialog with the POV pusher.

NatanFlayer (talk) 12:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

@Starscream, after viewing the whole image, I think one cannot surely call the position of SS-man Blösche aiming, as his MP is directed downwards. It would be different if he had held the gun in a 90° angle. Anyway, one can legitimately have another opinion about that. In such a situation it might be better to leave the disputed category out, as Martin H. already has recommended. As we have different versions of this photography, a salomonic solution might be to put 1 of the images into that category and the others not. However, you should really think about: is it worth to fight over such a minor issue and calling names to users who have a different opinion? --Túrelio (talk) 13:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Some baklava for you :) !

Some baklava for my favorite admin :) ! Алый Король (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! --Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Verschiebung ohne commons delinker

Moin Túrelio,

nachdem rund um das Update die Dateinutzung in anderen Projekten nicht angezeigt wurde ist jetzt File:Tadarida brasiliensis - Bahamas - Long Island (sic) - Cartwright Cave - March 2006 - 2.jpg ohne Delinker verschoben worden. Gibt es eine Chance im Nachhinein herauszufinden, wo die Datei überall genutzt wird, damit ich das händisch fixen kann?

Danke & Grüße, Rbrausse (talk) 17:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

'Nabend Rbrausse, wann ist die Datei denn verschoben worden? M.W. wird Global Usage seit Ende 7.10. oder Beginn 8.10. wieder angezeigt. Konkreter zu deiner Frage: der CD legt wohl logs an, allerdings ist mir nicht bekannt wo. --Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

am 7. wurde verschoben - und der File Mover hat es dem Delinker nicht untergeschoben, weil er eben glaubte, es gäbe keine Einbindungen. Stimmt aber leider nicht :)

Oder wäre es egal, wenn man die Verschiebung erst jetzt als Kommando einkippt? Rbrausse (talk) 19:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Ähem, nicht ganz klar was du mit dem letzten Satz meinst. Meinst du, wenn man den ursprünglich nicht dem CD gegebenen Befehl jetzt dem CD gibt, würde er die Nutzungen finden? Hmm, m.W. ist es so, dass der CD (oder welcher bot auch immer) nach einer Dateilöschung (egal warum) die Nutzungen entfernt. Eigentlich müssten diese Entlinkungen auch irgendwo gelogt werden. Falls du Hinweise (durch verblienene Rotlinks) hast, dass das nicht passiert ist, wäre es tatsächlich denkbar, den C damit nachträgöich zu beauftragen. Typischer Befehl: {{universal replace|vorheriger Dateiname.jpg|Tadarida brasiliensis - Bahamas - Long Island (sic) - Cartwright Cave - March 2006 - 2.jpg|reason=exact, or scaled-down duplicate}} --Túrelio (talk) 19:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

wir haben aneinander vorbeigeredet :) Ich meine die Delinker-Funktionalität "umbenennen in allen Projekten", nicht "Bildlink aus allen Projekten löschen". Jetzt wurde nach dem Verschieben dies nicht bei User:CommonsDelinker/commands eingetragen und ich bin mir unklar darüber, ob das 3 Tage später auch noch funktioniert oder ob man sich irgendwoanders her die Einbindungen der Weiterleitung File:Tadarida brasiensis - Bahamas - Long Island (sic) - Cartwright Cave - March 2006 - 2.jpg besorgen und das von Hand erledigen muss. Rbrausse (talk) 20:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

O.k., das entspricht dem von mir oben angeführten Befehl. Die derzeitigen Nutzungen der alten Version werden hier angegeben. Eigentlich sollte {{universal replace|Tadarida brasiensis - Bahamas - Long Island (sic) - Cartwright Cave - March 2006 - 2.jpg|Tadarida brasiliensis - Bahamas - Long Island (sic) - Cartwright Cave - March 2006 - 2.jpg|reason=exact, or scaled-down duplicate}} noch funktionieren. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Special:GlobalUsage ist es, danke - genau so was suchte ich. Die Handvoll Einbindungen verbiege ich nachher schnell per Hand statt tiefer in den Commons-Meta-Sumpf einzusteigen; normalerweise kenne ich es so, dass {{Rename}} läuft ohne dass ich mir über irgendwas Gedanken machen muss: Irgendein fleißiger Commons-Putzer erledigt das alles für mich :) Rbrausse (talk) 22:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

questions about files i've uploaded

Hi,

i've just read your messages. Please wait some days (i'm busy so i can work for wikipedia only on evening) to let me explain the situations. My images are capted from the web, i'm trying to update them with all required fields --Cucuriello (talk) 21:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Per default you have 7 days from tagging, which means 5 days from now. For an image such as File:Tarasconi action.jpg you need to provide the date (year) of creation of the photograpy, the name of the photographer, your source and, if you claim PD-Argentina, you need to provide proof that the image was created >25 year ago and that it was published >20 years ago in Argentina. --Túrelio (talk) 21:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

¡Muy importante!

Español (Spanish) Hola Turélio. ¿Como estás? Cargué uns archivos sin cuidado, no respetando los derechos de los autores, y sin poner el permiso del autor. Para no dañar mi imágen y mucho menos el de Wikipedia, "pido humildemente que elimine los archivos de abajo", que me cargan:

Português (Portuguese) Olá Turélio, tudo bom? Carreguei uns ficheiros por imprudência, não respeitando direitos autorais, e colocando sem a permissão do autor. Para não prejudicar a minha imagem e muito menos a da Wikipedia, "peço humildemente que exclua as imagens abaixo", por mim carregadas:

File:Fórum Ruy Barbosa - Salvador (Bahia).jpg File:Alto da Matriz - Jequié.jpg File:Rua Trecchina - Jequié.jpg File:Geminiano Saback.JPG

Gracias. Domingo, 9 de outubro de 2011. 5:36pm (Horário de Brasília). User talk: Gomes Netto.

Hola Gomes Netto, I have speedydeleted the 3 recent image and the unused portrait. However, why should there be a problem with the old postcards etc.? As they have been published in 1930, they should be free since end of 2000 per Brazilian Copyright law. --Túrelio (talk) 18:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Español (Spanish) Turélio ¡Muchas gracias! El punto es que las imágenes escaneadas de tarjetas postales antiguas que pertenecen a otra persona - una colección privada, y yo no pedí permiso. Por lo tanto, quiero corregir el mal que hice.

Português (Portuguese) Muito obrigado Turélio! A questão é que digitalizei as imagens de cartões-postais antigos pertencentes a outra pessoa - um acervo particular, e eu não pedi autorização. Então, desejo consertar o errado que fiz.

Quarta-feira, 12 de outubro de 2011. 7:15pm (Horário de Brasília). User talk: Gomes Netto.

File:Messier 60 Hubble WikiSky.jpg

Please restore the image File:Messier 60 Hubble WikiSky.jpg. It is Hubble image. I did process it myself from raw Hubble data. Thank you. (I'm not sure why it has been deleted from wikimedia before I even got the notice??) Friendlystar (talk) 22:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 07:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Marion Kreiner in Landgraaf 13.10.2011.jpg

Yep this is a photo of the TV, thus I hope I break no copyright laws.Pol574 (talk) 18:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but yes. TV content is copyrighted. Therefore, the files need to be deleted. Thanks for being honest. --Túrelio (talk) 18:51, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for cleaning up the copyvios and duplicates I tag. Badzil (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 21:06, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

This action

This action of removing a flickr fail mark is not OK correct? I don't think the uploader is the author...or at least there is no evidence to show that they are the same people. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:22, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. Deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 05:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

• Sure. No problem. --Leoboudv (talk) 08:36, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Zwei kaputte Vorschauen

Servus.

Da du bereits gestern freundlich warst hier noch zwei Dinge, bei denen du mir vermutlich helfen kannst:

Hier bestehen sämtliche Thumbs aus 0x0 Pixel-Fotos und haben 0 Bytes: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wohnpark_Alterlaa_Kirchenplatz.jpg

Bei dem hier stammt die 800x600-Vorschau von Version 1 (dunkleres Foto) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Station_Hietzing_Otto_Wagner_Teppich.JPG

thx im voraus, thomas

Hi Thomas, das erstere lädst du am besten nochmal unter gleichem Namen (Fehlermeldung wegklicken) hoch, da scheint beim Upload was schief gelaufen zu sein. Beim 2. würde ich einfach noch ein paar Tage warten. Es gibt leider seit längerer Zeit Probleme mit der Aktualisierung von Einzelansichten von Bildern, die sich auch durch mehrmaligen Purgen usw. nicht beseitigen lassen, weil die Prozessoren auf den WMF-Servern anscheinend mit dem Rendern nicht nachkommen (hab ich auch nur gelesen). --Túrelio (talk) 06:54, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Diese Datei (das erstere) scheint generell ein Problem zu machen. Reproduzierbar. Version 2. Nachdem ich 3 Pixel weggeschnitten habe gings. Version 3. Original liegt eh am Server, sollte mal direkt mit Kommandozeile gerendert werden und ggf als Fehler erfasst werden (für gimp?). Das JPG wurde von Picasa erstellt und ist mit diversen Programmen darstellbar. Es ist daher vermutlich kein Codierungsfehler enthalten (behaupte ich jetzt einfach mal so). Thomas Ledl (talk) 08:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Erstaunlich dass nach Wegschneiden von 3 Pixeln sich die Dateigröße vervierfacht hat (war vorher vielleicht zu stark komprimiert?); aber egal, jetzt gehts ja. Ich denke es lohnt sich angesichts der unzähligen Baustellen, die schon vor und erst recht nach dem MediaWiki-Update bestehen, nicht, das weiter abzuklären, da letztlich ja das Ergebnis zählt. Anders wäre es, wenn dir das jetzt ständig passieren würde. --Túrelio (talk) 08:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Ein anderes Foto mit 1600x900 hatte kein Problem (aber auch sehr geringe Dateigröße). Als ehemaliger Programmierer und jetzt Support täte ich es wegen der guten Reproduzierbarkeit weiterleiten, weil es der Idealfall für die Fehlerbehebung ist. Als Anwender ist es aber natürlich wie du sagst ein einmaliger Fall. Eigentlich müsste eh am Server irgendwo eine Meldung rauskommen. cu.Thomas Ledl (talk) 08:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Files on Simon Egan page

Hi there, the files:

• Capt Leonatos Sculpted by Simon Egan.jpg
• Black Goblin Bust Sculpted by Simon Egan.jpg

Were taken by me of models that I own. I don't understand how this might be a violation of copyright; could you explain please?

Mike

See by comment at File talk:Black Goblin Bust Sculpted by Simon Egan.jpg and Commons:CB#3D_art_.28sculptures_etc..29 for the general background. --Túrelio (talk) 10:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll ask for them to be removed.

Michael.j.lacey (talk) 12:11, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

File on Derby Grammar School page

Hi, thanks for picking up that File:Derby Grammar School Crest.jpg is missing evidence of permission - my oversight - I'm asking for that permission to be sent to OTRS now.

Michael.j.lacey (talk) 12:13, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Image erased

Hi Túrelio I saw You erased the image Vista_Alegre.jpg from article Vista Alegre(Trujillo) for copyright or some like that, I'd like to know why and how is that, I'm starting with wikipedia.have a good day.Eagle c5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.237.172.193 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 14 October 2011 (UTC) (UTC)

Hi 190.237.172.193, I cannot see the picture anymore (only admins can see deleted pictures), but the reason for the deletion was copyright violation (from Google Maps). I understand this as: Somebody took parts from Google Maps (their material is under copyright and mustn't be used here on Commons) without the permission of the copyright holder. --Schwäbin (talk) 20:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Screenshot of Google Earth, their terms of service are not compatible with Commons:Project scope#Required licensing terms. --Martin H. (talk) 21:23, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Kunwar Sir.jpg

Mind deleting this? Its been three days since the specified speedy delete date. LikeLakers2 (talk) 22:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, if you refer to the no-perm-tag, it means that the image can be deleted on 11th +7 days = 18th of October. --Túrelio (talk) 22:37, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thank you Turelio for marking possible copyright violations like file:Sam page.jpg Groetjes Neozoon (talk) 00:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar (and the template fixing ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 21:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Anesti_Vega.jpg

Hello, I have emailed a scanned, handwritten letter releasing copyright of the photo "Anesti_Vega.jpg" to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from Anesti Vega's official email address, as you requested. With the link you provided to tineye.com, the only result is from Anesti Vega's Official Blog, anestivega.wordpress.com, that is now moved to blog.anestivega.com. Please let me know if there are any other questions with getting this issue resolved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kipeowarrior (talk • contribs) 16. Oktober 2011, 02:14 Uhr (UTC)

Temporarily undeleted now. --Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This User

Vevoda22 uploaded 4 copyvios from flickr. I just ordered 4 {{Flickrreview}}s on them like this. 3 of the 4 images were licensed as 'ARR.' But for the rest of his uploads here which are not from flickr, I recommend that you check them and see if they can truly be used and are free--or if they should be deleted. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:06, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Already done by my colleague Martin H. --Túrelio (talk) 07:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

delte yu nan 2010

you erased the 2 pictures i upload yesterday because you find it on internet on http://slide.ent.sina.com.cn/image_4_163_10102.html ??? with writing copyright down the page ? Do you read Chinese ? The copyright down the page is not for the picture but for the web site.

i m the owner of this picture and i never give sina the right to use it, there is no agrement or contract for this photo, but in China sina can do what they want, you should know that! So how can i show it s my work ?

