User talk:Christian Ferrer/Archive49

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


May - June 2021

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Église de Notre-Dame de Douch - 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Église de Notre-Dame de Douch - 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hello Christian, I have found some files to get deleted:

Thanks in advance for your help! Regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 17:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, have a nice evening and a good start into the new week! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I think I found another file that could be deleted. [1] It doesn't look like original work and it seems to have been copied from this website. [2] 74.104.130.117 20:58, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian, here I have a bunch of files to get deleted:

Thanks in advance for your help! Regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 17:11, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, could you please delete the following files?

Thanks in advance for your help! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 16:18, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Have a nice weekend! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, I have found some file to get deleted:

It would be great, if you could delete them. Thanks in advance, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:28, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pont du Vialais - amont - Haut-Languedoc 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Mosbatho 20:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Église de Notre-Dame de Douch - 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments OK for me --PantheraLeo1359531 16:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #466

Explanation for file deletion, plase

Hi, you deleted three files I uploaded: File:Motiv tdkt 2019.png File:Map of members of euroregion elbe labe.png File:Map of euroregion elbe labe.jpg I might understand why you don't see any educational purpose in the first one, but what's the problem with the other two? The maps clearly have an educational purpose, and I created them myself, so copyright shouldn't be a problem. Elbelabe.de (talk) 11:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I just saw that the first image also was deleted due to copyright violation. How could that be, when the copyright for this images is clearly with us? Elbelabe.de (talk) 11:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

  • Hello, the message on your talk page is a standard message. The images have been deleted for copyright issues. A publication here implies, but not only, permission for commercial reuse, and only the copyright holder can grant such a permission. Therefore for the images that have been already published in the web without a compatible license, e.g., we need that the copyright holder (even if it is you) send a permission to our permission system. Hope this helps you understand. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #466

Wikidata weekly summary #467

File deletions

Hello Christian, could you please delete the following files:

Thanks in advance. --Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:28, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help. --Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 21:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, I have found more file to get deleted, some of them were nominated for deletion long long time ago:

Thanks in advance for your help! Regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 20:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks for your help. Have a nice weekend. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 08:08, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, can you please take a look at the following DRs and delete the files:

Thanks in advance! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 11:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Good evening Christian, here I have found two files to get deleted:

Thanks in advance, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 07:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, could you please delete the previous version of File:Graham-reaction-2D-scheme.svg. I have replaced it with a newer version. Thanks in advance, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, have a nice Sunday! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 08:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian, I have found two deletion request which should be delt with:

  • File 1 → the file should get deleted
  • File 2 → this file should be kept, but renamed

Thanks in advance for your support. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks! Best regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #468

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Deadwood on river bank.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments Good quality --PantheraLeo1359531 17:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 Support Good quality. --Commonists 18:35, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #469

Hello. Category "Media from Radek et al. 2017 - 10.3897/mycokeys.25.12446" is used by File:Nephridiophaga blattellae (10.3897-mycokeys.25.12446) Figures 10–14.jpg, but it seems to be missing. Something has gone wrong here, hasn't it? Regards, Strobilomyces (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

OK, fine. Strobilomyces (talk) 14:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

One of the consensus outcomes of this DR was to rename the file to remove "Dactylifric acid". The reason was because it was uncertain whether this was factually correct. When you did the rename, you left a redirect at that old name. Should the redirect be deleted, since it perpetuates the problem that there was consensus to solve? DMacks (talk) 15:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! DMacks (talk) 16:40, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Roquebrun, March 2021.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --George Chernilevsky 20:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Report

Hello, please take a look at this report: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Files named with meaningless/disruptive names (motivated renaming was reverted without any valid reason) as these are serious everyday violations of the Commons rules and protection of meaningless names (in this case, Kalumny which translates as Columns). User Kazimier Lachnovič with filemover rights constantly performs violations of the Commons rules, creates instability issues and protects meaningless names, thus creates confusion. His Commons admin rights previously were lifted, but it is clear that it is not enough. -- Pofka (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fiat 332C, Roquebrun 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support Good quality. --Lmbuga 12:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedydelete request because of FOP-situation

Hi Christian, I hope you're doing fine!

I sadly had to speedydelete-request 4 of my photos on commons, after I saw this discussion.

Bosnia and Herzegovina has sadly no COM:FOP exemption and since the photos also contain new buildings/memorials – I believe that those sadly have to be deleted.

