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.
I am from Mosaic Films and we are producing a series of educational animations for BBC Learning, on the history of medicine. We are using lots of archival illustrations and photographs to bring the history to life, and were wondering if it might be at all possible if we could use the image you have of the former premises of T.J.Boulting & Sons, Riding House Street, London. As it is BBC Learning, we are unfortunately unable to attribute. I am happy to tell you more about the way this will be used if you would like to start a discussion about this. Please get in touch: auriol@mosaicfilms.com
Hi, it's cool that you're creating categories for UK stamps by year. What was your reason for choosing year-then-country? Categories like Category:1919 stamps seem to use two different formats, and it's never been clear to me which one should be the standard. Stan Shebs (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that too, but another user had already created several by year then country and there was no facility to rename them so I decided to stay with that. Incidentally, I also created by reign but capitalised the R of reign by mistake. Do you know how to change that? Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just the country of origin, it's also that the 70 years rule generally applies as 70 years from the death of the author (not 70 years from date of publication -- and by "before Barbarossa" dating, it won't even be definitely 70 years after publication until a month and a half from now...) -- AnonMoos (talk) 17:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I was thinking about reverting it myself actually as I had just seen the earlier discussion. Is it correct, however, that the stamps are PD from 1994? Philafrenzy (talk) 00:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Every few years we go through big deletions of Polish Stamps. I think previous Deletion covered everything after 1945. I do not thing 1994 made stamps PD that law mostly retroactively removed PD status from Polish works that were PD before. --Jarekt (talk) 00:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
Thank you for uploading images from Wikipedia to Commons. However, the file you uploaded, File:1914 Greece educational revenue stamp.jpg appears to be a scaled down version of the version on Wikipedia. Please reupload the full version of the image. You can then tag the scaled down version with {{duplicate}} to have it deleted.
Consider using CommonsHelper to provide the correct image description and licensing tags. Thank you,
While I don't own one, nor have seen one of these stamps, maybe you have, but your increased contrast looks rather overdone to me. I agree that the original sandafayre image may be a little dark I think you have gone too far. Maybe a slight increase in brightness would have been better rather than increased contrast. Of course, if you have compared it to an original I accept your new image as an improvement. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 03:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I changed it to a mid level, trouble is it's not a particularly good scan in the first place, and really you can barely see the variety anyway. I will try to put a bit more Jamaica up. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok si esta estampilla esta en derecho, entiendo que debe borrarse, sin embargo entiendo que las estampillas austriacas están libres de derechos de el año 1975. También llama mi atención que si una estampilla de 1973 esta en derecho como señala quien sometió a consulta de borrado no halla visto que hay estampillas más recientes y que están bajo la misma licencia y que entonces todas deberían ser borradas. Hago referencia a la siguiente lista:
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!
Our chapter is examining the role that the internet plays in acting as a 'giant photograph album'. We have taken this principle and have begun to look for images, searching – as many of us do – under our own names, curious to find out what images appear.
The following image came up in relation to one of our surnames:
Miller's Green Gloucester with Parliament Room and Cathedral http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Miller%27s_Green_Gloucester_with_Parliament_Room_and_Cathedral.JPG
We are interested in using the image in our chapter and want to confirm that you agree that we can do this in line with the statement that appears in Wikimedia Commons which is as follows:
“You are free:
to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).”
To be clear about our use of the image, it will appear as part of a sequence of images for which we will provide full captions and acknowledgement (in reference to the information which appears on the webpage provided above).
We hope you are willing to give permission and would appreciate if you would confirm this via this email - r.miller@salford.ac.uk . We would also be very grateful if you could inform us of any other parties from whom we should seek permission in reference to this image, if you are aware of any such parties.
If you are willing to give us permission please confirm the text you would like us to present in relation to the image to satisfy the condition of attribution. We would appreciate it if you could respond by Friday May 3rd.
Thank you for your consideration & please don’t hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.
Very best regards
Rosie Miller & Jonathan Carson r.miller@salford.ac.uk
I always understood the Castle series were the GB high value definitives of the 1950s, so I was surprised to see this edit. Am I missing something? Can you please explain? Ww2censor (talk) 21:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They are in category Wilding Series, which is a sub-category of the definitives, though until I read the article on Wikipedia I must admit I had never thought of them as Wildings, but I guess they are as they use the relevant Wilding portrait. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If I get a chance I will try to contribute either today or tomorrow. BTW, I should commend you on your extensive contributions to the Philately Project on the enwiki. Ww2censor (talk) 13:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Stamps_of_the_United_States_1978-1980 has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Category:Stamps_of_the_United_States_1981-1990 has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
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!
File:De Administrando Imperio Dumbarton Oaks edition.jpg 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.)
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Hello Philafrenzy
I was quite surprised when I saw your delete requests for a bunch of files of stamps I uploaded in Commons. For two reasons. First of all because those files were pictures I took of stamps. I think stamps are not under the copyright laws because they are useful objects. They are made for charging a letter or postcard, that is, for paying a postal service. They are not made for being an artistic object like a film, a book, a painting or a statue. Second reason is that I paid for those stamps... they are mine. I photographed my stamps. The artist got paid when he made his drawing for the postal service. The postal service got paid when they sold the stamps to their users. So... the copyright is already paid. This is my point of view. Best regards. Towiki60 (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
File:Fakes Forgeries Experts No. 13.jpg 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.)