16 octobre 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edichina (talk • contribs) 16. Oktober 2011, 07:07 Uhr (UTC)

You uploaded File:Yu nan 2009.jpg and dated it from October 15, 2011. However it was found on http://women.sohu.com/20100301/n270448217.shtml, where the URL suggests it was uploaded already in March 2010. How did the people on sohu.com get this image more than 1 year before your upload to Commons? In addition, the file you uploaded has no EXIF data. That is typical for images simply grabbed from the web.

Your 2nd upload File:Yu Nan 2010.jpg has 296×444 pixel, was dated from October 15, 2011 and again has no EXIF data. However, on http://slide.ent.sina.com.cn/image_4_163_10102.html the image has 950x1432 pixel, has EXIF data and, from wat I can read on the page, seems to have been uploaded already in 2009. Again, how did the people on sina.com.cn get this image in this high resolution?

In most countries when somebody unlawfully publishes/uses your works/images, you can at least request them to take them down.

To provide evidence of your ownership you might upload the images with the original EXIF data from the camera and in a higher resolution. --Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I know now how they get this picture... Anyway i have upload a picture "Yu nan picture.tif" in the real size. This is the one i have used for the file "Yu Nan in 2010.jpg" and i m sure that nobody have use this picture. I have also send the permission to wikimedia-commons for the rights. What should i do next ? Edichina|17. Oktober 2011

Hi Edichina, yes, that is enough proof for your ownership of File:Yu Nan in 2010.jpg. Now, do you really want to release the high-resolution TIFF under a free license? Or shall we consider the TIFF file as a "test"? You might instead upload it in JPEG format. If you can do similar operations for the 2 above discussed images, you might just upload them as high-res JPEG, which means less upload time for you. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your work, I think it ll be ok like this, I mean it s better to share a good picture, i was just thinking in term of storage capacity for wikimedia commons. And i still able to use this picture in the future. Edichina|17. Oktober 2011

Datei mit Sonderzeichen

Danke fürs Umbenennen, ich kam nicht auf den Fehler. Grüße, --Blogotron (talk) 21:25, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die rasche Löschung!

Danke Dir für die so schnelle Erledigung meines Wunsches nach Schnelllöschung des Fotos vom Life Ball! Mir ist sehr daran gelegen, solchen Wünschen von Menschen die ich fotografiert habe ggf. auch rasch nachzukommen. Zum Glück passiert mir das erst zum zweiten Mal (seit Längerem frage ich vor dem Hochladen ohnehin in der Regel um eine Freigabe an). lg, Manfred / Tsui (talk) 18:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Borges SAP.jpg

Tá me perseguindo? Nem uma foto que eu mesmo tirei eu consigo fazer upload no Commons??? Ou tu tá fazendo isso pra conseguir bloquear a minha conta? Por favor, já tá passando dos limites! --Rafael1991 (talk) 20:22, 17 October 2011 (UTC-2)

Strong words from someone who has uploaded to Commons nothing than copyvios so far. File:Borges SAP.jpg is not your own work, as you claimed. You have stolen it from Panoramio, to where it had been uploaded by Leandro Kaiser already in 2007. --Túrelio (talk) 08:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

your upload (admin-only) vs. the absolutely identical image on Panoramio. --Túrelio (talk) 16:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

À partir do momento em que tu apaga o que eu escrevi perdeu qualquer razão que poderia ter. Pode falar o que quiser. O que eu tinha a dizer já foi dito. Só pra revisar, ataque pessoal no que eu escrevi? Não vi nenhum! Acho que tu vê coisas demais onde não tem. Engraçado isso. --Rafael1991 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC-2)

informations about my images

hi, recently you've contacted me to tell me problems about my images, now deleted. So I've not understood why there were problems. For example, if I find some images that I upload with PD-Italia (or PD-Italy maybe) is necessary to know author(s)? And I have the same question about PD-AR-Photo (Argentina). Thanks --Cucuriello (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cucuriello, as the messages on your talkpage state, there was missing information about source and permission.

Take, for example, File:Tarasconi action.jpg: you claimed it to be {{PD-AR-Photo}}, but you did not provide a source of the file, the author of the image, the date (year) of the creation of the original image, the publication where the image had been published >20 years ago, as required per {{PD-AR-Photo}}. --Túrelio (talk) 20:55, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Three deleted images due to the copyright law infringement (?)

Dear Túrelio, I have owned these paintings since before 1994 and the Polish Copyright Law (of 1994) says that it does not restrict the earlier rights (and the earlier Polish law – as far as I know – gave the owner all material rights if not expressly restricted on the artwork). Please, correct me if I am wrong, Regards, Happa (talk) 22:19, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Happa, the general rule is what I answered on the image talkpages and what is again explained here. I think that is true for all countries that have a copyright law. However, I am not a lawyer and know nothing specific about Copyright Law of Poland. If you believe that it is different in Poland, I would ask you to provide some evidence (legal commentary, § from Polish Copyright Law). If you prefer you might involve (or hand over to) my admin colleague User:Jarekt, who is pl-native speaker. --Túrelio (talk) 06:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished

Dear Túrelio, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help. You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 01:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File:PeppercornPoster.jpg

Hi you deleted the image for Mrs Peppercorn's Magical Reading Room. This image is copyright to me Mike Le Han as I wrote, produced and directed the film - I also own all material to the film and any online content. I also designed the image that was uploaded. Also the poster is freely available on the internet either through facebook, twitter and various online film websites for anyone to copy, download or distribute. Please would you reverse your action?

Thanks

Mike Le Han

--86.175.185.51 14:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

being "freely" available on the web has no relevance for copyright, as a lot of web content is either blatant copyvio and claimed as fair-use (per US copyright law). We accept only content that has verifiably been put under a free license by the rights holder, allowing any kind of use, including commercial use. If you have such rights over the above mentioned poster, then please send a written permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org wherein you should state your copyright over File:PeppercornPoster.jpg, your willingness to release it under a free license of your choice (provided it allows commercial use) and which should be sent from an email account that can be clearly associated to your business/office. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Bruxelles Divinite farouche Tibet 02 10 2011.jpg

Sorry, but the museum don't provide any date for this statue, so I can't write more. --Vassil (talk) 07:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I asked this question not for encyclopedic reasons, but to check whether the image is legal on Commons, as in Belgium there is not freedom of panorama. Is the original sculpture on ancient/old or a more recent work? --Túrelio (talk) 08:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Lynne Williams (File:Lynne Williams.jpeg)

Hi Túrelio,

The file I uploaded of Lynne Williams was personally sent to me by the subject and asked to be uploaded to Wikipedia. It was speedily deleted as a copyright violation. Can you help? Please contact me on my English Wikipedia userpage [69], as I do not regularly check this page. Thanks Namiba (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on :en. --Túrelio (talk) 18:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Doorways_in_the_Sand_Japan_cover_art.jpg‎ use in Doorways in the Sand

Please click on photo and the justification for use of the photo is clearly stated. Read carefully. It is for illustrative purposes, perfectly okay. Rhennius (talk) 01:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

What are you talking about? When I click on the image, I see the image, nothing else. And your entry "source=Internet" is ridiculous. Even if there would be a permission "for illustrative purposes", as you claim without proof so far, this would not be a free license but the equivalent to U.S. "fair use", which is not at all allowed on Commons. The page http://www.terra.dti.ne.jp/~okawa/erz/list/Doorways%20in%20the%20Sand.JPG which hosts this image, is clearly marked (C) All rights reserved. --Túrelio (talk) 06:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Using TinEye

Hello Túrelio

I see that you have closed my DRs as copyvio by showing TinEye results. I have already used it to look for those images but it didn't working (0 result). So can you tell me to use TinEye properly? Best regards--Quan (talk) 09:58, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Quan, could you please specify resp. link the DRs you are refering to. One I could easily identify was Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cristianu.runaldu.jpg. The TinEye-link I posted was http://www.tineye.com/search/e3c628455fdd5c9fdcdd4511194adf29fa671396/?sort=size&order=desc. When I clicked on it a second ago, I saw the same results as earlier this morning. Therefore I don't really understand the problem. Just in case, speedy-closing a DR, after more direct evidence was found, does not mean it was wrong to file the DR. In case your question doesn't refer to these image, in your preferences>gadgets>3rd paragraph you can "activate" a TinEye-option which then will appear among the options on each image page. --Túrelio (talk) 10:32, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I'm talking about the DR shown above and some more. I don't have any concern with speedy-closing a DR. I just ask you of how to use TinEye to search for copyvio easily. Because I can't find a link to any of them with TinEye so I have to file DRs but I believe that they are obvious copyvio--Quan (talk) 10:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

If changing the preferences, as explained above, doesn't work, you need to go to the TinEye-website and enter the complete URL of the image in question. --Túrelio (talk) 10:44, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your useful advice. In fact, I had copied the full link of image on Commons. So I will try to activate the tool in preference. Best regards--Quan (talk) 10:46, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

File:LeakedBattery_2701a.jpg

Hello,

I would like to use one of your pictures: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LeakedBattery_2701a.jpg to illustrate an educational article about batteries.

I work for a company that develops and distributes innovative, multiplatform science popularization products to help its partners enhance their educational, communications and marketing activities. We are presently developing a free virtual world named GAME FOR SCIENCE, dedicated to science and technology:

www.gameforscience.ca/ www.scienceenjeu.ca/

In the thematic lands of GAME FOR SCIENCE, players encounter entertaining games, fascinating information, and engaging videos, all of them science-related. Since September 2009, the site has attracted over 100,000 visitors. Site attendance is growing constantly and new content (games, videos, etc.) is regularly added. Innovative and designed to appeal to young people, this project helps to connect youth culture with science.

I am now writing small articles linked to science news that will be available for free on our internet site for one week, and then sold as teaching materiel. I would like to use your picture to introduce an article about batteries. Please let me know if I can use your picture and in which conditions.

Best regards,

Myriam Verzat

CREO inc. 460 Ste-Catherine O. Local 507 Montréal (Québec) H3B 1A7 tél. (514) 278-9595 fax. (514) 278-9793 67.68.218.228 18:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Myriam,

thanks for your interest. For a general overview see Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. As this image is licensed CC-BY-SA 3.0, you can use it for any purpose, provided the conditions/requirements of the license are met, which is 1) attribution of the author (me) and 2) mentioning of the license conditions. The minimal credit should be:

• © Túrelio (via Wikimedia-Commons); CC BY-SA

wherein the license name "CC BY-SA" should have an underlying link to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en or to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode. This is true for any online-use.

For offline-use, i.e. printed materials, the credit should read:

• © Túrelio (via Wikimedia-Commons); Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike.

In both cases the credit should be placed near the image (placement as mouse-over text is also possible), but in any case be clearly associated to the image.

