User talk:Amitie 10g/Archive/4

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

why i cannt upload images didt you blocked me? ANTON BIEDERWOLF (king Muh)(King muh (talk) 21:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC))

File:Imurdock.jpg

Hi Amitie 10g. Were you able to access that URL? --Leyo 11:12, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Leyo, at the moment of the review I was able to access the page, and is also available at Web Archive. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:39, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I wasn't able to, neither then nor now, but OK. --Leyo 18:47, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Question on removing copyvio tags

I'm not clear on why you say these do not qualify as copyvios - can you clarify for me? The source pages are labelled "Copyright © 2013 City of Hamtramck. All Rights Reserved" ... is it because they are copyrighted by a city agency? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

al-Nimr image is obviously a derivative work

At this blog there is this photograph nimr-baqir-al-nimr.jpg which resembles File:Sheikh Nemer Baqir Al-Nemer by Talkhandak.jpg very closely. Flip nimr-baqir-al-nimr.jpg left-to-right, scale it up by a factor of 1.15 (i.e. to 690x420), look at it as a transparent layer on top of Sheikh Nemer Baqir Al-Nemer by Talkhandak.jpg, and I think that the evidence of Sheikh Nemer Baqir Al-Nemer by Talkhandak.jpg being a derivative work of nimr-baqir-al-nimr.jpg, apparently (c) w:Press TV, is very strong. The artist making the derived version changed very little apart from the style, but cropped the turban a little. Since you approved the photo, you might wish to propose deletion. Of course, maybe Press TV illegally claimed copyright, and the original photographer (Abbas Goudarzi?) approved the CC-BY licence for the talkhandak version. (Thanks to Monochrome for pointing this out at en.wikipedia.) Feel free to copy/paste this paragraph to a another page where it's appropriate. Boud (talk) 20:37, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you sir! Monochrome Monitor (talk) 22:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

File: El_presidente_Mauricio_Macri_junto_con_los_gobernadores_de_las_provincias_argentinas.jpg

Hello Amitie 10g,my name is Nico and i am the uploader of that source, please give me a few days because the links in casarosada.gob change a lot recently and the links that i provided became broken very quickly, (sorry about my english) the photograph that i picked from that website has the Creative commons licence, please bring me a bit of time, any help with this (and commons) are welcome because it is my first upload --Jnpoelstra (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Joseph Gordon-Levitt LG V10 advertisement.jpg

File:Joseph Gordon-Levitt LG V10 advertisement.jpg doesn't load for me in Firefox. No thumbnail, no version of any other size. I just checked it in Chrome and it does load in that. Weird? --ghouston (talk) 02:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

My ad-blocker is blocking it, hilarious. --ghouston (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

File:US Army 53138 United States Army Africa - official website and social media center.jpg

File:US Army 53138 United States Army Africa - official website and social media center.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Gazebo (talk) 05:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Zurücksetzen

Unterass es bitte einfach, Bearbeitungen von mir zu revidieren, weildir gerade mal eben so ist. Danke. Haster (talk) 02:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Denunciar usuario anónimo en Commons

Hola amigo. Te escribo para preguntarte cómo se puede denunciar un usuario anónimo en Commons, ya que lo denuncié en Wikipedia, pero ahí no tiene actividad, en cambio en Commons sí la tiene. Ah! Quiero que investigues sus "contribuciones", porque hay algunas que las hace con el objetivo de vandalizar, agrediendo y dejando dedicatorias despectivas a usuarios y bibliotecarios. Si está a tu alcance, por favor, hacé algo y en el mejor de los casos, bloquealo. No podemos tener una persona así en este espacio. Un saludo grande. --Diego HC (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Vector version available

Thanks for translating Template:Vector version available/es. Though, could you please translate the remaining parts of the template as well? In particular, the texts "It should be used in place of this raster image.", "It has been marked as inferior to this raster image.", and "reason". SiBr4 (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I almost forgot it. I have translated the missing text. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:55, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. "reason" still wasn't done, but thanks to Wiktionary and Google Translate I'm fairly sure "razón" is the correct word for that. SiBr4 (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Special:Diff/189265927

Hi! Please note that this admin action in question was falsely executed so that the request was open only for about one day instead of regular seven days. So it should be fair to renegotiation the decision. I understand that requests can be closed more speedily from time to time, e.g. when criteria of speedy deletion apply. But this isn't the case here. I see no harm in simply letting another admin to make another closure decision now that the reasonings have been brought out more clearly and after the request have been properly open for seven days. If the request would have been properly closed in first time then I would certainly consider re-nominating the photo for deletion.