Could you please delete those files:

Best regards, Koreanovsky (talk) 14:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your fast reply! --Koreanovsky (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fiat 332C, Roquebrun 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Ermell 18:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Hello Christian, could you please delete the following files:

Thanks in advance for your help, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 10:01, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, have a great weekend! Regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, here I have two deletion requests:

Could you take a look at them? Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 06:23, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help! Best regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Good day Christian, could you please take a look at this deletion request? I have re-nominated the file for deletion. I have already coordinated the issue with DMacks on his talk page, see User talk:DMacks#Deletion of File:Strukturformel von 3-Hydroxybutanal.svg. Perhaps you treat the DR as uploader's request? Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 17:02, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

  • @Chem Sim 2001: hello, I agree to delete the file but I see no reason not to wait the usual delay of 7 days usualy required for a regular deletion request, especially in the extand that the file have been kept one time and is more than 2 years old. Let me know if I forgot to look at it in one week. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:20, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. Let's take a look at this DR in one week. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian, I have found two deletion requests to close:

Thanks in advance, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 14:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Have a nice day! — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 06:14, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Christian, here are several deletion requests to close by deleting the files (including my nomination one week ago):

Thanks in advance, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, have a nice weekend! Best regards, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian, could you please take a look at this deletion request and perhaps delete the file! Regards, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 06:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Ariel statue

Hi, I'm unsure - the File:Nm toronto eatons centre disney store ariel.jpg, even though it's placed in Canada, Ariel (and her companions) by Disney, is still copyrighted, right? TherasTaneel (talk) 18:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #470

Hi again, another admin asked awhile ago (but since taken a break, which is why I ask you), if the uploader of File:LogoNBU.png could confirm it was made by him/herself, I don't see any reply. Now another is uploaded, this time taken from facebook. I suppose the logo is composed of simple shapes, but not enough for it to be without copyright? TherasTaneel (talk) 21:34, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Fiat 332C, Roquebrun 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Aristeas 08:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #471

Donald Duck

Hi, sorry to bother you so... frequently. I was trying to find out for sure if Donald is copyrighted or not (amongst others) which I assumed and english wikipedia seems to think so, e.g. File:Donald Duck - temper.png. The File:531st Bombardment Squadron Emblem.png (and variations thereof) didn't make easier, making it free because some squadron took him on their emblem doesn't make much sense to me. So, is the back of comic books (like these: File:Bookshelf with stuff.jpg and File:Jumbobøger.jpg) free? What about File:Donald Duck.jpg and other characters uploaded here: Special:ListFiles/ברטוביניו. While you are at it, could you have a look at the files in a topic named "Copyvios to decorate my talk page" here, thanks in advance. TherasTaneel (talk) 17:09, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

  • Hi there are several things here:
  1. If you compare en:File:Donald Duck - temper.png to File:531st Bombardment Squadron Emblem.png, the second drawing is maybe not a derivative work of the first though there are some obvious similarities. However they may be an issue with the character itself, i.e. does Walt Disney Company have some rights on all depictions of a white anrgy duck clenching fist with a blue sailor shirt and a blue cap? Honestly I don't know. Commons:Fan_art#Copyright_in_fan_art is interesting, e.g. "there is no copyright in an idea". But it's true that there are signifiant similarities between the two files. And the reference at Donald duck is of course more than obvious. The original emblem seems less problematic. We are in the case where the last derivative work of the emblem looks more to the original character than in the emblem. I am curious on what would be a justice decision on that. I'm not sure what to do there. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
  2. I nominated for deletion almost all other images you listed
  3. and for the files listed "Copyvios to decorate my talk page", sorry I have not the time, but I will may take a look from time to time, but that's not my priority because if I want to quickly delete copyvios I go there and I delete 2 hundred files in 1 hour. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

The Olympic rings

So... files in the Category:Olympic rings and subcategories ignore the Can I use the Olympic rings?: "The Olympic rings are the exclusive property of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). They are a mark protected around the world and cannot be used without the IOC's prior written consent." because they are too simple? Just... I vaguely remember some newspapers getting in trouble, or mentioning this was why they chose not to show them. TherasTaneel (talk) 01:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pont de Ceps.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Tagooty 13:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pont de Ceps 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality. --Aristeas 07:27, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #472

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pont de Ceps 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Impressive. --Nefronus 23:12, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pont du Vialais.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Good quality--Lmbuga 13:17, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

File deletions

Hello Christian, could you take a look at the following deletion requests and delete the files:

Thanks in advance for your help! Best regards, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 18:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, have a nice evening! — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian, could you delete one of my files since I have superseded it with a newer version. Thanks, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, have a nice weekend! Regards, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 07:06, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Someone uploaded a picture of the same exact file which was deleted from Wiki before. [5] Unholy bunghole (talk) 19:53, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian, I have found several files to get deleted:

Thanks in advance for your help! — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)