I assume that this should be no problem with your intended form of use. Otherwise please contact me directly by email. --Túrelio (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

need your competent opinion

here--Алый Король (talk) 04:26, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Commented at DR. --Túrelio (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

thanx a lot --Алый Король (talk) 14:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Pino-presti-live 238px.jpg

Hi Túrelio, it's OK, thank you. --Pino Presti (talk) 10:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 10:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

About MIUI

Good afternoon! Today you deleted photos from Ukrainian article "MIUI". Please, explain, why had you done it? --93.75.173.127 14:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Unknown, for sure I did not remove anything from an Ukrainian article. What might have happened is that I have deleted images on Commons that were in use in an Ukrainian article. Thereafter, the DeLinker automatically removes the links from the articles. As I delete a lot of images (mostly because they are copyvios), I don't know to which images you are referring. Please give me the file names. Then I can provide you to reason for their deletion. --Túrelio (talk) 15:31, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

OK.For example (Користувач CommonsDelinker Вилучив файл Годинник_і_будильник.jpg, оскільки він був вилучений з Wikimedia Commons користувачем Túrelio). I think, you don't understand Ukrainian, so I'll express the same in English: (User CommonsDelinker deleted file "Годинник_і_будильник.jpg", because it was deleted from Wikimedia Commons by user Túrelio). But I can't understand the reason of deleting, because their author photographed them himself.

O.k. In general, making an image of something that is already copyrighted by somebody else, does not give you copyright over your photo. For example, if you go into a museum and take an image of a painting from a painter who is still living, you cannot distribute this photography (though shot by yourself), because it violates the copyright of the painter.

• File:Годинник і будильник.jpg - shows a touchpad screen (likely from a mobil phone or similar) with a background photo of a landscape; at least the landscape image is likely copyrighted. If User:Vitali pomazybida did also originally shoot this landscape image and then put it into his phone, the "screenshot" image might be o.k.
• File:Головний екран MIUI.jpg - shows the same touchpad screen but full of icons, wich are verly likely copyrighted.

--Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Just thanks; no need to respond!

Hello, Túrelio, thanks for deleting my screwed-up file: "File:ErrorForDeletion.jpg"; things had gone all pear-shaped! The same file in a slightly different form was what I had intended, and it is happily in the catalogue. Cheers, JonRichfield (talk) 11:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 11:41, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Botticelli's Birth of Venus souvenirs.jpg

Dear Túrelio! Can you please restore this one my file, with {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} lisense. I've made it same hour as File:Venus of Milo souvenirs by shakko.jpg (you can check the metadata), but have lost the lisence somewhere during upload and it was quickly deleted before I've noticed it. Shakko (talk) 09:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done. When adding the license tag, you forgot to remove the no-license tag. --Túrelio (talk) 10:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

danke schön:*Shakko (talk) 10:36, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Всегда пожалуйста. --Túrelio (talk) 10:40, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Big Bang Lollipop 2 cover.png

Hi, I uploaded File:Big Bang Lollipop 2 cover.png. please check the page 'Commons:Deletion requests/File:Big Bang Lollipop 2 cover.png' --Puramyun31 (talk) 11:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

More copyvio?

You recently deleted four images by User:Gt5p. This was not the first violation, and based on the quality of the images and the user's history I suspect that most remaining contributions are copyvio. I checked some of them:

• File:Levi Leipheimer 2011.jpg ‎- Photos courtesy of Graham Watson as pr. this
• File:Manuel Cardoso 2011 RadioShack.gif -‎ from here
• File:Philip Deignan2.jpg ‎- from here.

--Pirker (talk) 16:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. However, feel free to add copyvio tags by yourself. You need not be an admin to do that, especially with such solid evidence. --Túrelio (talk) 18:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Renzo Rosso by Anton Corbijn.jpg

Hi Túrelio,

Thanks for your help and input on the images I uploaded.

I will categorize the images better from now on and get the signed copyrights from the copyright owner, Diesel, as soon as possible.

Thanks again.

Wellescorp (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)WellesCorp

Hi WellesCorp, if you work for or act on behalf of Diesel Corp., please ask them to provide you a permission of those works of which they are the rights holder. --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, although the weird name Im actually just an independent writer, though obviously with a lot of interest in Diesel and its founder. I have emailed the Diesel press office and asked them to supply written permission for the photos. Hopefully it will come through soon. Thanks again for your help! All best.--Wellescorp (talk) 20:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Question on duplicates

I think the "duplicate files = always speedy delete" rule needs a bit of looking into. In 99% of cases, its not a big deal. However there's one class of images I'm really not sure about. What if the files are identical but depict two different subjects?

For example File:Blason Bourgogne-comté ancien(aigle).svg and (the deleted) Special:Undelete/File:Roussillon-Anjou.svg have identical SVG content. However they have fundamentally different descriptions as they depict two different subjects (which happen to be visually identical). I'm not keen on the idea of merging the descriptions and having one file description handle every different subject. We have enough legibility problems with many different language descriptions on one file. To have many different subjects?

Given the complexity of this type of situation, it feels like a full deletion request is probably better (ie it should not be eligible for speedy deletion). In such a DR, I'd probably vote to keep (based on concern I have above), but don't know what community consensus will be on this.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:57, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

As I have used "your" special script for dupes for a lot of files in the last months, I have indeed found situations where I did halt the already started process, especially when there were extensive descriptions which were not identical between the 2 files, as with File:The Pinwheel Galaxy, M101, in the Infrared.jpg. As of yet I have then left those files with the dupe-tag to other colleagues. Most are gone, anyway. The above mentioned File:Roussillon-Anjou.svg was in the dupe-queue already since 3 days, as I had hesitated to perform the deletion until today. I have no problem with restoring it, though the links may already have been replaced. --Túrelio (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

To be honest I'm not particularly bothered about the file in question here (and see no real need to restore) - the deleted version might be of a different subject, but I don't think it was in use and its caption/file name don't appear to be that useful. I'm more concerned about the implications for our speedy criteria as clearly, discussion is needed for such files. In the case of the one for the Pinwheel Galaxy, merging the descriptions is quite complex; and isn't really in the deleting admin's remit (we just want to push a button!). In the case of COAs, its if two seperate files or one with a combined caption is the better way of presenting.

I wonder if it would be sensible to tighten up the wording of the policy, and on the template, to ensure users are aware of the need to sort out the description and don't just say "bitwise identical = delete"?

Btw, on that image OSX is frustrated about - how about a full deletion, followed by a selective restore? I think that would do it (and you could also rm the tag nonsense edits).--Nilfanion (talk) 23:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Photos

Hi Túrelio, i think the Watermarks aren't permited in this files no? But the name of author are listed at the Summary. Thanks. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 21:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

It's more "not wanted" than "not permitted". However, without the original file version you wouldn't have got the Flickr-review per bot. As it has been confirmed now, feel free to revert to your initial version. --Túrelio (talk) 21:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Now i understood. Thanks. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 21:53, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Congrat's for your efficiency !

Hello !

Just a small message to congratulate you on your speed and efficiency as a Commons Administrator. Every speedy delete or copyvio that I find is deleted by you few minutes later... !

Respectfully, Kevin Benoit ^{[Let's talk about it!]} 21:41, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Deleted Image of File:Dale-A-Kimball.jpg

I am a new user and trying to figure out how all of this works. I am curious of why the image that I uploaded was taken off Wikipedia Commons. I believe it said I did not give adequate information on where I got the image, but I put the website where it came from. Is there something that I missed and if so is there anyway that I can go back and fill in more information so the picture can be uploaded. I am doing this page for a homework assignment and going to interview Judge Kimball in about the week and would like this page to be finished in my sandbox so that I can show him and make the corrections if there are any.

Thanks for the help,

U0601079 — Preceding unsigned comment added by U0601079 (talk • contribs) 26. Oktober 2011, 01:02 Uhr (UTC)

Hi U0601079,

in both instances of your upload of Dale-A-Kimball.jpg you missed to add/choose a license at upload. Therefore a bot tagged the image with "missing license". As this was your first upload, I can understand that you may have had no idea which license to choose. In cases of not-own works and when you are unsure, it might be a good idea to ask at COM:VP for help.

Back to the image: your first upload was deleted as 1) it was missing a license and, while clearly being not-own work, 2) as there was no evidence why it should be free. Deep-links such as http://static.deseretnews.com/images/article/sidebar/585040964/Dale-A-Kimball.jpg are of no use for us, as they don't allow to check for the author/permission/etc. But from your 2nd upload I see that you learned that already. I wonder where did you find "Brady Snyder" as the photographer?

A minor problem with your second upload was that you used the author of the article "Pat Reavy" as the author/photographer of the image, though it is clearly labelled as "provided by U.S. District Court". I have corrected that now. The only remaining question is whether the PD-USGov license is applicable here, as it only refers to works of the federal government. As I see from en:United States district court, district courts are part of the federal court system. Therefore it might be o.k., though we are relying only on the "provided by U.S. District Court" citation in the newspaper.

As you are going to see Judge Kimball personally, why don't you prepare to take a few shots of him with your own camera? --Túrelio (talk) 06:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Uganda pic (File:Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill protest.jpg)

I don't see any evidence that the license on Flickr was modified to reflect noncommercial subsequent to uploading. Did I miss something? I note that the Flick-upload-bot doesn't validate the license: it is entered manually. I speculate that the Flickr license was always NC and an honest mistake made during upload.Lionelt (talk) 12:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

"... doesn't validate the license" - This would be a desaster, if true. Are you really sure about that? As of yet I had assumed that it did the same as our Flickr review bot. --Túrelio (talk) 12:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Trying to use http://toolserver.org/~bryan/flickr/upload on that flickr file says "The image on Flickr is not licensed under a sufficiently free license." and I can't go "next", thus unless there's some bug, it should have had an other license at that time. _→AzaToth 17:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that information. --Túrelio (talk) 18:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Oops.Lionelt (talk) 19:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

File:11-09-fotofluege-cux-allg-25a.jpg

Als IP habe ich da Singular eingetragen, das war falsch. Aber mein nächster Edit??? Was mache ich falsch? --Ralf Roleček 17:49, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Ach, du warst das. Cats sind case-sensitive, wie es auf neudeutsch heißt, deshalb müsstest du Oil platforms klein schreiben. Das kannst du dir aber eigentlich auch sparen, weil die Haupt-cat Mittelplate bereits eine Unterkategorie zu Oil platforms o.ä. ist. Soll ich die IP von deinem Edit verstecken? Gruß. --Túrelio (talk) 18:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Radios of Catalonia

Hi. Why did you delete a category in the plural form in favor of a category in the singular form? --Eusebius (talk) 18:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, I did it just because it was tagged as badname by User:Jordiferrer, who works much in catalonian cats. De facto, the overcat to Radio of Catalonia is Radio of Spain. So, the mistake, if there is one, seems to be systemic. --Túrelio (talk) 18:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Frage

Hallo Túrelio, ich weiß nicht, ob ich dazu berechtigt bin, aber ich möchte gern vorschlagen, den Status des User:Chris.urs-o wenigstens zum "Automatisch bestätigten Benutzer" zu ändern. Chris.urs-o macht hier so umfangreiche und sinnvolle Arbeit, dass die "kontrolliert" Bearbeitung eher Zeitverschwendung ist. Ich kenne nicht das Procedere für meine Frage, aber Du kannst mir sicherlich Auskunft geben. Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Orchi, ich weiß zwar nicht, ob ich das überhaupt könnte. Es ist aber nicht notwendig, weil er das bereits ist [70], was auch der Information auf Commons:Autoconfirmed users entspricht. --Túrelio (talk) 18:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, danke für Deine schnelle Auskunft. Ich dachte, Du könntest in Deiner Funktion solch ein Recht vergeben. Bei mir erscheint in Commons immer noch ein rotes Ausrufezeichen in meiner Beobachtungslist, wenn Chris.urs-o eine Datei geändert hat. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Tja, jetzt wo du es sagst. Als ich mir einen aktuellen Datei-Edit von ihm in der Differenzansicht angeschaut habe, stand er tatsächlich noch zum kontrollieren an, was ja eigentlich nicht der Fall sein sollte. Werd's mir morgen mal genauer anschauen. --Túrelio (talk) 18:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Danke! Orchi (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Weiss nicht warum RE rillke questions? auch involviert ist, aber Danke für den neuen Status ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 16:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Inzwischen ist auch klar, was fehlte: das Commons:Autopatrollers#Autopatrolled. Möglicherweise hat Rillke - nach meiner allgemeinen Frage auf COM:AN - dir den Status gegeben. --Túrelio (talk) 22:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Sidur Adir ba-marom

Why did you deleted the file Sidur Adir ba-marom.jpg? It’s my own work, I have got the copyright. There’s no copyright violation at all. --Thomazzo (talk) 20:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, how comes the same image is found at http://nakladatelstvibergman.cz/images/sidur_promo.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 20:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Because I have made the book and I have post it at the nakladatelstvibergman.cz webpage. --Thomazzo (talk) 10:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

