User talk:Crystallizedcarbon/Archive 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discussion archive 2015

Image problems

[edit]

Please stop uploading images for which you fail to add the appropriate needed details. If you cintinue they may well be deleted even though they are freely licenced. We take copyright status and sourcing very seriously and the images you uploaded don't have the correct information which is why the bot tagged them. You need to provide the proper url for each and every image not just a general link to a Flickr search or a Flickr user. You are just giving us lots of unnecessary work that would not be necessary if you gave the url. I have found many of the images but each image has to be reviewed by a human if a bot cannot find the url, then I link to the Flickr user link you provided. If that person does not have too many images it may be possible to find the actual image page in a short time but often, when a Flickr user has many images, it is virtually impossible or takes a long time. The if I find the image I then have to copy the url and paste it into the image file page and, when the image is freely licenced, add a good review tag. If you had given the proper url for each image when you were on the page it would save us volunteers much time and energy and even cursing you for being inconsiderate even if it is out of ignorance of what is needed. The images from which you removed the Flickr bot tag will most likely be retagged, so I suggest you do us all a favour and revisit the image put the correct url of each image you uploaded. Sorry to be pedantic but you can make it work better for all of us. Good luck. Ww2censor (talk) 19:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ww2censor: Thank you for taking the time to explain and sorry for the extra work. Just a short message would have sufficed. I left another experienced user a message about this matter but I received no answer, and the main page of the bot said it was broken. Obviously I did not know that I had to give the especific link to each foto. I was under the impression than linking to a page where the image appeared was enough even if there where more pictures in that page. I understand now that for Flickr that is not the case. I appreciate your help in fixing some of them, and I will take care of the rest and take note for future Flickr uploads. Again thank you and sorry for the extra work. Regards --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:08, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I can be a bit long winded! It's one of my failings. Well you see that User:Leoboudv also noticed your flick album links. The images still need to be reviewed by either the Flickreview Bot or a human volunteer, so if you leave the flickrreview tag even if you add the correct Flickr url, then one of those will happen and give them a good review. Thanks for your understanding but thank you for finding nice freely licenced images. You are accurate that normally a link to the page an image appears on applies to most images but for Flickr an album or photostream could be hundreds of images, so the image page url is better and makes the review much easier and quicker. Again thanks Ww2censor (talk) 10:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again for your help and for your complement. I will be sure to do it that way in the future for Flickr images. Best regards. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 06:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Elysée Kouadio.jpg

[edit]
العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Elysée Kouadio.jpg. 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:Elysée Kouadio.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Ww2censor (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ww2censor: the page I listed as source includes the commons license at the bottom. It does link the image to content from another page giving atribution. I don´t know if we could assume that the license on the source page applies or not to the picture, If after reviewing it you think it does not, please feel free to delete it. Regards.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:00, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually this one does not look quite as simple as that. It appear this is a sort of blog that pulls data and images from elsewhere including copyright sources, so we cannot reliably use their licence. In fact the image is used elsewhere in different cropped versions but I can't find a reliable source showing who the actual photographer is. The image from the site you call the source is actually http://www.rumodispo.com/match-reports/2014/7/26/matchday-21-levadia-vs-fc-infonet-2-3 and the other images on that page do have an attribution but this one does not, so we have a problem. Ww2censor (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Ww2censor: I think you are correct. I agree that the stated free license may not aply to that picture. I removed the picture from the article, and since I have not been able to find any properly licensed pictures of the player I will leave the field in the infobox empty. Regards.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I also nominated the file for deletion.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Ruta del Cares 33.jpg

[edit]
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:Ruta del Cares 33.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!

Leoboudv (talk) 21:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I gave the flickrlink for most of your other images. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Leoboudv: Thank you so much for your work and I am really sorry for the trouble. I fixed this one. I am leaving on a trip until friday, but I will review all files when I come back to make sure that they are all ok.

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Madison Beer Disney.jpg

[edit]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Nederlands ∙ sicilianu ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ +/−

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Madison Beer Disney.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (NC), No derivative works (ND), or All Rights Reserved (Copyright), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as BY (CC BY), BY SA (CC BY-SA), CC0 (CC0) and PDM (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

Thibaut120094 (talk) 16:46, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Thibaut120094: Why isn't this license valid for this image? It allows commercial use and it is only restricted to give attribution and not make transformations to the original.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Commons only accepts licenses that allow derivative works, see COM:L. Thibaut120094 (talk) 16:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Thibaut120094: I read it, I don't fully understand why it is not allowed, but you are right, it is not, so it will not happen again.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crystallizedcarbon/Archive_2&oldid=185165271"