PS. I wouldn't call it a clear consensus when two users (excluding me) disagree. 90.190.58.159 19:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think that there's a guideline which suggests your approach being more correct that what I did for special cases like this. Either ways the solution is ad hoc as we are dealing with something that wasn't done right in the first place. Oh well, I'll put my comment down as a re-nomination then. 90.190.58.159 19:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Mtg-sorocaba.png

Why?

One of the images is a copy of an copyrighted site! How can it be unqualified for speedy deletion?

Yanguas (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


File:SVG test by Davod22.svg

File:SVG test by Davod22.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Stefan2 (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

File:MariaAdelaidevonSavoyen01.jpg

this is the old file name redirect not to be deleted. see [1]. thanks anyway--Pierpao.lo (listening) 22:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Was created 50 minutes ago. Is it enough recently?--Pierpao.lo (listening) 22:17, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
you are welcome. bye--Pierpao.lo (listening) 22:23, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Tinashe

If you two had the foggiest idea of what you’re doing here, you’d have linked to the said original. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:03, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Trace Urban logo 2010.svg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Trace Urban logo 2010.svg, 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!

Leyo 15:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Such lousy transfers (file description page) by experienced users are not acceptable. --Leyo 15:44, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Please explain in detail why you di8dn not found a valid source for the file transferred. See also Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Trace_Urban_-_Logo.png. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
There are plenty of (syntax), the file is uncategorized, etc. You are not a newby. --Leyo 15:51, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
If you really want to help with my transfer by fixing it instead of making this unhelpful action (Tagging files is not the best way to enforce users to do the things well). Yes, I'm not a newbie, but for you, as admin, pressing a button is easier than taking two or three minutes to research before making unhelpful taggings.
Also, there is not category for French TV channel logos (at least Category:Logos of France), so come on! Thangs for the warning, but shame for the way of that. --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:04, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
What about Category:Logos of television channels and networks of France?
You should be experienced enough to make a proper transfer yourself. I cannot fix all bad transfers. There are simply too many of them. This time, I fixed it for you, but next time, please don't outsource the workload. --Leyo 18:28, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to tell the category. I'll add the categories for transferring, but it may take more time with the german ones uploaded with my tool. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:01, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags

español ∙ galego ∙ English ∙ français ∙ Deutsch ∙ suomi ∙ עברית ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ македонски ∙ polski ∙ Nederlands ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ українська ∙ русский ∙ svenska ∙ +/−

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from images that you have uploaded yourself. If you do not believe the image deserves to be deleted, then click "Challenge speedy deletion" to convert the tag to a regular deletion request. Thank you.

You removed tags on several files as for File:Logojaguaresverde.jpg and for other upload from the same uploader. Please don't do that, you can change the speedy deletion to a proper DR if you think a case need a bigger discussion. Persist in this direction could be considered vandalism and could have consequences. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Notificación de traducción: Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion

Hola, Amitie 10g:

Has recibido esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductor de español en Wikimedia Commons. La página Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:

La prioridad de esta página es media.


Please help us to translate the speedy deletion policy in many language so that non-english speaker can read it as well.

Agradecemos enormemente tu ayuda. Traductores como tú hacen que Wikimedia Commons funcione como una verdadera comunidad multilingüe.

Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de notificación.

¡Gracias!

Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikimedia Commons‎, 15:23, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Special:Diff/191726242/191757284

Why do you believe this photo is PD exactly? Storkk (talk) 16:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

The Library of Congress is not a repository of Public Domain images, and indeed contains the vast majority of copyrighted items published in the United States. That's exactly why {{LOC-image}} states "This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work." Storkk (talk) 16:24, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I know it, therefore I still finding proof of that (considering that Tedd Kennedy was Senator since 1962, and tagging for speedy a well known picture of a member of the Congress is not very correct). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitie 10g (talk • contribs)
I think you are much too quick to remove deletion tags. False negatives (i.e. keeping a copyright violation) are much worse than false positives (deleting some files that we could have hosted), especially since deletion is easily reversible. At least convert speedies into DRs and vote {{Vk}}, instead of just removing tags. For this specific image, it seems quite possible to me to be a studio portrait paid for by Kennedy. Storkk (talk) 16:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Re:Thai Government House

Sir, are you finish looking into the files? Haven't heard from you since. --Horus (talk) 10:34, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Trace Urban logo 2010.svg

File:Trace Urban logo 2010.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:18, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Michelle Aucouturier, Madame Vincent Auriol.jpg

Please recalibrate your radar - this was obviously a French photograph from 1954 claimed as {{Own work}} by the uploader. You cited no evidence or objection in the DR, so why did you remove Hégésippe Cormier's {{Speedy}} tag and convert to DR? Storkk (talk) 08:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Battleground mentality

It would be nice if you realized that other editors who spend a large amount of time here, as well as administrators and bureaucrats are here because they love this project and think it is important. Everyone makes mistakes, and it is good that we can all check each others' work - so please continue to do so, but your hostile tone and comments should be left at the door. Your "us vs them" attitude is not helpful: when requesting a COM:REFUND or commenting on DRs, just state the facts as you see them, without editorializing on the people involved in the deletion. The specific edit that prompted this message was Special:Diff/194517545/194523139, but while that was relatively mild (containing "only" three accusations of acting in bad faith), it is just the latest in a long history of hostility towards your fellow editors. You don't have to like anyone else here, and you certainly don't have to agree with them, but please try to mellow a bit and drop completely the battleground mentality. Storkk (talk) 11:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Less than one day later, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=194725013&oldid=194714644 is again an unconstructive accusation leveled against a fellow editor. I do not think you took Storkk's message to heart. I would point out that you are collecting quite a string of warnings about behavior. Please put on your "play nice with others" skills instead of the constant emo. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Stay mellow could be easier if less users open non-sense DRs and less admins delete files carelessly and without valid reasons (and this also include you). --Amitie 10g (talk) 21:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Question

Hello, I have a question about File:Kirk Schulz, WSU portrait.jpg. You said it isn't sufficient enough and I was wondering what else needs done? I have been in contact with the university about this photo being used and they've given me permission. I told them to use the template at Commons:Email templates or click the button and go through the steps there. I'm new to this whole OTRS thing and was wondering what else needs to be done? Do you want me to contact them and tell them what else needs to be done? Thanks, ☔️ Corkythehornetfan ☔️ 19:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I was also wondering if I would be able to crop it to bring him more closer so you can see him better? I know with US-Gov't officials pictures you can, but wasn't sure with these. Thanks, ☔️ Corkythehornetfan ☔️ 19:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
@Corkythehornetfan: I think the permission is confirmed now by Amitie 10g. So no copyright problems. :) ★ Poké95 02:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Query re: an insufficient-permission slip

Hi Amitie, - On April 25, you affixed a purple tag by the "Permissions" box at File:Kirk Sale and Bob Olson.jpg. It stated that the permissions material Commons had received from the owner of the photo, Mark Satin, was insufficient, and invited the relevant party (me) to contact the person who'd affixed the tag (you).

I have now seen Satin's correspondence with Wikimedia. I assume the problem is that the creator, Allegra Azouvu, did not confirm Satin's ownership of the photo via email, but rather via regular mail. There is a good reason for that: as Satin's email correspondence with Commons demonstrates (via links and Azouvi's attached letter), Azouvi is wheelchair-bound in a nursing home. Surely you or someone at Commons can make an exception in this case. Moreover, Satin unambiguously donated the photo to Commons (with Azouvi's explicit consent), most recently via the standard template. While I respect Wikimedia's processes, I do not see the problem here. If there is one, please explain, and I will take whatever steps I can to move this forward. Thanks so much. - Babel41 (talk) 05:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