O.k., then please do as User:Daniel Baránek has already advised you (if I understand his comment correctly) and send a verifiable permission/confirmation to OTRS. After you have done this, drop me a note; I can then temporarily undelete the image until an OTRS volunteer has checked the permission. --Túrelio (talk) 10:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Brooklyn Museum files

Hello Turelio. I saw that you marked many Brooklyn Museum files as having no license. The Brookyn Museum has set up a partnership with Commons, and Commoners were supposed to provide the license (see {{Brooklyn Museum-no known restrictions}}). There are still many licenses license missing, but since {{PD-art}} should almost always be applicable, I think we should add them ourselves rather than warning the museum about that.--Zolo (talk) 09:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually I did not warn User:BrooklynMuseum, but only their bot, which is done by the script automatically, anyway. Instead I asked User:Dcoetzee to jump in, as he is involved in art images. However, if you are prepared to add the appropriate license tag, feel free to do so and to remove the no-license tag. I stumbled over this problem inadvertently when trying to work on about 100 dupe-speedies which would all end in these no-license images. --Túrelio (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to do some of them. Since all images are 2D, maybe a bot could add "PD-art" tags based on the date ?--Zolo (talk) 09:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Regrettably I have no knowledge about bots; just dealing with the problems they sometimes produce ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 09:57, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

It seems that user:Romaine has fixed them all (by hand I guess). I removed messages from the bot page. Cheers--Zolo (talk) 11:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 12:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Big Bang Lollipop 2 cover.png

hi, I'm talking about "Commons:Deletion requests/File:Big Bang Lollipop 2 cover.png". the Flickr account LGEPR is valid, but Big Bang Lollipop 2 cover.png was deleted. what's happen? --Puramyun31 (talk) 01:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Puramyun31, you should either talk to the deleting admin, Beria, or formally request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 06:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Jerzy Vetulani fot Lech Polcyn.jpg

Hello, Recently you wrote on my user talk that the picture mentioned in the subject was reported for deletion because the author didn't confirm his authorship in the OTRS system. Today he communicated that he sent a message on OTRS mail.

Could you please reinstate the image? Francesco 13 (talk) 17:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 18:29, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you very much. Francesco 13 (talk) 18:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Altes Foto - Lizenzfrage

Hallo Túrelio, ich habe vor kurzem dieses alte Bild aus dem Netz gefischt. Repro eines zweidimensionalen Werkes (Photo), Urheber 1912 gestorben, Erstveröffentlichung in den Vereinigten Staaten vor 1923. Ich hatte schon mal bei Ra'ike nachgefragt, sie scheint aber nicht an Bord zu sein ;). Falls du irgendwelche Rechtsprobleme siehst, bitte ganz flott löschen. Ansonsten: Ist die Lizenzierung so in Ordnung? Danke und Grüße, --Alupus (talk) 14:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Alupus, da unklar zu sein scheint, wer das Repro vom PD-Original gemacht hat, könnte man erwägen, PD-Art hinzuzusetzen (gemäß COM:ART). Man kann auch PD-Art und -US kombinieren. Der Dateiname auf der Quelle deutet m.E. auf die Herkunft aus einer eher offiziellen Sammlung in den USA. Das Motiv bezieht sich vermutlich auf de:Tristan und Isolde, oder? --Túrelio (talk) 15:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Ich denke auch, es bezieht sich auf Tristan und Isolde. Nähere Angaben habe ich aber leider nicht :(. Es war schon schwer genug, etwas zum Fotografen herauszufinden. Nun, ich habe es vom Blog geholt, da da keine Rechtshinweise waren. Ich bin z. Zt. unterwegs in Sachen Emma Barton, sehr interessante Bilder und interessante Lebensgeschichte und Person. Wenn man nach Barton googelt, findet man eine Menge neuerer Aufnahmen einer aktutuellen Schauspielerin. Hier führt man aus, Rechte an den Bildern zu haben - aber auch Frau Barton ist über siebzig Jahre tot, und die meisten Bilder wurden auch ausgestellt zu Lebzeiten. Ich habe dort aber mal vorsichtshalber eine Anfrage gestartet und bin gespannt, was als Antwort folgt. Grüße und Danke, --Alupus (talk) 16:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Wow, kaum glaublich dass 'Old Familiar Flowers' von 1919 stammt. Dass eine UK-Firma Rechte reklamiert überrascht nicht so sehr, weil dort ja Repro u.U. eigenes Copyright verleihen kann[71]. Sollte hier aber trotzdem unter PD-Art laufen. Vielleicht wär es klüger, es mit einer Socke hochzuladen. --Túrelio (talk) 16:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Das Flowersbild hatte ich auch im Auge :). Komme fast in die Neigung, mir es da zu bestellen. Aber ich warte jetzt mal die Anfrage ab. Dann hätte ich gerne noch Alma Mater, weil es ein Selbstportrait als Jungfrau Maria mit ihrem jüngsten Sohn ist. Aber ich muß erstmal das Buch weiter auswerten. --Alupus (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Gerade bemerkt: man muß nach Bildern von Mrs. G A Barton suchen, so signierte sie ja. Dieses Selbstportrait als heilige Katharina ist ebenso eines ihrer besten Werke, aber wie im Link reproduziert unbrauchbar. --Alupus (talk) 07:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Falls das auch aus Camera Work ist, vielleicht gibt es dieses Magazin ja in einer nahegelegenen Bibliothek. --Túrelio (talk) 08:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Leider nein. Frau Barton ist nicht in der Camera Work veröffentlicht worden. Von der Camera Work wurden sowieso nur je 1.000 Stück produziert und maximal 500 verkauft. Die Restbestände dieses philanthropisch motivierten Zuschussgeschäftes hat Stieglitz bis auf wenige Ausnahmen vernichtet. Für alle etwa 50 Ausgaben zusammen sind schon mehr als 300.000 US $ geboten worden. Es gibt aber Drucke in deutschen Werken von 1905, 06. Bei diesen kann dann das UK-Copyright auf Repros nicht greifen! Ich habe die auch schon im Netz aufgestöbert, aber die Seite enthält keinen Copyrightvermerk. Daher wäre es mir am liebsten, die Bücher zu beschaffen und dann selber zu reproduzieren. Wir brauchen ja keine druckfähige Vorlage mittels Phase 1 Rückteil, sondern ein gutes Bild von etwa 1200 mal 2000 Pixeln. Oder einen Scan auf einem guten Scanner. Gruß, --Alupus (talk) 09:56, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

bad quality

Hallo Túrelio, deine Speedies auf File:Camara web.jpg und File:Cable Paralelo Impresora.jpg entsprechen nicht Commons:Deletion_policy#Redundant.2Fbad_quality ("Redundant or low quality files only get deleted on a case by case basis after they are listed at Commons:Deletion requests.") ... falls du es noch nicht wusstest. ;-) Zumindest sind die Dateien seit 8 Tagen von niemandem gelöscht - vielleicht deswegen. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 04:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Dann hätte nichts dagegen gesprochen, wenn du sie in DR umgewandelt hättest, wie ich das auch nicht so selten tue. --Túrelio (talk) 19:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Richtig, das hätte ich machen können. Oder du machst es und machst es das nächste Mal gleich so. Siehst du irgendeine Verpflichtung von mir, dass ich das machen müsste? Dein Tonfall scheint mir so. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 20:56, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

du mich meinst - ich mag den Trash nicht - aber es ist eben kein Speedy-Grund. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 14:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Annalisa Scarrone

For example in this http there is File:AnnalisaScarrone.jpg and all 5 photo Category:Annalisa Scarrone are on forum. --79.19.30.37 17:01, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. But, File:AnnalisaScarrone.jpg was uploaded in May 2011, where the article http://www.gaywave.it/articolo/marco-carta-e-annalisa-scarrone-insieme-per-essere-insultati/31509/ is from June 2011. So, the article may have used the image from Commons. Also, the image on Commons has far better quality/resolution that the one in the article. Do you have links for the other images in this forum? --Túrelio (talk) 17:08, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I try. That day were shot same videos (for example) (other are not avaible), forum I don't link because I don't save for the "filtro anti-spam", and many photos are in facebook. For example only File:DSCN2769.JPG have metadata, and yet the uploader is always the same person. However if you say that is all ok, for me it's ok. Good evening, now I go out. --79.19.30.37 17:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Foto

Mi dici cos'hanno le mie foto caricate che non vanno bene??? Io ho semplicemente preso le mie immaginini da quì http://www.postproduktie.nl/voetbal.htm come fanno in molti ed è un fotografo riconosciuto da wikipedia è Paul Blank--Steven Chiefa (talk) 23:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't read dutch, however, the source website clearly says "© 2010 Paul Blank. Alle rechten voorbehouden". If there is a general permission (OTRS) for Paul Blank's photos, then you as the uploader have to present it and add the ticket to each image. --Túrelio (talk) 23:46, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Albert Kappis, Schreibkabinett der Königin Olga in der Villa Berg, 1858

Hallo Túrelio, kannst Du bitte das Bild löschen? Das andere (File:Albert Kappis, Kabinett der Königin Olga in der Villa Berg.jpg) ist richtig.-- Gerd Leibrock (talk) 11:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:14, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Kannst du mir das genauer erklären?

Hallo Túrelio, 1 "nominator, who actually hasn’t edited this page since 2 days". Ich weiß nicht, was du damit sagen willst, kannst du mir das erklären? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 14:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Das, was ich an der de-admin-req (ähnlich wie schon an anderen) kritisiere, ist im wesentlichen in deren Verlauf entstanden und resultiert aus den Kommentierungen, wenngleich ich es als Systemfehler ansehe. Da ich deine "Wikilove"-message erwähnt hatte, wollte ich den Eindruck vermeiden, dass sich meine grundsätzliche Kritik gegen dich oder spezifisch gegen deine Edits darin richtet. --Túrelio (talk) 16:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah, okay, danke. Ich war mir nicht sicher, ob das - im Gegenteil - als Vorwurf gegen mich gemeint war. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 20:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Call to NYC 311 2007-01-08 10-37 EST.ogg

How exactly does {{Fair use delete}} work? I see that the file is orphaned globally, yet it is not deleted. So what is precluding its deletion? Train2104 (talk) 21:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

This template is used for to-be-deleted files that are in use (or likely to be) on :en, as :en allows fair-use. The template puts the file into a special category that is currently maintained only by the person who invented this system. Usually, when such a file is uploaded locally on :en uder fair use, the file is deleted from Commons. As the image was no longer in use anywhere, I've deleted it now. --Túrelio (talk) 21:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

BSicons

Thanks for deleting the BS icons I had incompetently uploaded as Bsicon* instead of BSicon*. I’ll try to be more attentive in the future! :-) -- Tuválkin ✉ 22:48, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 22:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Green button issue

Hey,

Identified and fixed the problem. It was result of some recent changes to MediaWiki:AjaxQuickDelete.js. Fixed now and appears to be working - this is what was wrong.

My attitude to these black boxes is similar to your own (I don't trust them), but if they get the job done I won't complain :)--Nilfanion (talk) 23:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 23:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

MauroDemonstration

Dear Turelio, I would like to urge you to read descriptions of Commons Images, before deleting them. The permission was granted on Twitter. [72] Grashoofd (talk) 10:15, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

O.k., I've undeleted it, but tagged with no-permission. Please find a way to send a record of this "permission" to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org), so that an OTRS volunteer can checked whether that's sufficient and then eventually issue an OTRS ticket. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

毛泽东 (=Mao Zedong)

Hi, Túrelio. What do you think about this and this? Is it good reason to nominate for deletion? --Алый Король (talk) 16:06, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Алый Король, no, as "our" image is claimed under FOP exemption, which seems to be valid to me. --Túrelio (talk) 16:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

but info in description seems to be wrong --Алый Король (talk) 17:07, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

What specifically do you think is wrong? --Túrelio (talk) 17:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I just hesitate why this work (as reported, attributed to Zhang Zhenshi and a committee of artists) so similar to photo made by Zheng Jingkang. --Алый Король (talk) 17:32, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

If I understand the external article, linked in the description, correctly, then this is a painting, which may of course have been painted after a photography. --Túrelio (talk) 17:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Free image

Hello, this image is free:[73] as the copyright has expired. A disruptive user and his sock continues to ignore the fact that its free and I pointed this out in my edit summary. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 02:02, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I am the "disruptive user" and the "sock." I inadvertently forgot to log in and restored your template (deleted by Supreme Deliciousness here and here) under an IP. I realized the error after I clicked saved. In any event, I'd like SupremeD to explain how I am a "disruptive editor" and a "sock" when my concern is focused on a meritorious Copyvio claim?--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 02:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

The "disruptive user" is based on your long history of non neutral editing and propaganda pushing and inserting of falsehoods and inaccuracy's and fiction into Wikipedia articles and commons images. But its also that I pointed out that its free in my edit summary but you continued to re ad the tag despite this. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Me a Propagandist? Now there's the pot calling the kettle black--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 02:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Recreating deleted category

I'd like to inform you that I have recreated a category that you deleted. For my reasons see please the discussion on Category:Cities and villages by Obersee.--Pingelig (talk) 10:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem with that. Thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 10:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Augusta Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach

Hallo Túrelio, auf der Seite de:Augusta von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach gibt es einen Link nach Wikimedia Commons: {{Commonscat|Augusta Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach|Augusta von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach}}

Die Category:Augusta Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach hast Du gelöscht.