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
File:Richard Carnac Temple 1850-1931.jpg 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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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!
Hi, as I changed the name in order to avoid confusion and make it clear it is a mirror image, it seems not to be a good move to upload a another version of the image like you did. How can we solve this? Lotje (talk) 12:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's in use so we can't leave it as it is as two pages are showing the mirror image by mistake. I have suggest a simple rename. There is no benefit in leaving a mirror image here. What is it good for? Philafrenzy (talk) 12:29, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When you upload images of paintings, do not increase the saturation levels, or contrast, or brightness. This is an unacceptable practice. Thanks in advance. Coldcreation (talk) 13:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
Thanks for uploading File:High Commission for Pakistan, London 02.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 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.
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!
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!
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Smuggling cigarettes inside a statue of Buddha.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Smuggling cigarettes inside a statue of Buddha.jpg]]).
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!
File:Smuggling cigarettes inside a statue of Buddha.jpg 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.)
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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!
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!
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!
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!
I was accepting this request because it is told on Commons:File renaming "Which files should be renamed?" page: #1. At the original uploader's request.[1][Unless there is a compelling reason not to, uploader requests should be honored. This is a courtesy, not an absolute, however.].
But I'm sorry I did not support your decision to decline: I missed it :( It wasn't intentional. I beg your pardon, Wieralee (talk) 11:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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!
I used to live about 10 mins walk from here back in the early 19…s. My wife and I used to push the pram up here for the weekly shopping! Do you ever add the coordinates to such images as I could not easily find 28 Topsfield Parade. None of the maps I looked at actually placed it at that address but on Tottenham Lane. Curious. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, neither my camera nor my phone include that facility. Perhaps when I replace them. That's the post office in Broadway Parade which continues as Tottenham Lane slightly further on. Topsfield Parade is the name for the row of shops rather than the street name I think. Those Victorian/Edwardian rows of shops are characteristic of that part of north London as I expect you know. Queens Parade Queens Parade in Muswell Hill is another one. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; I saw Topsfield Parade as a small street backing onto Broadway Parade, but I dont' remember it in such details. I was just interested because I lived so close by. Ww2censor (talk) 22:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah but when was the picture published previously or is it a painting from a gallery or museum? One should really know where it is from as it might still be in copyright. I could not find anything old online. Ww2censor (talk) 13:33, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Philafrenzy, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:
Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
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!
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!
I came upon this image when working on the Cardwell Bush Telegraph article. I don't know if you are able to remember back to 2011 when you uploaded the image, but you said the creator was the British Government and then licensed it as a UK public domain image. However, I don't think this can be so. The form is for a telegraph in Queensland in the 1880s. The Queensland Government was established in 1860 and post and telegraph were within their responsibilities until Federation of Australia in 1901 when post and telegraph became Australian Government responsibilities. So, I think this is a Queensland Government document (but I think still public domain under PD-Australia). Is it OK with you if I change this? Thanks Kerry Raymond (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The page history means to me (uncertainly) that you provided one image 2013-12-14 with documentation. You scanned some c. 1900 original? Do you mean that that image including top banner shows front cover of some c. 1900 book?
Yes, the illustration is "Sweyn's Finding" from the end of the 1896 first ed. of the story as a book [1]. Is the image with yellow banner a scan of the front cover of one of the modern reprints that von-eitzen.de identifies: Reprint Edition, 2000 // Ayer Company Publishers, Inc. (or) Reprint Edition 1976 by Arno Press Inc.? (This section is my first contribution to www.Wikimedia.org; I don't know the documentation standard and don't mean to criticize, only to identify the edition where the image is used at EN.wikipedia.org, whose caption I revised this weekend. I don't see any cover image at von-eitzen.de, only the interior artwork of the 2000 reprint). --P64 (talk) 22:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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!
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!
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!
There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
This category combines 2 photos of the Orient Express restaurant in Seattle's Sodo neighorhood, which was once known as "Andy's Diner" with a photo of a now-demolished restaurant on Seattle's Capitol Hill that was also once known as "Andy's Diner", later the third successive location of Cafe Septième. Is there even any reason at all for a category here? - Jmabel ! talk18:33, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I was wrong. The picture is indeed the same restaurant; the description was wrong. (There were, indeed, two "Andy's Diner"s in Seattle; the description on the B&W one was about the one on Capitol Hill, but the picture is the Sodo one.) - Jmabel ! talk21:45, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No offense, but wearing shorts in a church is not very respectful, also as a tourist, let alone as a worshipper. There is (as it should) a clothing etiquette/dress code for churches (also outside services), just as there are (and should be) for fine restaurants, operas, classical music concerts and official functions. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 31.200.8.179 (talk) 17:23, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry! Call me old fashioned, but I think that so many people today are unfortunately not as respectful or conscientious about these things. I may sound like a very old person, but I am actually 32 years old saying these things! — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 31.200.8.179 (talk) 23:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
{{Geograph}} is good on photos from Geograph Britain and Ireland
Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:
Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.
