User talk:Newnewlaw

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

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 09:58, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

cc cv

[edit]

Cc Mariam bou (talk) 23:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:38, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Claudel - Le Pain dur, 1918 (page 12 crop).jpg

[edit]
العربية  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  hrvatski  italiano  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  русский  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Claudel - Le Pain dur, 1918 (page 12 crop).jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, 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. 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!

sourced to image since deleted as copyvio BevinKacon (talk) 11:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your views? okay?

[edit]

Hi there,

I've been helping to sort (and populate) some of the categories on Commons. :-) I was wondering if you'd be okay with the notion of renaming of "Cat:Media of Ottawa" to "Cat:Media of the National Capital Region (Canada)"? Reason being, at least some of the media TV & radio stations in the Ottawa area would somewhat overlap with Gatineau and vis versa. They're like a shared/blended media market. CaribDigita (talk) 02:50, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:La Revue blanche, t17, 1898.djvu

[edit]

Bonjour, Merci pour l'importation des images de ce fichier. Pourriez-vous enlever de vos fichiers la catégorie Category:Files uploaded by Yann Forget‎? Merci, Yann (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok désolé. --Newnewlaw (talk) 09:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

[edit]
2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Fierens-Gevaert - La Peinture en Belgique, volume 2 (page 311-2 crop).jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Fierens-Gevaert - La Peinture en Belgique, volume 2 (page 311-2 crop).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:03, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi can you check who the artist is and convert the file description on the page to use {{Artwork}}? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Newnewlaw (talk) 19:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi can you check for a specfic artist, engraver or illustrator credit, and update the file description page accordingly? {{Book}} is intended to be used for entire documents such as books or manuscripts, and it's use on a single image is misleading. A template like {{Artwork}} would be more appropriate. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Its going to be quicker if you do an update on all the etxracted images you created, them me indvidually sending notifcations, BTW ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aside: Ideally, the wording of the above notification {{Msg thisisart}} should be an autotranslated message, but I wasn't sure how to set that up. Do you know anyone that's technicaly able to do that and find suitable translators, (At minimum, there needs to be an English, French, Spanish and German wording, as I've encountered the situation with images from works in all those languages and from uploaders who whome those would be primary languages over English. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Revue pédagogique, premier semestre, 1923 (page 115 crop).jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Revue pédagogique, premier semestre, 1923 (page 115 crop).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 17:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Catégorie à enlever

[edit]

Bonjour, Merci d'enlever cette catégorie quand vous importez des images. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 12:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Newnewlaw (talk) 17:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
File:Claude Farrère - Les civilisés, 1905 (page 9 crop).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!

Dapa1928 (talk) 21:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:EDMA - La psychanalyse, Le Livre de Poche, 1975 (page 30 crop).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!

VIGNERON (talk) 18:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your recent nominations fall outside of the speedy deletion policy. Would you mind re-reading the guidance about duplicates. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Billinghurst: Is it for File:Susejournaldes00dieu (page 222 crop).jpg ?
It's exactly the same source as File:Négociant musulman de Mascate.jpg. But File:Négociant musulman de Mascate.jpg have higher resolution.
What should I do ?
Thanks. --Newnewlaw (talk) 11:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The same file/image does not make them exact duplicates, a lot broader consideration is there. I don't think that you need to do anything. FWIW "duplicates" is a speedy deletion criteria, which they fail, so that puts all other things in the normal deletion requests as explained in the policy.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:11, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. --Newnewlaw (talk) 12:19, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]