User talk:Piet.Wijker

Welcome to the Commons, Piet.Wijker!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 20:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Jacqueline Poelman.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Jacqueline Poelman.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Yann 20:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, the tag {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} was missing. I added it. Regards, Yann 10:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Yann, thanks for your speedy reply. You helped me a lot. Best regards,--Piet.Wijker 11:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Machteld_Mulder.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Machteld_Mulder.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

-Nard 20:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

File:Elodie ouedraogo.jpg

Hello,

In fact you can rename the image yourselves. I did it for this one: it will be renamed by a bot. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Athletes from Switzerland

Hello,

What you created is not a category, but a regular page also called a gallery. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Yann, for your reaction. I realise now where I went wrong. Regards,--Piet.Wijker (talk) 14:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Photographs by Erik van Leeuwen

Adding a defaultsort to images is maybe an improbement for some categories, but other categories are not improved by this sorting. Please add a sortkey to categories where this is a good idea, but please not use defaultsorts on images. --Martin H. (talk) 22:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear Martin H., In my opinion adding a defaultsort is always an improvement, no matter what category we are talking about. So please give me some examples of cases where I might be wrong. Thanks in advance,--Piet.Wijker (talk) 08:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

The category Category:Photographs by Erik van Leeuwen is the example. Thats a category indicating the source of the image, from a position of maintenance im interested to see e.g. related images in this category, not persons. This applies to near all source and license categories, a catsort there is only irritating and not serves any other purpose. Also categories for one person not need a catsort, see File:20090405 Bram Wassenaar.jpg, the image is in category Category:Bram Wassenaar only, it can have a catsort "2009mmdd" or something, but sorting again by name is not an improvement. --Martin H. (talk) 11:44, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

As for your second example, I might agree with you. Catsorts for one person are not improved by adding a defaultsort. On the other hand, they are not damaged by it either. And since in most of the cases these images are categorized in various other catsorts as well where adding the defaultsort is an improvement, I don't see why in these cases we should not take advantage of the defaultsort opportunity.
As for your first example, I disagree with you. If I am looking for an image taken by Erik van Leeuwen, for instance because he told me he made one, and I want to make use of it, it will make it a lot easier for me to be able to look in his file arranged in an alphabetical order, in stead of having to scroll through the entire file, which by the way will grow rapidly, looking at the speed in which Erik van Leeuwen is adding images to Wikimedia Commons.
My conclusion is, that your arguments haven't convinced me at all. Regards,--Piet.Wijker (talk) 13:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

The images from Erik van Leeuwen are added by various users, I recently collected them all in this category to maintain the correct license and OTRS ticket. The category is not invented as a gallery of sportspeople, also you will easily find those persons by name with the search function. Im personally much more interested in having the van Leeuwen images sorted by date to find them on the source website. However, there are many users uploading this image and noone will do the maintenance in future, so I not implemented a by date sorting while adding the category. --Martin H. (talk)

If Erik van Leeuwen's images are not ordered by date, what then is the arrangement you have chosen? Perhaps I am stupid, but I don't see any order at all. Regards,--Piet.Wijker (talk) 14:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

The filename, best sollution for maintenance, best to keep groups of uploaded files together and to efficiently correct them. --Martin H. (talk) 14:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

You still fail to convince me, why we shouldn't agree on a finer form of arranging these images within the file, apart from the filename. Maintenance is not the only form of using Wikimedia Commons, you know. Besides, it is not true that everybody uploading images doesn't take care of maintenance. For instance, I myself did a lot of maintenance work recently for the file:Category:Athletes from Germany. Keeping the file as it is only for maintenance reasons, is unnecessarily limiting the other possibilities of Wikimedia Commons. Besides, if I would add an image to this file, first of all I would look into this file how it has been generally done and than do it likewise. Regards,--Piet.Wijker (talk) 14:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Autopatrol

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching RecentChanges to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. Martin H. (talk) 18:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this assignment, Martin H. It is nice to realise that apparently my activities for Wikimedia Commons give so much confidence to other users, that these autopatrol rights are entrusted to me. I will continue to do my best for this medium. Kindest regards,--Piet.Wijker (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Marijke-zeekant.jpg

Hi Piet,

thanks for helping out on lots of things, however, you also removed a category at File:Marijke-zeekant.jpg, which imho should not have been removed. No problem, people make mistakes, but also after I corrected it, you persisted. Please take a look at the image description or the article. This athlete is not just a rower, but also does duatlons and triatlons, hence definitely an athlete. Effeietsanders (talk) 16:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear Effeietsanders, if Marijke Zeekant competes in duatlons and triatlons, she is a du- or triathlete, but still no track and field athlete, unless she has competed in track and field competition as a member of the Dutch Ahtletics Association, which I don't know. Duathlons and triathlons are really something different from Track & Field Athletics, you know. Since on the Dutch Wikipedia she is not categorized as a track and field athlete either, I wil stick to my opinion that she isn't, unless you can convince me otherwise. Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 21:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

File tagging File:Eef Kamerbeek Atletiekcentrum.JPG

File:Eef Kamerbeek Atletiekcentrum.JPG which you uploaded has been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the Volunteer Response Team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the Volunteer Response Team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org now. Please quote the file name ("File:Eef Kamerbeek Atletiekcentrum.JPG") in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the VRT noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up or contact a VRT member directly.