If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.
You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file.
Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.
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!
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!
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!
Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Manchester Metropolitan University advert Euston Station.jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.
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!
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!
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Trump's Small Hand Soap for Dirty Politics.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!
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!
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!
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:Jose E. Prieto, President of BID with his family, greeting Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.
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!
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!
You're receiving this message because you've previously contributed to the annual Wiki Loves Monuments contest in the UK. We'd be delighted if you would do so again this year and help record our local built environment for future generations.
A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.
Possible acceptable uses of this ability:
To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.
The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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!
Please let me know on what basis you are able to take and publish photographs of a personal home without permission? Your photos include car number plates and other identifying factors that even Google do not include. Who gave you permission to photograph windows and doors of a private property and subsequently publish them? Have you photographed your home and published those photos too? There is an issue of privacy, security and respect which you seem to think unimportant and have totally ignored. I look forward to receiving your response. GizmoLucyJumper (talk) 00:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I take a lot of photos of houses from the street, mostly listed buildings, but others too. There is a legal right in the U.K. to do so. Please give a specific example of an image to which you object and we can have a more detailed discussion about your concerns. (Add your next message below this one please) Philafrenzy (talk) 08:30, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have taken a series of photos of Ossulston House in Barnet. These include a car number plate which could link a vehicle to the property and detailed photos of 2 windows and the front door. Please share details of the UK law which give you the right to do this without explicit permission from the owner. As I said before Google pixilate car details and people. Why did you not decide to do the same? Whilst the property might be listed it is not public property. Seeking permission before publishing images would not seem unreasonable. I presume you have published similar images of your home? And car? And specific features? Without exception our neighbours and friends are most unhappy at your decision to publish images without permission and with the explicit wish to then share those images. We look forward to hearing your response. Thank you. GizmoLucyJumper (talk) 08:46, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a broad legal right in the U.K.to take photographs of objects, including houses, in public. These photographs were taken purely because the house is a listed building of architectural and historical interest. All the pictures were taken from the street. You can't see into the house in any of them. Chipping Barnet is so short of parking that one is rarely able to take a picture without someone's car being included but I will see what I can do about blurring the number plates. Rest assured, nobody is interested in you personally, you remain anonymous. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Glasgow. "Fear and Love".Graffiti by The Rebel Bear
Hi. I am the author of a photo showing illegal graffiti on the building, this is not a mural. The author is known only from a nickname, this work is illegal, it is in a place not intended for painting any graffiti. I am the author of a photo of graffiti in public space, and this is legal. Look pictures of Banksy's works in Commons. Daniel Naczk --Daniel Naczk (talk) 23:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Ladybird adult books.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!
Thanks for uploading File:Tom Moore (soldier).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).
Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.
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!
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!
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!
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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!
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!
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!
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!
Hello, I noticed you have hosted to Wikipedia an image of the 32 Lowndes Street with alterations by Edwin Lutyens. I am working with the Lutyens Trust for their comprehensive Gazetteer website of architect Sir Edwin Lutyens projects, and I would like to ask on the behalf of the Lutyens Trust to ask for permission to use the photograph of this Lutyens project for the Gazetteer website. If permissible, the photograph and you as photographer would be credited and this topic chain would serve as proof of agreement of image usage and permissions. And if so, what credit line would you like associated with your image? Thank you. VCannella3 (talk) 13:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for asking but you don't need to ask. All of the photos on Commons can be used as long as you quote the author and licence under which they were uploaded. If it is the 2015 images you refer to (best to link said image in future), then the wording is "Image by Philafrenzy CC-BY-SA 4.0)". Philafrenzy (talk) 23:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, we are grateful for this contribution to the Gazetteer website. It is in fact the 2015 image, I will be careful to be more descriptive in the future. VCannella3 (talk) 13:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point, I have moved it to Illegal stamps as it is the stamp that is bogus, not the place. As far as I know Nagaland has never issued any stamps. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First steps tutorial
Getting help
Goodies, tips, and tricks
Made a mistake?
![23 File:Mirror image of "The Roses of Heliogabalus" by Alma-Tadema.jpg](#File:Mirror_image_of_"The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus"_by_Alma-Tadema.jpg){kind=link}
_in_1939_lot_14.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![79 File:"The Roses of Heliogabalus" by Alma-Tadema.jpg](#File:"The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus"_by_Alma-Tadema.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![12:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Philafrenzy#c-Lotje-2014-12-18T12:16:00.000Z-File:Mirror_image_of_"The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus"_by_Alma-Tadema.jpg){kind=link}
![[1]](http://www.von-eitzen.de/gutenberg/were-wolf/werewolf.html#finding.png){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_in_1939_lot_14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_in_1939_lot_14.jpg){kind=link}
→ Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 11:03, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![09:20, 16 June 2020 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Philafrenzy#c-Alsakan-2020-06-16T09:20:00.000Z-File:"The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus"_by_Alma-Tadema.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