The permission is (stiil) discussed at OTRS. I'll update the thread with your message. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, much appreciated. - Babel41 (talk) 22:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Logo Eintracht Braunschweiger 1967 - 1972.gif

See the license on de.wiki Logo Eintracht Braunschweig.svg. Regards. Cynko (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

File:科技日报.jpg

Hi. I have reverted your edits on this file on the ground that only simple facts about news events are exempt from China's copyright law. The way news is presented shows a great amount of originality so newspapers are not exempt from copyright protection. --Wcam (talk) 17:12, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Test file by Davod.png

Is File:Test file by Davod.png still in use or is it ready to go? czar 22:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Since the file is part of my examples (indirectly used), I see no reason for deletion. And, PassLicense is still in developement, therefore, the file is still used. --Amitie 10g (talk) 22:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Autorretrato Pepe Castro.jpg

Hi! Sorry for my delayed reply, I had little time to do anything the last weeks. I have no problem with you setting OTRS tags for files I deleted. Thanks for taking charge and finishing the ticket! café --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:50, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Olga Barenyi gravestone.jpg

Hi, I have asked for OTRS for this file. permission=OTRS received|id=2016050810010104|year=2016|month=May|day=9|user=Amitie 10g.

You have written there: “This may, among other reasons, be because there was no explicit release under a free license, or the email address that the permission came from is not associated with the location where the content was originally published.“

I would like to explain. I needed a photo of gravestone for my article Olga Barényi. I have asked my friend Raimund Paleczek from Munich (800 km from my home in Prague) to shot it for me. He has done it and sent me the photo and permission for usage. He is not a Wiki-user. Perhaps I used wrong licence template self|cc-by-sa-4.0 first. Now it was replaced by GFDL licence. Please about the normal OTRS permission. Auhor of photo is Raimund Paleczek and he has sent me the permission for its usage.

Thank You,--DusanH (talk) 09:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

GLAM - Immigration Museum

Hello Amitie, can you check if we are using properly the templates and OTRS info https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2016-04-22_pin%C3%A7a.jpg ? The museum created an special user user by one person to load the pictures. Rodrigo Padula (talk) 15:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Chacas-escudo.svg

Hi, we use the date of first response in the tagging, not the date of the first message by the sender. Jcb (talk) 21:16, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Please double-check your license confirmations

File:Leonard Lorenz "Korpus".jpg you have confirmed is PD... I see nothing to that effect in the ticket. Additional files where licenses don't match the tickets (either leaving out licenses, or giving out wrong licenses, both bad for different reasons), or tickets seem problematic:

Ticket (or file)"Confirmed" licenseLicense in ticketComment
Ticket:2016041210009486{{CC-0}}{{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}Arguably the most restrictive allowed vs the most permissive
Ticket:2016050910010335{{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} only{{Cc-by-sa-2.5}}+ Re-users have the option to use versions 2.5 or 3.0 (or any future version). 2.5 is different in some major ways to 4 (see [2] and [3])
Ticket:2016050810010104{{GFDL|migration=relicense}}
(i.e. + {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}})		{{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}
Ticket:2016050910011656{{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}{{Cc-by-2.0}}Also, the signatories of the release don't match the "From" field... ticket should not have been accepted without an explanation
File:Wheaties_4,_Edward_A_Bellande.jpg
File:Wheaties_3_of_8,_Airmail_Flyers_Medal_of_Honor_series_(Grover_C_Tyler).jpg		Why is there an OTRS ticket that refers to a cc-by-sa-3.0 document on a supposedly PD document? Also, how are you convinced that there was no notice? What is the text underneath the "Breakfast of Champions" in each? I don't understand your templates here at all.
Ticket:2016043010008471No evidence at all that the copyright holder approved the license, or even who the photographer is ("author" clearly stated in the ticket they were not the photographer in item 9). Does the subject own the copyright? how?