Die angezeigte Begründung ist für mich als Laien nicht durchsichtig. Was ist passiert? Wurde die Category umbenannt? Wenn ja, in was? Und warum hat man den toten Link nach Commons stehen lassen? -- Gerd Leibrock (talk) 12:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

O, now I see your language is English. Let me repeat it in English. In the Wikipedia article de:Augusta von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach is a link to Wikimedia Commons: {{Commonscat|Augusta Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach|Augusta von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach}}

You have deleted the Category:Augusta Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach.

I as a layman cannot understand the reasons indicated. What has happened? Has the category been renamed? If yes, what is the new name? And why has nobody changed the dead link in the Wikipedia article? -- Gerd Leibrock (talk) 12:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ich denke die sind hier gelandet. -- RE rillke questions? 12:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Gerd, no, I'm a native German-speaker and "a layman" as well. Trotz des Hinweises von Rainer hier noch die ausführliche Antwort: Die cat Category:Augusta Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach ist gelöscht worden, weil Category:Augusta of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach offenbar als richtig(er) angesehen wird. So habe ich jedenfalls den Löschantrag von User:Songsblame "correct name, moved media" verstanden. Leider wird der Inhalt aus dem Schnelllöschformular nicht immer korrekt/vollständig in die edit summary des Lösch-Logs übernommen, was dann die Löschbegründung unverständlich erscheinen lässt, wie leider in diesem Fall. Hinzu kommt, dass es keine vernünftige Funktion gibt, um Links auf cat-Seiten aus anderen Projekten zu erkennen (und dann ggf. zu korrigieren). --Túrelio (talk) 13:10, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die Erklärung, Túrelio. --Gerd Leibrock (talk) 07:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Bilderlöschungen

• File:Albert Kappis, Schreibkabinett der Königin Olga in der Villa Berg, 1858.jpg
• File:Albert Kappis, Empfangssalon der Königin Olga in der Villa Berg, 1858.jpg

Hallo Túrelio, das Teil hatte ich auch schonmal auf dem Tisch, habe damals den Löschantrag entfernt, da die beiden Bilder deutliche Unterschiede aufwiesen. Warum hast Du das jetzt gelöscht? Gruß a×p_de^Hello! 15:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Axpde, [74]. Ich hatte vorher nachgefragt, welche Version die "richtige" ist, weil sie gespiegelt und farblich auch unterschiedlich waren; und mich dann auf die Auskunft des Hochladers beider Versionen verlassen. --Túrelio (talk) 16:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion?

Hi the pic you asked about was taken with my camera phone and I had permission to upload it. Sunshine120 (talk) 17:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. You should then tag it with the template {{Consent}}. --Túrelio (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

msg

hi you left me a msgs about the photo of rodolfo jimenez he had ginven me permision to use it it belong to him but now i dont have anything to do with him can you please errase it and regarding the other one of Carolina sandoval titled mme osea yo that was taken from her camera and she gave it to me to put it in her wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Topmartz (talk • contribs) 5. November 2011, 21:48 Uhr (UTC)

Permission to deleted file

Hi, the permission to publish deleted file Sidur Adir ba-marom.jpg was send to OTRS. Could you renew the picture please (at least until someone will check the permission? Thank you. --Thomazzo (talk) 09:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

2 restored images

Hello, Just that you know that I restored 2 images you tagged as copyvios: File:Two JF-17 readying for take-off.jpg, File:JF-17_background_Mirage_5_ROSE_foreground.jpg. There are actually under a free license. Best regards, Yann (talk) 11:50, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I had only seen the "© Copyright 2010 — Pakistan Defence. All Rights Reserved" at the bottom of the page, but not the quote at the end of the posting. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 12:03, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Bitte

Hallo Túrelio, könntest Du bitte hier: User talk:PicTrans mal nach dem Rechtem schauen. Die Bilder stammen alle von User:Dalton Holland Baptista und waren unter "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License" in "citizendium.org" (Teil von Wikipedia??) veröffentlicht. Dalton hat Wikipedia leider verärgert und genervt verlassen. Aber wir sollten seine Bilder hier in Commons retten. Wo liegt der Fehler und was kann man tun? Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:28, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, zunächst einmal vielen Dank für Dein spontanes Handeln in dieser Angelegenheit. In der englichen WP war die Diskussion ebenfalls über einige Bilder von Dalton aus "citizendium.org" . Könntest Du bitte bei folgenden Bildern die Situation ebenfalls klären?:

• File:Catasetum barbatum 009.jpg
• File:Leptotes harryphillipsii plant.jpg
• File:Miltonia candida.jpg
• File:Miltonia spectabilis1 cz.jpg
• File:Sandstone cliffs close to Analandia.jpg

Vielen Dank für Deine Mühe. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

...danke für Deine schnelle und immer zuverlässige Hilfestellung. Grüße. ~~

revert

Please explain me this revert! Can't a contributor at citizendium do a copyvio? and if so, why not? The link/image has neither Exif data, nor who shot it, camera information, where it was shot, NOTHING! mabdul 19:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

What is your evidence for copyvio? If you read the original uploaders userpage, it is at least credible or plausible that he shot the images by himself. --Túrelio (talk) 19:41, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

heh, and because I stalk some things, this can be called a edit conflict ;) mabdul 19:39, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand what want to say with that? --Túrelio (talk) 19:41, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Read en:Citizendium and then register there. Everybody is able to upload there. And I doubt that this isn't a copyvio, so I tagged it here at wikim/pedia as "no permission". mabdul 19:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

"Everybody is ..." - Would that be any different from here at Commons? --Túrelio (talk) 19:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

No, and if anybody doubt that the image is legally here, everybody is able to tag it with no permission and it will be deleted within a week ;) So... I did this... mabdul 19:48, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Achja, wir können auch in deutsch schreiben ;) mabdul 19:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Eh, I don't say you are bad or malicious. I just asked for a rationale for your tagging, as you should have been aware that the original photographer/uploader has left Ctizendom and likely will not reply.

Look, if have done some checks for File:Catasetum barbatum 009.jpg: 0 hits on TinEye; 1 hit (:en use) on Google image search for "Catasetum barbatum"; Google search for "Catasetum barbatum 009.jpg" and "Catasetum barbatum 009" did not provide any new or older source. On Citizendom the image seems to have been uncontested since its upload on 6 March 2009. --Túrelio (talk) 19:58, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Wenn du das weiterhin für zu zweifelhaft hältst, dann stell bitte einen regulären LA/DR, damit der Gesamtkontext berücksichtigt/diskutiert werden kann. Denn no-source und no-perm führt, sofern es der bearbeitende admin nicht revertiert, in diesem Szenario zwangsläufig zur Löschung. --Túrelio (talk) 20:04, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Album Cover copyright problem

Hi Túrelio, you tagged file File tagging File:Gevolt - AlefBase - Cover.jpg with "missing permission" template. But this is a album cover, so this reproduction from it is allowed by everyone on the band off.site, and on every site where the album is in for sales and download. and the source i marked so what needed more?KremBrule commons (talk) 19:17, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi KremBrule, that is a frequent misunderstanding. The uses you describe above are equivalent to the US construction of fair-use, which is not allowed on Commons. The content we offer on Commons has to be freely licensed for any purpose, which requries a written permission/license by the rights holder. See also Commons:CB#Album covers. --Túrelio (talk) 19:22, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Orobanche rubens

Dear Túrelio You deleted Category:Orobanche rubens on the 13th Oct. 2011, I don't think it was a good idea, I'd like to know your sources. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:00, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Chris, I'm somewhat surprised now, as you had tagged this cat for speedy deletion with {{Bad name|Orobanche lutea}}. Or did you have something else in mind and have just choosen the wrong template? Feel free to recreate it by yourself. --Túrelio (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought that it could have been my fault. I got better with handling the databases, and I try to avoid to delete the category tree on commons nowadays, I use redirs instead. Database Tela-Botanica.org, has a somewhat different point-of-view. I have to check deeper the genus Orobanche. Sorry, once more. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:13, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

review

Hi, Túrelio. Can I ask to review this image? --Алый Король (talk) 15:25, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

O.k. From which source did you get the date (2011-10-18) information? --Túrelio (talk) 15:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

here but plz dont worry. it is the photographer who operates the flickr account and who voluntarily released this under a free license after my request. He is a good friend of mine and actually he had already released a bunch of photos under CC for wiki. Actually he think that this photo not good enough for his flickr-blog so he is going to delete it. Is it ok now? --Алый Король (talk) 15:39, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I had it already reviewed before putting the above question. --Túrelio (talk) 16:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Kansas City Municipal Stadium plaque.jpg

Not to put words in the uploader's mouth, but what's the actual issue with this thing? It's not a statue, it's a plaque. Are you saying that plagues are to be treated the same as artworks??? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, though I only notified the uploader, the user[75] who tagged it, had likely in mind that the 2 photographies on the plaque may still be under copyright. The fact that the photographers may have agreed to this use on the real plaque, does not necessarily mean, they also allow off-plaque uses, as they were aware that FOP exemption is not valid for such works in the US. --Túrelio (talk) 16:21, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

So it's the pictures that are the problem? Also, perhaps it could be used as fair-use if it's kept on wikipedia instead of commons? And I will also ask the tagger. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:01, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

At least from my mind-reading of the tagging user. Fair-use on :en might go if there is no free replacement. --Túrelio (talk) 17:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've posted at both the tagger and the uploader. Thanks for your kind assistance. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Please do me a favor

Hi. I meant to only upload two versions of this file, but I clicked submit by accident on my bot. Could you please delete version 2 and 3 of this file, because they need to be split. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh right. I probably should let you know what the file is: File:LtGovBradOwen.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Sahrana Djindjica1.jpg

Please read my recent comment. PS: and please close this discussion. Alex ^discussion 19:11, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I've commented at both. --Túrelio (talk) 20:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

+Commons:Deletion requests/File:Precrtana zastava libijskih pobunjenika.png --Alex ^discussion 22:14, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Tonkatoy.jpg

Hi,

I do not have the time nor the will to ask the original owner. How do I bring it back into the English Wikipedia ? After that, I will ask its removal from Commons.

Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 11:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, you should ask an admin on :en to eventually undelete the file on :en. This might also unearth a permission record, provided there was one. --Túrelio (talk)

cancelling of my photo

Good morning, On September 5, you have cancelled my photo. That photo has been taken by Alain Bédard in 1990. Alain Bédard is a friend of mine, he is not a professionnal photographer. There are no rights on that photo. Please reinstall it. Thank you.If you like, you can erase the name of Alain Bédard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.122.57.221 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 14. Nov. 2011‎ (UTCTúrelio (talk) 19:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC))

Hi Unknown, as I have deleted 20 files on September 5th, I can't do anything if you don't provide your username and/or the name of the file/image you are talking about. --Túrelio (talk) 15:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Lincoln the Mystic

Thanks for your concern. Think the issue has been addressed by the creation of fair use rationale as seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_the_Mystic 62.163.57.21 21:31, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. --Túrelio (talk) 22:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Seeking an opinion

Seeking an opinion about the uploads of Irisk12 (talk · contribs). I am thinking that we may simply have a case of a user not understanding the requirements for completing a {{Information}} template, eg. File:Spielplatz Josefwiese.JPG, however, maybe not, and my recent message is not receiving a response. What drew it to my attention was the use of [[Template:Grün Stadt Zürich]]. I am hesitating on which which to act, so seeking other thoughts.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:43, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I was offline for a few days. I've now identified somebody from this institution who might be the real uploader and asked her for feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 11:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

She has replied today and will forward a permission. --Túrelio (talk) 11:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Sahrana Djindjica1.jpg

In relation to File:Sahrana Djindjica1.jpg I have denied the speedy, as you have mentioned it has "some sort of" permission, and have instead tagged it as "no permission", as it isn't known whether this would pass OTRS procedures. If you disagree with my taking this option, feel free to revert me, and perhaps suggest which way involved editors should take to have this allowable for hosting on Commons. Cheers, russavia (talk) 05:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

O.k., no problem. However, as no-perm does again lead to deletion if nobody adds a permission, a regular deletion request might be more productive. --Túrelio (talk) 10:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Harry Bolus

Hallo Túrelio, könntest Du bitte den Artikel Harry Bolus hier in commons wiederherstellen. Ich werde umgehend mit einem zweiten Bild den Anforderungen in commoms nachkommen. Danke und viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 22:14, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

...ich danke Dir. (Die Regel mit dem einen Bild war mir nicht bewusst. Ich finde sie auch nicht gut, denn man sollte sich doch auch über ein Bild z.B. einer seltenen Pflanze oder eines seltenen Tieres freuen, wenn es in die biologische Systematik der galleries eingebunden werden kann.). Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Ich selbst betrachte diese Regel auch nicht als absolut. D.h., wenn so eine Gallerie gut kategorisiert und ggf. noch mit interwikis ausgestattet ist, würde ich das eher nicht löschen. --Túrelio (talk) 11:14, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Borrado File:018D7ALBP1 1.jpg

¿Que problema hay con esa foto?

Hi, you had claimed it as "self-made", but it had been published on http://www.laverdad.es/albacete/20080420/provincia/otras-religiones-discipulos-odin-20080420.html 4 months earlier than your upload to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 15:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

RE:Techarrow

Yes, I did it. I have 3 accounts and I didn't see that I was log-out. Also, you can help me with this problem?--Techarrow (talk) 18:53, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

O.k. But are you sure you have posted at the right place? You seem to address a "Rastrojo", but you are posting at the general Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. --Túrelio (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Redirect of dupes

Hello Túrelio,

you redirected some files I marked as dupes, thanks for that. My question is, if I can/should do this by my own in future or let it be done by you/admins. Tx --Funfood ␌ 10:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so because the deletion requires admin rights anyway. However, processing such requests can be made easier for the admins by comparing the descriptions of both versions, checking whether the description of the remaining version is complete and eventually copying additional information over from the to-be-deleted version. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Images copyright information (Jane Reumert)

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at Apovlsen's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

help with licensing

Need your help urgently with File:Noah Mills Lacoste campaign in Moscow.jpg and File:Noah Mills 07.jpg. Details on the discussions pages of the images. Thanks! --Teeemurrr (talk) 12:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Bischof Weber und Pfälzer Missionare 3.jpg

Hallo Túrelio, das Foto ist aus unserer Speyerer Bistumszeitung [Der Pilger], Jahrgang 1938. Die Seite müsste ich nachschauen. Ich habe es selbst eingescannt aus einem gebundenen Jahrgang, den ich besitze. Die Fotos dort haben normalerweise keinen Urhebervermerk, kann aber ebenfalls nachsehen. Gruss --Joachim Specht (talk) 17:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Wenn sich das bestätigt, bitte die bisherige Lizenzvorlage durch {{PD-EU-anonymous}} ersetzen. --Túrelio (talk) 17:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Ich hab`s so gemacht und noch die Seitenzahl mit angegeben. Gruss --Joachim Specht (talk) 11:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

O.k. Ich habe noch ein paar Korrekturen vorgenommen. --Túrelio (talk) 11:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: IP comment

The IP address states that the image does not depict a stag, and frankly I think is a mistake. If I'm wrong, you undo my edit quietly. Best regards. Angelus ^(talk) 20:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

reply re Kemerton images

Hi Túrelio They are the same, as the account has been renamed, as can be seen here [76]. :) Flozu (talk) 12:19, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

O.k., thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 13:15, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Joanna Photo

No copy violation - posted by author

Hmm, you, User:PriscillaA, sourced it to http://www.joannatrollope.com (which is © Random House Group Ltd) and credited it to "barkerevans". That's really not even suggesting to be a legitimate upload. If you think you have the full rights to release this image under a free license, which will allow any kind of use by anybody, then please mail your evidence to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and include to mention a license, which you also omitted with your upload. --Túrelio (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

UserYou764645

Hello Turelio One question why can not I upload photos in commos

Oh, you again. You know the answer to your question quite well: because you need to open a user account in order to upload anything to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 21:36, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

File:BSicon_hRP4q.svg

Hi! Concerning this File:BSicon_hRP4q.svg — the usage CommonsDelinker could not fix is exclusively in non-article space, in grab-all icon catalogs. So you can go ahead and delete it, so I can rename as  (hRP4q) what is now (misnamed) at   (RP4hq(!)) — which is the topology that corresponds to that name according to the BS icons’ naming conventions. -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:01, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast!… -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 23:05, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, really. People like you make this all worthwhile! Now I’ll add a rename request at   (RP4hq(!)) for it to be ranamed  (hRP4q), and I promise in the future I’ll tripple check all uploads! -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:10, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Rename has been performed by Pi.1415926535. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Israr ahmed.jpg

Hi there. I apologize for what might be an obvious question, but I don't really know commons procedures and would like to learn more. I understand that photographs of deceased people are fair use in Italy and Greece, which would be a reason for keeping that image, if the Greek or Italian wiki had an article, until a copy is made. But as far as I know, it is not in itself enough for fair use in the English Wikipedia. Is the policy to wait and see if an article is created? By the way, the user who uploaded it keeps uploading copyrighted images from the internet despite warnings, what's the procedure? Thanks. --Muhandes (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Muhandes, photographs of deceased people might go under "fair use" on :en wikipedia, provided there is no other freely licensed image available. Fair-use on :en requires always that the image is used in at least 1 article. As I am not really active on Italy and Greece Wikipedia, I don't know whether they also allow fair-use material and under which conditions. However, Commons does not host fair-use material. If a user uploads copyvios despite warnings, you might notify admins on COM:AN/U. --Túrelio (talk) 16:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. Though I'm quite active in :en, I don't often get involved in biographies so I was not aware being deceased made any difference. The subject isn't even mentioned in the non-free content criteria. Anyway, if I may take a bit more of your time, what would be the fair use with File:Dr.bilal philips.jpg who is alive? Also, what is the procedure, is there some time limit on keeping the image in the commons? --Muhandes (talk) 18:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Here is the explaination of fair-use policy and here is an fair-use image example for the procedure. Being deceased is only an argument for fair-use insofar as there is no chance to shoot an image of the subject by yourself. On the other hand, being not deceased doesn't prevent fair-use if no other freely licensed image of the subject is available. For clear copyvios there is no time limit. However, as I have tagged most of the images in question as "fair use delete", they may stay for a day. But you can always download the image and copy the description and the original upload data in order to claim fair-use at a later timepoint. --Túrelio (talk) 19:25, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarifications. --Muhandes (talk) 20:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Copyright

Hello, Túrelio. You have new messages at Apovlsen's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Hedgehog and the Fox

You have just deleted a photo of Richard Serra's "The Hedgehog and the Fox" from the article The Fox and the Cat. I wrote specially to Peter Brett, whose picture it was on Flickr, and he was kind enough to change its attribution to NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0). You cannot possibly have checked http://www.flickr.com/photos/oblong_dog/3188440307/ and I feel very aggrieved at your interference. I am about to upload the picture again and hope you will not be so careless in future. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 20:35, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

And I will delete again. In case you really don't know: we do not allow NC-restricted files. Uploads have to be free also for commercial use. --Túrelio (talk) 20:39, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, we discussed which license to use and the photographer thought that was the proper one. My apologies. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 21:05, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

ACK. --Túrelio (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Merci pour ta vigilance.

Thank you Turelio was a collateral damage of a copy and paste in the translations.
Daniel Villafruela (talk) 09:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 09:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

When You remove pictures of other people, do contact them .

Dear Turelio Lately I noticed that You removed the pictures on the page written about me by Ulven Ulven. I do not understand why they are removed from the page. My pictures can be used freely by anyone who wants and I have not claimed any copyright or any other restrictions on them. If people mention I painted them they may use the images, when ever and where ever they want. Several people added my paintings to their blogs and sites and I am just happy for the publicity! Pleace reinstate the pictures, which were removed on your request. Greetings Pia Ranslet

Hi Pia, the uploaders of these images were surely warned in advance that something was missing or that their uploads were considered as copyvios. Anyway, as I perform a lot of deletions most of the days, I can't look into your complaint if you don't give me the names of the deleted files or at least the username of the user who uploaded them. --Túrelio (talk) 15:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pia_Ranslet&action=history -- RE rillke questions? 16:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

uploaded by Ulvenx2 (talk · contribs) -- RE rillke questions? 16:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Rainer.

@Pia, a few general points. Copyright is independent of whether an artist/author/etc. claims it (at least today and in Europe). When you create a copyrightable work (above the threshold of originality), you have automatically the copyright. Were these photographies of your paintings shot by yourself or by the uploading user? Anyway, the permission is needed for the original copyright. I would ask you to go to Commons:Email templates, copy the "Declaration of consent for all inquiries", enter the below listed filenames, enter the license of your choice (recommended: CC-BY-SA 3.0), date it, put your full legal name under it and mail it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org . The content of your mail will not be published and can only be accessed by our OTRS volunteers (I am none). If you agree to do that, I can temporarily undelete the files (so that they will be available for the article).

• File:Anna med storkenæbskrans.jpg
• File:AndersWestenholz.jpg
• File:Portrait_of_Elisabeth_Westenholz_by_Pia_Ranslet.jpg
• File:Brothers.jpg
• File:Bornholm_Landscape_by_Pia_Ranslet.jpg
• File:Chinese_Emperor_costume_by_Pia_Ranslet.jpg

--Túrelio (talk) 16:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio Thanks for the answer, it's too complicated! I have really no idea how to use the computer. It took me 2 hours just to find out how to answer You on this. I took those fotos of my paintings and send them to Ulven, like he requested. The pictures are all in my belonging exept for the 2 Portraits of Elisabeth Westenholz and her son which hangs on her estate. I tried to find out how to get into that page You want me to sign, but I didn't manage and I do not understand even half of what is written in those pages. Will You pleace send the document I have to fill in to my email xxxx@gmail.com and then I can foreward it signed back to you. Sorry to be of such problem, but I can only paint, all the rest is volapyk for me. Best regards Pia Ranslet.

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Dennis hipp.jpg

I took your comment from Dennis hipp.jpg, shortened it, and copied it to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dennis hipp.jpg.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Crocus vs. Colchicum

Dear Túrelio,

As you know, I am looking for errors of identification of plants and correcting them.

(Autumn-flowering) Crocus and Colchicum are both called "saffron" in English. That's probably the reason why I had to rename three pictures today: two Crocus speciosus wrongly identified as Colchicum autumnale, and one Colchicum montanum wrongly identified as Crocus sp.

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Dear Réginald, good. I just saw your thread "Error occuring when renaming file" on VP. I hope the problem didn't reoccur. Sometimes I experience similar hiccups when using the copyvio-script to speedy-tag copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Dear Túrelio, the problems has been solved in the meantime. I did not occur again when I renamed these three files yesterday. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

High School Image

Hello Túrelio,

I was wondering if you could explain why Joliet_Central_High_School.jpg was deleted? The photographer allows reuse of his work - would I still be able to upload the image under different specifications?

