User talk:NAADAAN
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 20:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Andrew Anglin.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. |
Streamline8988 (talk) 02:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
File:Dmitry-Utkin-passport.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. |
Yann (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Pay attention to licensing
|
Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose.
File:Dmitry-Utkin-passport.jpg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file. If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.
|
ArtSmir (talk) 22:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
File:Hibatullah Akhundzada.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.)
|
25stargeneral (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Dear @25stargeneral, have you seen the rationale for uploading this on Commons on the permission field, citing ToI? It seems like Afghanistan has a requirement for "innovative/original" input for copyrighting a photograph, which this very bland passport photograph obviously doesn't have and lacks any original input from any author. If you are willing to debate about this further, you are free to replace this with a normal deletion request. NAADAAN (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- There was already a deletion discussion. Your rationale is incorrect. The file has been reuploaded dozens of times. If you believe the discussion was improper, open an undeletion request. Just repeatedly re-uploading is not productive. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @25stargeneral, the discussion was archived, was it not? That would be even less productive. I was unaware that this was uploaded before and an un-deletion request would have been possible in this scenario, I am willing to concede to deleting it and creating an un-deletion request on a previous upload. I ask you elaborate on how my rationale is incorrect, this has been proven true on other discussions in Commons regarding passport photographs in other nations with a similar clause in their copyright legislature. NAADAAN (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- There is a warning at File:Hibatullah Akhundzada.jpg, the local copy you replaced, asking people to stop re-uploading to Commons. The discussion was closed, which means it was the outcome the community decided on. You will need to argue at an undeletion request that there was some sort of procedural error with how that discussion was handled. The Afghan copyright law doesn't include any exceptions for "bland" photographs, and you also need to keep in mind that all uploads to Commons must also comply with U.S. copyright law. Furthermore, the image is iconic and is the subject of extensive analysis and commentary. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @25stargeneral, you cited a .jpg. The file I posted was a .png so no -- I did not have a warning. 'The community' did not raise this question during their consensus/discussion and rather debated on whether the Taliban were entitled to copyright (they are not in the U.S. under the IEEPA and this was made prior to a reliable source linked this picture to a 1990s passport picture which is important context), if you wanna consider that as a procedural error, so be it. I don't know why you're trying to make this sound farfetched, the threshold of originality is an omnipresent concept in copyright jurisdiction, including the U.S. and Afghanistan. There is no need for an 'exemption' when Afghan copyright laws cites that only photographic works that were created as a result of "innovation and creativity" (Article 3.13) and that were "created using an innovative mode" (Article 6) can be protected under copyright law. What is not protected under copyright law is public domain per deduction and the Berne Convention. I don't see how popularity is relevant. NAADAAN (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- You replaced the jpg with a png in this edit. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- You stated that I got a warning -- I did not and I proved it. At the time for me, the .jpg only correlated to the fair use picture on Wikipedia, not the deleted photograph on Commons. Are you gonna address the rest? NAADAAN (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- You replaced the jpg with a png in this edit. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @25stargeneral, you cited a .jpg. The file I posted was a .png so no -- I did not have a warning. 'The community' did not raise this question during their consensus/discussion and rather debated on whether the Taliban were entitled to copyright (they are not in the U.S. under the IEEPA and this was made prior to a reliable source linked this picture to a 1990s passport picture which is important context), if you wanna consider that as a procedural error, so be it. I don't know why you're trying to make this sound farfetched, the threshold of originality is an omnipresent concept in copyright jurisdiction, including the U.S. and Afghanistan. There is no need for an 'exemption' when Afghan copyright laws cites that only photographic works that were created as a result of "innovation and creativity" (Article 3.13) and that were "created using an innovative mode" (Article 6) can be protected under copyright law. What is not protected under copyright law is public domain per deduction and the Berne Convention. I don't see how popularity is relevant. NAADAAN (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- There is a warning at File:Hibatullah Akhundzada.jpg, the local copy you replaced, asking people to stop re-uploading to Commons. The discussion was closed, which means it was the outcome the community decided on. You will need to argue at an undeletion request that there was some sort of procedural error with how that discussion was handled. The Afghan copyright law doesn't include any exceptions for "bland" photographs, and you also need to keep in mind that all uploads to Commons must also comply with U.S. copyright law. Furthermore, the image is iconic and is the subject of extensive analysis and commentary. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @25stargeneral, the discussion was archived, was it not? That would be even less productive. I was unaware that this was uploaded before and an un-deletion request would have been possible in this scenario, I am willing to concede to deleting it and creating an un-deletion request on a previous upload. I ask you elaborate on how my rationale is incorrect, this has been proven true on other discussions in Commons regarding passport photographs in other nations with a similar clause in their copyright legislature. NAADAAN (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- There was already a deletion discussion. Your rationale is incorrect. The file has been reuploaded dozens of times. If you believe the discussion was improper, open an undeletion request. Just repeatedly re-uploading is not productive. 25stargeneral (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
File:Travis King.webp 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. |
Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Brenton Tarrant.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. |
Muzilon (talk) 11:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
what about the French droit à l'image ?
[edit]File_talk:Armand_Rajabpour-Miyandoab.png Wisdood (talk) 12:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
File:Brianna Ghey CPS photo.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. |
Stifle (talk) 14:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
No notification
[edit]Hi @NAADAAN
I hope all is well on your end. I kindly request that you refrain from any further notifications or interactions with me. I would appreciate it if this request is respected, including any notifications from the admin noticeboard. Please do not notify me again.
Thank you and regards. Riad Salih (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- + This has nothing to do with AN; it's your talk page, and I already have the discussion on my watchlist. Riad Salih (talk) 17:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- If I can "write whatever [I] want", allow me to add back my response instead of accusing me of harrassement for responding to your kind request (which it is not per COM:HA#NOT; that is beyond the point). Please act in a COM:CIVIL way. NAADAAN (talk) 20:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
File:Thomas Matthew Crooks.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. |
Hammersoft (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
File:Thomas Matthew Crooks.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.)
|
Di (they-them) (talk) 18:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Di (they-them) there's already an ongoing conversation about this, if it's 'clearly' an incorrect license, why don't you participate in the discussion and explain how? NAADAAN (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
File:NawalElMoutawakel1984.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. |