Apart from the first, these only represent spot-checks of four days of your OTRS confirmations. Storkk (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Dalton-Bust-in-PIVA-LR.jpg

Hi, I gave Daniel Fairbanks, the artist of the sculpture depicted in the photo, instructions on how to release the depiction of the sculpture in the photo, which he followed. The photographer was the person who uploaded the file. Fairbanks forwarded me the message from the commons, and it appears that he did fill out a release for the "work depicted in the media." Is there still a problem with the file? Thanks for your help with this. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Notificación de traducción: Template:Abbedabb/ESC/i18n

Hola, Amitie 10g:

Has recibido esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductor de español en Wikimedia Commons. La página Template:Abbedabb/ESC/i18n está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:



Agradecemos enormemente tu ayuda. Traductores como tú hacen que Wikimedia Commons funcione como una verdadera comunidad multilingüe.

Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de notificación.

¡Gracias!

Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikimedia Commons‎, 20:23, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

File:British_Institute_in_Amman.jpg

Hi Amitie,

Can you tell me what was wrong with the OTRS email for the above file? I'd asked a representative of the copyright holder to submit a ticket through the online form, so it should all be in order. --Joe Roe (talk) 09:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

What is the problem?

Greetings, Amitie. I would like to inquire what the problem is regarding the files: Bishop Armando Cruzem and congregation - Day to Praise 2016.jpg AND Bishop Armando Cruzem and wife Joy - Day to Praise 2016.jpg. I personally turned to Bishop Armando and asked him to send permission in accordance with the OTRS requirements. I would like to know why it says that the message was not sufficient? --Omert33 (talk) 05:12, 15 May 2016 (UTC) Hi again. In regards to these photos, Bishop Cruzem has informed me that he has already sent you final confirmation. What is the current situation in regards to these 2 photos? Thanks. --Omert33 (talk) 09:58, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Email

I sent to you Email to the mail mentioned in OTRS system. -- Geagea (talk) 20:53, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Also, can you unlock Ticket#2016051410005215. I want to asl one question there. -- Geagea (talk) 00:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Jackson Yi 20151013.png

Hello! I uploaded a picture (File:Jackson Yi 20151013.png) and sent an email to OTRS, but the reply is "the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file". However, I have reserved the right from the owner, and he agreed to licensed the picture under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 Internationallicense. In the email attachments, you can see the screenshots of my conversation history with owner. If this was not sufficient to confirm permission, please tell me what should I do, thank you so much. Pico cavadino (talk) 14:30, 18 May 2016 (UTC) Pico cavadino (talk) 14:30, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Permissions status update

Hi! I have been submitting some images associated with the artist Howard Newman to wikimedia commons and many of them say that the email messages received were not sufficient to confirm permission for the files. I realized that Howard Newman's email address that he was sending them to me from had expired, and so I contacted him and the issue was resolved, so I forwarded his consent once again. Could I get an update on the permissions status for the images or is more required? These are the links to the images in question: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_Balinese_Sword_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_newman_pistol_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_Alexis_Caswell_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_baluster_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_newman_Touro_restoration.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_newman_sheffield_candelabra_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_plated_pewter_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_decorative_column_restoration.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_sculpture_torso_3_dancer_front.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_Sculpture_Duet.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Howard_Newman_sculpture_avant_garde.jpg Aculpepp (talk) 13:08, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for taking a look at the numerous image files I uploaded! I am a first time user and I appreciate your communication throughout the process. Aculpepp (talk) 14:34, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Multi-licensing

I just saw you asked a question on IRC about whether a copyright holder can license an image under CC-BY-SA-2.0 on flickr and CC-BY-SA-4.0 here. The answer is yes, the copyright holder can do that. If the copyright holder wants they can release it here under CC-BY-SA-4.0, on flickr under CC-ND-2.0, and on a website as requiring all reusers to dance around the room in their underwear - it's their image to do with as they wish. What cannot be done however is for the copyright holder to release on flickr under CC-BY-SA-2.0, then for me to upload it to Commons under CC-BY-SA-4.0, as regardless of whether it's compatible it's not the licence the holder released it under, and unless it specifically states 2.0 or later or compatible, you need to stick with what was originally used. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:20, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Working with WMF banned users

Hi, please take care to understand the threats made by the WMF. The discussion at m:User_talk:WMFOffice#Working_with_banned_users left no room for doubt that it was up to Wikimedia Commons volunteers to be able to demonstrate that if they were working with WMF banned users they were doing so "innocently". Knowingly cooperating with a WMF banned user on OTRS tickets is likely to put your account at risk. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 21:32, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

OTRS permission - American Chemical Society

Hello, I am assisting the American Chemical Society with this file.