Best, --Ozwiki123 (talk) 01:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ozwiki123, when you go to the source page, http://flickr.com/photos/26582481@N08/5527773875, you see the stricken-through $ sign at the right side. That means the image is nc-restricted (no commercial use allowed), which is a no-go on Commons. Uploads have to be free also for commercial uses. Of course, you may try to convince the Flickr user to lift this restriction either only for Commons or also on Flickr. --Túrelio (talk) 07:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you for your help! --Ozwiki123 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

About category Odia cuisine

Hi, the category About category Odia Cuisine, which you deleted is actually correct than Cuisine of Odia, so many pictures which I have uploaded have no categories now because of this deletion, you would have better messaged me before deleting, now a bunch of uncategorized pictures and a category name which is incorrect, Any solution? FYI Odia is the name of the language and tribe of Odisha, Food of Germany is correct, but Food of German is not. Please do understand. ସୁଭପାSubha Pa^Utter2me! 19:29, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

OMG, this was 6 weeks ago. Do you have any idea, how many deletions I had to perform in between? Anyway, Category:Odia cuisine had been tagged by User:Badzil as "duplicate of Category:Cuisine of Odia" and it had surely been empty. Otherwise I would not have performed the deletion. The user who tagged it for deletion should have talked to you. But we few admins cannot do this, except in more doubtful cases. The solution: just re-create the category again. Anybody can do this, you don't need to be an admin for that. I have no objection against, as your rationale seems to be reasonable to me. --Túrelio (talk) 19:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Pardon me to interrupt your conversation, is this the subject you are talking about? Don't know if that can be of any help. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 21:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Eventually. But this should be answered by the complainant. --Túrelio (talk) 21:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll inform the complainant. saves you time. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 21:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. --Túrelio (talk) 21:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 21:52, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Selena Gomez American Music Awards 2010.jpg & a bad flickrwashing account

Dear Turelio,

I think that this is a Bad flickrwashing account which should be added to the list of bad flickr accounts on Commons. Why? It is clearly controlled by the Commons uploader who uploaded several images but this person has been warned to stop doing Copyright ciolations The images were added to the flickr account on November 30, 2011. So, it must be he who controls the flickr account since he uploaded several images of S. Gomez. Maybe he should be banned for 2-3 weeks but the flickr account must be placed on a 'bad' list. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you for blocking this uploader and tagging his images. I hope his flickr account has been added to the list of 'bad' flickr accounts. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Conflicts when moving file from Wikipedia

I had already uploaded the image to the Commons from the Ant2.jpg file name on Wikipedia, but it was corrupted, and I requested for deletion, which you did. But now when I try to reupload it here to the new name: Ant Aphid exploit by wasp.jpg, the Uploader keeps denying the upload because it was previously deleted. Can you move it? cause I can't seem to be able to. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Look whether File:Ant2.jpg is o.k. for you now. --Túrelio (talk) 07:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Dealing with an Impolite and uncivil editor/ admin

Dear Túrelio, I suffered terrible taunting and very uncivil and impolite treatment by a fellow editor who is also an admin on the English Wikipedia. I agree that at times I may have differed with you or anybody else on an issue but I am open to reason and willing to oblige with Wiki norms in any discussion. But I cannot tolerate a taunting or insulting remarks and would like to know of any forum or place on Commons where I can get some redressal. Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC).

Try COM:AN/U. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:33, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, I am sorry to hear that. Though you didn't provide any specifics, I assume that the problem occured here on Commons. Then you should go to where Matt advised you. However, if the problem occured on :en, you should look at en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard which sub-board is suited for such a conflict. --Túrelio (talk) 08:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I've posted my problem at this link. Regards, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 11:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, I am sure I've placed my complaint in the right discussion forum. I request you to please help me in getting justice from a person is bent on terming my contributions as "junk" despite proving the utility of uploads, myself as somebody "not understanding the scope of Commons" and "sitting on a high-horse", etc. Regards,Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, I'm currently very busy real-world and therefore can't get really into that now. But I'll give you a hint in order to increase the probability that an another admin/user takes this case: your comment on COM:DN is far too long, which will naturally frighten away anybody willing to help. Shorten it substantially. Leave out everything that is not absolutely necessary. Quote only what is necessary for the case, but without making the quote non-neutral. Reduce the huge space between paragraphs. Eventually indent (by using * or ::) the quotes. Also you should not write "with an Admin" as SpacemanSpiff is not an admin on Commons and we can't get involved in other projects. --Túrelio (talk) 10:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hope the very best for all your endeavors.I've just implemented your guidelines and hope this will lead to a logical outcome. Regards and best wishes for now and always, Hindustanilanguage (talk) 11:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC).

Hi, Túrelio. Wikipedia is supposed to be governed by five pillars which includes a rule "Orange pillar (4: Code of conduct and etiquette):Editors should interact with each other in a respectful and civil manner". I wonder if this rule is also applicable to Commons. The person against whom I have complained seems to be directly degrading me and my contributions instead of restricting his discussions focused on specific issue that is being discussed. Does this not call for an admin action? Am I destined to suffer more insults and humiliations because of him? Will there be any admin reaction to his churlish postings? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hindustanilanguage, it seems that Commons:Disputes noticeboard wasn't the best place for your complaint, as this board is little used and known. COM:AN/U, as recommended by Matt, might have been better. Anyway, as his last edit on your talkpage was on November 29, I think the issue isn't that hot now. While I agree with you that "junk" wasn't a good choice of word, I think you take this issue too serious. Not so rarely, such conflicts derive not from any intent of the "offending" user, but from cultural differences. To give an example, which doesn't affect either you or SpacemanSpiff: in my country, Germany, we usually talk rather directly without beating around the bush; in our neighbour country, France, this way of communication is considered as impolite, as I've heard. They start the communication by talking about totally unrelated things and only after some time they are eventually coming to the topic. If people are not aware of this, this may lead to a unnecessary and unintended conflict.

Therefore, I recommend you to try to forget all the past tensions with SpacemanSpiff, as he should now be aware of you sensitivities, and to give it a new start. In the unlikely case, that in the future the same problem arises again and to a rather serious degree, then you might take it to COM:AN/U. Also, reading Commons:Staying mellow may add to your peace. --Túrelio (talk) 10:22, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I recall 2 incidents between us - Once when I uploaded a pic in which I was present along with other fellow Wikipedians but the pic was taken by a friend. And though I honestly gave his name as the author - you deleted the pic because there was no note from his side. My argument that I am in the pic didn't hold water and you deleted it. I agree that you are right. Similarly, I uploaded a pic with a Christian prayer autographed by Mother Teresa. You marked it for deletion but removed the mark when I showed that the prayer is in the en:wp. We see reason and we concede before it. We don't beat around bush. There is no reason to term a users contribution as junk. I've demonstrated the utility of two files before him. Many more can be quoted. I also designed the promotional poster of the first Wiki Conference in India in Hindi, Urdu and Telugu. Is that also junk? How will you rate that he uploads mostly from second hand sources and is guilty of uploading watermark images? Further, his assertion about the pic in question to be text-to-jpg conversion is wrong? How will you react if somebody says you are sitting on a high horse, you dont understand Commons, you treat commons as your flickr a/c, etc? Did I upload my family photos or vacation pictures? I generally use a mild language but if the other person does it differently, it hurts. Please look into the matter.Hindustanilanguage (talk) 11:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC).

I had already contacted him. --Túrelio (talk) 14:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I am desperate

Dear Túrelio,

Please find a copy of the message I just have posted on Village Pump:

Dear All,
I am desperate. 
I just had a look on My uploads and I have noticed that about 1/3 of my more the 3,000 pictures needs a rotation by 270° or 90°. 
I have asked manually for it for the first 6 instances. You will understand that I am not intended to spend hours for doing it for the other (presumably) abound 1,000 instances.
Is there another possibility for solving this issue?
Thank you for your appreciated help.

Hopefully this will be solved quickly. Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:08, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Bitte um Hilfe

Hallo Túrelio, auf der Suche nach etwa noch verborgenen Werken Comollis (vgl. [77]) bin ich auf eine möglicherweise einem Pizzi zuzuschreiende Napoleon-Büste gestossen. Ich hab mehrfach versucht, die Bildbeschreibung zu ergänzen, dass klappt aber irgendwie nicht :((. Könntest du bitte mal drüber schauen? Mein Text ist zumindest gespeichert in der Bildbeschreibung. Danke! --10:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hochladbar

Hallo Túrelio, ich hab mal wieder eine UrhR-Frage. Ich bin auf eines der ersten Dias überhaupt im Netz gestossen, noch dazu gut aufgelöst reproduziert: "Kitty Stieglitz" von Frank Eugene, Aufnahme in Tutzing, Bayern, vom Spätsommer 1907, nach einem mir vorliegendem Buch im Bestand des Art Institue of Chicago (wo man es aber bei einer online-Recherche nicht findet). Was hälst du davon: Fotograf Amerikaner oder Deutscher, mehr als 70 Jahre tod, Bild über 100 Jahre alt, und auch zeitnah nach Entstehung veröffentlicht. Herkunft des uploads wäre dann Israel. --Alupus (talk) 18:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Alupus,

geht o.k. unter {{PD-Art}} gemäß Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag. (Der IP-edit zum Pizzi-Foto war auch von mir.) Gruß. --Túrelio (talk) 09:03, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

LGBT people

Hell, I can't speak German, so I do not know what you are telling about deletion of Category LGBT people, but I opned a discussion page here: Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/12/Category:LGBT people --User:G.dallorto (talk) 16:32, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

The user had a good intention and tried to protect people from potential defamation. I therefore recommended him to discuss this at Cfd. --Túrelio (talk) 18:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Image of Brigidine College

Regarding abovementioned image which you asked me about, I am indeed the creator, and I'm also Clytemnestra. Clytemnestra was a disguise I was using for a while when I was being stalked by User:PoorPhotoremovalist, who turned out to be a sockpuppet of Adam.J.W.C. Thanks for checking it out. There shouldn't be any more confusion, since I'm not using Clytemnestra anymore.

Sardaka (talk) 07:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

O.k., thanks for the feedback. --Túrelio (talk) 08:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio

Hi Túrelio, could you please have a look at Vijoshi Komul contribs? They are all copyviol...! Thank you, --Delfort (talk) 18:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 20:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank to you! PS: I found File:Goldwire.jpg, another copyvio from an italian user! --Delfort (talk) 20:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Filemove reversion

Hello Túrelio,

Yesterday I moved file File:ESA Gothaerstr9 Bild1.jpg to File:ESA Gothaerstr7 Bild1.jpg on an uploader's request. Now, because of misidentifying the subject, he wants me to revert that move. I use the "revert" link in my Logs, but an error message appeared: "The file name chosen is already in use on a shared repository. Please choose another name."

I thought that if the destination file hasn't been changed since the filemove, we can revert the rename? Or is it only sysops can do the revert? If so, please do it for me (here is the request of the uploader). Thank you. PRENN (talk) 00:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

File:FahrkartenautomatDefekt.jpg

File:FahrkartenautomatDefekt.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!

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:56, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

File:RatsWarningSign_0348.jpg

File:RatsWarningSign_0348.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!