You tagged it as needing further OTRS permission. If I can assist with anything, then please let me know. At this point they have given standard text for a release through OTRS. I want the relationship between this organization and Wikimedia projects to go smoothly.

Thanks,

Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Your successfully closed OTRS tickets showing as "new"

Hi, Amitie 10g. Were you aware that several of your successfully-closed tickets have returned to the queue and are showing the state "new"? For example:

There are several more. I don't know why this happened, but I thought you might want to know. --Rrburke (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Notificación de traducción: Commons:Picture of the Year/2015

Hola, Amitie 10g:

Has recibido esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductor de español en Wikimedia Commons. La página Commons:Picture of the Year/2015 está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:



Agradecemos enormemente tu ayuda. Traductores como tú hacen que Wikimedia Commons funcione como una verdadera comunidad multilingüe.

Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de notificación.

¡Gracias!

Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikimedia Commons‎, 05:40, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of one week
You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of one week for the following reason: Intimidation/harassment (don't show you want to learn regardin your behavor).

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

see also https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=197520929&oldid=197519019 Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:54, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Unfounded accusation

Please explain the grounds for your accusation of vandalism. 109.159.59.146 18:45, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Fenitrothion different stages.svg

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Leyo 20:26, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Test file by Davod.png

If the file is not waiting for a license review, {{Licensereview}} must be removed. Thanks. — regards, Revi 10:56, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Why Sir?

Care to explain this. An admin should have instead?--TripWire (talk) 01:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

What's the problem?

What's the problem with File:Altwied St. Antonius Orgel (1).jpg and File:Altwied St. Antonius Orgel (2).jpg? --Wikiwal (talk) 09:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Aziz Seyidov

Dear Amitie, You won't able to find a larger version of this photo in the english web as I personally took it during the Annual Prosecutors Conference in Baku in January 2015. However, If you search əziz seyidov net then you will be able to stumble upon his pictures. Furthermore, in http://www.genprosecutor.gov.az/?/az/pressreliz/view/261/ there are numerous other photos of Aziz Seyidov published by Press Service of General Prosecutors Office of Azerbaijan and which have been used by news agencies such as trend.az, haqqin.az, telegraf.az and etc.

You can see the similar photo to mine which was taken at the start of the conference in January by the trend.az news agency. 

http://az.trend.az/azerbaijan/society/2354142.html

http://metbuat.az/news/12766/baki-seher-prokurorlugu-istintaq-ve-tehqiqatin-obyektiv-apar.html


However, there are other pictures of Aziz Seyidov such as: 

Aziz Seyidov in the press conference.jpg

Opening of annual conference of the Prosecutors in Baku 2014.jpg

Aziz Seyidov with his collegues.jpg

Aziz Seyidov before the crowd.jpg

That are not my work, but the work of the Press Service of the General Prosecutors Office of Azerbaijan (where are currently work) which were used by other news agencies. I took them from the news agency websites instead of the Press Service and posted the source of a picture as that agency but the author was the Press Service of General Prosecutors office of Republic of Azerbaijan (Metbuat Xidmeti).

Best regards, Alex

Notificación de traducción: Commons:Bots

Hola, Amitie 10g:

Has recibido esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductor de español en Wikimedia Commons. La página Commons:Bots está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:



Agradecemos enormemente tu ayuda. Traductores como tú hacen que Wikimedia Commons funcione como una verdadera comunidad multilingüe.

Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de notificación.

¡Gracias!

Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikimedia Commons‎, 02:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 week
You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 week for the following reason: Intimidation/harassment.