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

* Frohe Weihnacht und einen guten Start ins neue Jahr
* Prettige Kerstdagen en een gelukkig nieuw jaar
* Merry Christmas and a happy New Year
from --Neozoon (talk) 23:31, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Juanes.JPG

Hello Túrelio

Could you please delete the image version by Laresmith which is a probable copyvio. By the way, thank you very much for fixing the source for File:Manuelfernandes4.jpg. That was my mistakes. Keep on good work of fighting with copyvio. Best regards--Morning Sunshine (talk) 09:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Bryant-1.jpg and File:Eleanor Hackleman-1.jpg

Neither of these images would meet En Wikipedia's non-free content criteria as they are easily replaceable with free use images.--ukexpat (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

O.k., deleted. But what the hell is "Greasemap"[78] ? --Túrelio (talk) 20:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Greasemap is a Firefox mapping add-on, but that's the first time I have had a problem with it. Apologies.--ukexpat (talk) 00:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I was just curious. --Túrelio (talk) 06:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Aufhebung Bild aus Petit Patrimoine

Ich habe das Erlaubnis des Webmasters des Sites Petit Patrimoine seine Bilder auf Common aufzunehmen, deswegen ist der Name des Sites deutlich darauf geschriebenNortmannus (talk) 12:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, dann maile die Genehmigung doch bitte an permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Danach kann ich die Dateien vorübergehend entlöschen. --12:53, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Birkenau Walk of Death.jpg

This is in regards to the image File:Birkenau Walk of Death.jpg listed on my userpage Folklore777. The image is personally mine and copyrighted under the company I work for:http://www.gigatel.co.uk/. The image will not be listed under my company site for it is an image, among others, that my colleague (Llion Roberts) and I have donated to Wiki Commons to share in part of a documentary that is being produced and released later this year. All images under the Gigatel Ltd. copyright are personally donated and properly licensed. I do not have them on another website, for they are from a personal collection. If you have an idea on what you would like me to put under the "Summary", please let me know. ~ Folklore777 (talk) 03:11, 22 December, 2011 (UTC)

O.k., please understand that sourcing an image to a copyrighted company site, where it is not to be found, and crediting it to a third person different from the uploader was calling for trouble. As you wrote that the image was shot by Llion Roberts, only he is the author and only he can to give permission. I don't really understand what role the company has. As far as I know "work for hire" (full transfer of authors rights to company) is legal only in the U.S. If all this is only about the credit for the image, be informed that the author can request whatever credit he wants, including a so-called "attribution party" (see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode (search for party)). However, if - for any strange reason - the image is legally under the authorship of the company, then only the company can give us permission. For a permission template see Commons:OTRS. --Túrelio (talk) 08:23, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	It is a time for giving gifts -- so here's one in appreciation of all the Admin work you do (over 116,000 Admin actions), and especially for being a helpful colleague.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 00:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Grüße zu den Festtagen

Ich wünsche Dir, Túrelio, friedvolle und besinnliche Weihnachten und für das neue Jahr 2012 alles erdenklich Gute. Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 15:43, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Consult archive.org before assuming copyright violation

When a user gives a url for a free image source and you can't find said image at the source, then please check archive.org before assuming the image is a copyright violation. Not doing so creates an unwelcome atmosphere and results in needlessly deleting valid content. An example from a year ago: File:Gray Wolf in Grand Teton NP-NPS.jpg vs http://web.archive.org/web/20060222174618/http://www.nps.gov/grte/galleries/gallery_wildlife.htm --Mav (talk) 13:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Even following your link took me half an hour until the page appeared. This is not possible routinely. I did restore the image, but it seems to have been deleted again. --Túrelio (talk) 17:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Hi Túrelio,

Hope that so day somewhere on earth we shall meet in the same friendly manner in which we have interacted online for Wiki Projects. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 09:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC).

Requested image deletion

Hi. Do not know if this is the appropriate place for this. I apologise if it is not.
Regarding my deletion requests, I saw that you saved 2 images (this and this). Even if I can agree that quality of the these picture might be better, main (and probably only) purpose of this pictures is to be hosted in PSM project on WS, where naming convention is very important.
For the following reasons: 1) these were uploaded by mistake and risk only to confuse, 2) we can upload improved quality images of the correct ones, 3) the source is clearly identified and everybody if interested, can easily reach it, I suggest that we delete also these two.
Will you please reconsider the request? Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 16:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

FoP in Iran

Hi Túrelio, Could you please have a look at this DR that is about FOP issues in Iran. I hope that this help the community to reach a consensus about FOP issues in Iran. Furthermore, it might be helpful to have a look at this discussion you had earlier this year. Thanks AMERICOPHILE 08:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to do, but I'm not an expert in FOP of Iran. --Túrelio (talk) 17:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

HNY

--Nevit Dilmen (talk) 14:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Wolf

Hi! Wenn die Datei eigentlich woanders herstammt, sollte sie gelöscht werden, auch wenn dem Uploader natürlich kein Vorwurf zu machen ist. Dir alles Gute im Neuen Jahr! --Polarlys (talk) 19:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Flickrreview

Hey, the images that you nominated for speedy deletion have a modified license on twitter now. The image uploaded here is of higher res because the author made a straight donation of original images and gave Flickr link for reference. As I see it, its beneficial to Commons to have a higher res image than the lower res copy on Flickr. Please review. Thanks! :) Noopur28 (talk) 20:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but with the available data I can't review the image. Please forward the email from the author to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Besides, I did not nominate it for speedy deletion, I only notified you of the existing problem. --Túrelio (talk) 22:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: The flickr license for the 3 pictures is now 'cc by generic' and not 'All Rights Reserved.' I only marked 2 of the 3 pictures. Americophile marked the third image. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. But the latter is not o.k. in my opinion, as the CC-licensed version on Flickr har far lower resolution than the image on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 07:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

At first the license of the image on flickr was "All rights reserved" and the license review on commons was failed but after a while the license of the image on flickr was changed to "cc-by-2.0". Google search and TinEye show no similar results. One can assume that there is an obvious connection between the uploader on Commons and the uploader on Flickr but assumption is not acceptable on Commons. On the other hand a low resolution image on Flickr can not be a source for a higher resolution image on Commons. I accept that I was not careful enough about resolutions so I will undo my edit and put the image aside for a more experienced user/reviewr to deal with it. Thanks for your notification. AMERICOPHILE 08:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. You are correct that likely in the end everything will be o.k. with this image. In this case it looks just like a formality to get the confirmation/permission for the high-res version. So, not a big problem :-). --Túrelio (talk) 09:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: This is my image on flickr with a link to the original size on Commons. On flickr, I'm restricted to the 'L' size of 1024 X 768 pixels whereas on Wikicommons it uploads the original size. Since the flickr account owner actually changed the license and is donating only 3 images to Commons, I don't see what the problem is? A friend of mine would have the same problem if I gave my original size image to him to upload and it has the maximum resolution on Commons but only the 'L' size on flickr. The real problem is flickr places restrictions on the size of my image since I'm on a basic account--the same as the flickr account owner--and I cannot upload more than 200 images either while Commons does not. But since the donation is only 3 images, does it really matter? You can revoke my flickrpass on the other 2 images if you wish but to me, the key thing is the license and it is now 'cc by generic 2.0' or free for Commons. This seems like excessive lawyering to me. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't you realize the difference: in your case, you are both the uploader here and on Flickr. In the above discussed image, Commons-uploader and Flickr-uploader are different people. As our uploader was already in contact with the Flickr user, why should it be too complicated to ask him to send a simple confirming email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org? --Túrelio (talk) 09:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: OK. I reverted my flickrpass on the other 2 images...but personally I think this is a case of excessive lawyering. Sometimes, people upload images of their own work which are already on their (basic) flickr account but on Commons the image size is of the original maximum resolution version. They, too, should not be asked to OTRS their own work because it is a case of excessive lawyering to me. If Commons becomes excessively legalistic towards people who wish to donate a few pictures to wikipedia...then few people will bother to donate images to Commons in the future, I'm afraid. They just won't put up with the hassle and the barriers that is placed in their path. Regards from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks User:Leobudv for echoing my sentiments. It is already a great effort to ask people to donate images and this Flickr user was kind enough to volunteer high res images precisely because the free Flickr account 'L' size image is not the highest resolution. The aim of this whole exercise was to upload the best quality media to Commons and now you also have the license in place. I've sent a mail to the user but I am not sure if he will go the extra mile. In that case, you can nominate deletion again if it is absolutely unacceptable to you. I cannot pursue the user forever because he might just get irritated and decide never to get into this mess again. Thanks. Noopur28 (talk) 10:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Turelio means well when he says that it's just a 'formality' to get the permission from the flickr account owner but in this case, Noopur28 had to push the flickr account owner to 1. change the flickr license. Now, the flickr account owner is expected to 2. type out a message and send it to an E-mail address that he doesn't know of? I don't know what I would do if I was him. If it was me, I would think very hard too. Every person has a limit although I hope that it works out well. But this process is becoming extremely legalistic and may drive away good contributors, I fear. --Leoboudv (talk) 10:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

This may look to you as "excessive lawyering", however, it is exactly for the protection of the original creator/author that we don't take a license for a low-res image also to be valid for a high-res image. @Noopur28, as I asked you already in my first reply, why didn't you forward the initial email with the high-res image from the author to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org)? If you had done this, likely no further confirmation from the Flickr user would have been required. --Túrelio (talk) 10:20, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Otto_Hupp_Undeletion_Requests

I am now getting the individual images for this mass undeletion request, which was something you asked for before in October at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Mass_del_Category:Coats_of_arms_by_Otto_Hupp. If you have time, I like to request for your help in sorting these images out. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Puh, I tried to avoid that ;-), as I am not a specialist for COAs. O.k., I'll try to make some sense of it. --Túrelio (talk) 20:08, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I am a specialist in coat of arms, but with how many images that has to be restored, I needed/wanted a second opinion before we just mass restore all. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Good. I've also asked on Forum to support you. --Túrelio (talk) 21:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

• File:Krems Coa.jpg
• File:Wappen der ehemaligen Gemeinde Aubing.png
• File:Berun Wappen.png
• File:Beuthen O.S. Wappen.jpg
• File:Bladen Wappen.png
• File:Borislawitz Wappen.png

Canvassing

I agree with you philosophically about the canvassing. The area could be seen as negative. However, I think the focus on canvassing ignored that there were many supporters that gave no reason for their support, with no background on Commons, etc. while there were many opposes who were prominent members here. It is a little sad that Peter Damian's issue ignored the problems on Commons that I was bothered with - asking people behind the scenes to speedy delete images then try to prevent others from doing the same via DR (i.e. in public and not pulling favors) while claiming pointing out the double standard would be harassment. Then the coverup of his past actions in very out of process ways and having defenders make blatant untruths about Wikipedia's policies (the Clean Start policy makes it clear that people have the right to point out the previous socks and that when you edit in the same topic area it can be construed as trying to hide past behavior. Fae verified that such concerns were true by having people rev del out of process and getting pages deleted out of process). The user had a background of putting up copyright infringing material at Wikipedia and making BLP violations, and it is obvious from at least a few images that they continued this behavior here. I think if the BLP matters and the copyright matters were known, they would not have been allowed on OTRS and their many, many bad rationales at DRs here would have been met with a block to stop disruption.

Commons affects all projects, and there is a difference between disagreeing and harm. I believed that Fae and I merely disagreed until I saw the lengths he was willing to go to regarding hypocrisy and preventing others from self-nomination deletions of their images while nastily attacking others in those reviews and tossing around rather hateful accusations in a very unfair way. Hate is never good, and his hateful ways of interacting with others was why he kept having to change names before. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Hans Hartig Bei Bardowick in der Lüneburger Heide 1900.jpg

Hallo! Habe gesehen, dass Du dort auf meinen Duplikat-Hinweis geantwortet hast - sollte man sonst beide Dateien als "other versions" miteinander verlinken, ohne eine von beiden zu löschen? Ohnehin sind beide gleichermaßen nicht mehr als nur Abzüge von einem Original. Guten Start ins neue Jahr! --ChristianSW (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Request of undo of deletions of paintings and pictures of manav gupta

Artist Manav Gupta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manav_Gupta) is one of the ten leading young artists of india and has been interviewed by top &leading news channels and media bodies. One of the pictures of his that you have deleted is in the CNN IBN website ( http://ibnlive.in.com/photogallery/1578-0.html ) when his interview was being taken. The other one is the 5 floor mega mural in Bharti Airtel that is his copyright work ( http://www.hindustantimes.com/audio-news-video/a-tall-story-artist-manav-gupta-paints-a-colourful-tale/article2-577892.aspx) This is a very humble request of undoing the deletions of his paintings and photographs Regards Thunder Minds — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thunder Minds (talk • contribs) 13:43, 31. Dez. 2011 (UTCTúrelio (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC))

OMG, this was nearly 3 months ago. So this is about File:Umbilical_Cords_of_Earth.jpg, File:The_Tree_of_Life_by_manav_gupta.jpg, File:The_Life_Tree.jpg and File:Manav_Gupta.jpg. The source http://ibnlive.in.com, above linked by you, has a clear copyright mark. So you can't take content from that site. --Túrelio (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Images rotation

Dear Túrelio,

Thank for your message. The thumbs of all my pictures are now correctly oriented. Thank you too for your best wishes (I had sent you one hour ago an e-mail with my wishes).

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:12, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

(Finally) good news. --Túrelio (talk) 17:17, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

* * * Gutes Neues Jahr 2012! * * *

-- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, auch ich wünsche dir Gesundheit, Zufriedenheit und dass dir gelingt, was du dir vornimmst! Du machst hier einen megaguten Job nicht nur mit deinem Fleiß, sondern auch auf eine sympathische Art, die wertvoll ist für das gesamte Projekt. Deine Familie und Freunde wissen hoffentlich, welchen Schatz sie bei sich haben. :-) --Martina talk 17:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

. --Túrelio (talk) 18:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)