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

  • Following [4] you have been blocked, and I unblocked you. Now I see again you can not understand your behavior is a discomfort for Ellin. I have warned you not to behave in a way too familiar with her. Therefore I restored the block that was deserved the last time. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "First, Is not funny to see how different admins takes different administrative decisions for the same subjects, and how admins does not apply their desisions with the same rigurosity to all of the users. So, I don't understand why this can be considered as Intimidation/harassment, while I'm just expressing my opinion about a wrong admin decision (one of the several ones from her), the main reason why several users abandoned Commons. @Christian Ferrer: if you only inentions for that DR is to block users rather than take an admin decision for the DR (eg. Speedy close it, or at least commenting it), you should also consider this comment (now retracted), that demonstrate that I'm not the only who disagree with the admin decisions from her, but I'm the only who expressed it (enough reason to get blocked, whm...). This block demonstrate the lack of impartiallity from several admins, one of the reasons why Commons is broken. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)"
Decline reason: "Your hostile behavior against Ellin is not acceptable at all, the block is pursuant to Commons:Blocking policy valid. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)"
Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.
 (Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ português ∙ Simple English ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ हिन्दी ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

  •  Oppose The user have been warned several times by several users to stay mellow with Ellin when a disagreement with her, since several months, years?. It's not funny either to have someone who can express only his exasperation and who write in bold again and again who do not hesit to troll again and again e.g. "What about your DRs for invalid reasons speedy closed, Ellin?" in a familiar way that does not please Ellin. if you do not change the way you interact with other members of the community, you will still face the consequences. I said what I have to say, therefore EOD for me. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
  • OK, I'll use this time to get mellow, but I can't still ignore the bad actions, specially from admins who are supposed to be qualified and impartial to everything and everyone.
@Steinsplitter: you should also consider this, this and this (insulting me after opening a thread at the AN, and supporting a known long-term abusive sockpuppet, who also accused other user for sockppupetry). --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

File:2015 Aug gRAY Applications.pdf

Hi, you confirmed OTRS permission for this but forgot to add the license of the copyright holders choice. Pls. have a second look. Thx. --JuTa 07:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

OK:changed. --JuTa 10:43, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Please do not close DRs

Hi Amitie. While it is true that in some circumstances "Non-admins may close a deletion request as keep", I would request that you refrain from doing so. Please simply {{Vk}} and an admin will close it later. I have disagreed with your judgment numerous times in the past, and so I do not believe that any closures you perform are "non-controversial". Storkk (talk) 09:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

More careless tickets

@Geagea: ping restoring admin. Storkk (talk) 12:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Storkk: , restored the deletion. -- Geagea (talk) 12:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
ticket:2016061310015759 needs extra info. ticket:2016061310004734 comes form the subject and there is no explenation how he became the copyright holder. I hate to say it but we probably have to check every ticket you handeled. Natuur12 (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
@Storkk and Natuur12: I requested more info for these tickets. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

stay cool anton

King muh (talk) 21:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked

You have been blocked from editing Commons for 2 weeks. The reason for the block is Another invalid ticket (ticket:2016060610017431) and another undel request based on a clearly invalid ticket. We are not talking about difficult cases open for interpertation but about major screw up after major screw up. (block log). If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.

Natuur12 (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "First, this 2 week block seems to be very exagerated, since my previous block expired few days ago. Then, watching the tickets closer, Natuur12 mentioned the Ticket#2016060610017431, where there is a written and signed permission from the legitime inheriter of the author, and the representatnt already indicated that the current copyright holder agree to release under a free license (my mistake to don't request the exact license from the holder). And, for Ticket#2016061510021266, I considerted the mail enough to request the UDEL (even if the mail is not an organization one), and I already requested more proof of authorship."
Decline reason: "I wouldn't be opposed to an appeal a week from now, as I think a one week block would have been more suitable as it seems more appropriate for OTRS access be suspended than the user blocked. For now though, unblock declined. ~riley (talk) 18:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)"
Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.
 (Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ português ∙ Simple English ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ हिन्दी ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

Regarding the first ticket:
The copyright holder granted a you may use it on Wikipedia-license.
Regarding the second ticket:
You only asked for extra info after you already send a note that it would be undeleted and making the client believe that it was all proper. Natuur12 (talk) 17:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, my mistake. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amitie_10g/Archive/4&oldid=200303120"