 

– Adrignola talk 18:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

File: 111127-063 Anne van Es-van den Hurk.jpg

Renamed -- Blackcat (talk) 13:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Machteld Mulder - 130602-097.jpg

Hi Piet.Wijker, as far as I know you are not an OTRS member and you are at Commons not within the OTRS group. You are thereby not allowed to tag any images with {{PermissionOTRS}} as you did here. Any such attempts are caught by an abuse filter and logged. While the ticket number you refer to is related to the copyright holder, this needs to be checked first. See also my comments here. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear AFBorchert, photographer Erik van Leeuwen gave his permanent permission to use his photos on wikimedia commons already years ago. In my remembrance this goes back to 2009, or perhaps even 2008. This permission finally led to the following template, that you can find here: [1]. Various users have been making use of this permanent permission, which led to over 1000 track and field athletics photographs until today, being uploaded on wikimedia commons. Now I don't exactly know how the other users do it but, since I have personal contacts with Erik van Leeuwen, to be dead sure about his consent, I always ask him in a separate e-mail, if he agrees with me uploading certain images from his 'Foto-Gallery' and only after he has given me a positive reaction (which he always does), I will start uploading them. While doing so, I always immediately add the OTRS-permission ticket mentioned, because what is the point in waiting, until somebody else does? Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 10:57, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

An OTRS member would have seen that the license tag you attached to the image does not match that of the OTRS ticket. Why didn't you use the {{Erki.nl}} template instead? If you are adding {{PermissionOTRS}} yourself, you actually generating more work as this is logged, if done without authorization, and requires follow-ups like this. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 11:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, I see what you mean now. I simply copied the OTRS-permission ticket from a former upload and didn't realise, that the ticket-template was slightly adapted in the mean time. I took for granted that once a tag is adapted, all former uploads should be revised as well. Apparently I was wrong in this assumption. Thanks for the explanation. It won't happen again. Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 13:06, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Sifan Hassan - 120609-011.jpg

I saw the tag again for OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member. You stated above that you would not continue to do this. It took a little while to research what you were doing and correct it. Please do not apply OTRS tags as you are doing and use the {{Erki.nl}} template. Thanks! Warfieldian ^(talk)

I see now what you mean, Warfieldian. My comment is that the way you corrected it, is again different from what I find elsewhere, for instance as in 'File:Phara Anacharsis Göteborg 2013.jpg'. So what is correct and what isn't? OTRS-members themselves seem to differ in this respect. Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 08:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

It does not matter where the permission is located as long as you use the {{Erki.nl}} template which includes both the license and the OTRS permission. You shouldn't just add the OTRS permission itself because that generates a tag that states OTRS permission was placed by a non-OTRS member. Warfieldian ^(talk)

Although I understand that, being a non-OTRS member, formally I am not allowed to attach the {{Erki.nl}} myself when uploading one of Erik van Leeuwen's images, it remains odd to me not being able to do so since, as I explained before, I have direct contacts with Erik van Leeuwen and I always ask him in a separate and personal e-mail, if he agrees with me uploading certain specified images from his 'Foto-Gallery'. Only after he has given me a positive reaction (which he always does), I will start uploading them. It seems to me that the internal OTRS-rules, necessary to guarantee a waterproof procedure, in this special case are just an extra and superfluous hindrance. Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 19:14, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I think we are misunderstanding each other. You can add the {{Erki.nl}} template. Adding that template should not cause a problem. I think you were directly copying a OTRS permission tag from somewhere else that was causing your uploads to be flagged. Warfieldian ^(talk)

OK, thank you for this further explanation, Warfieldian. This was indeed a misunderstanding. Great relief! Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 07:32, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:José van der Veen - NK 2010.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:José van der Veen - NK 2010.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.

 

De728631 (talk) 20:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice the OTRS tag there. Please ignore this message. De728631 (talk) 20:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Renée Eykens - Gouden Spike 2016.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Renée Eykens - Gouden Spike 2016.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.

 

BrightRaven (talk) 12:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:Yvonne van Dorp tijdens de NJK in 1984.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Yvonne van Dorp tijdens de NJK in 1984.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.

 

Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

File tagging File:Yvonne van Dorp in actie tijdens de NJK in 1984.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Yvonne van Dorp in actie tijdens de NJK in 1984.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.

 

Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Beste Patrick Rogel, als ik bij het uploaden van de beide hier genoemde foto's nu aangeef dat, wat er volgens jullie zou moeten gebeuren, namelijk schriftelijk toestemming geven via permissions-nl@wikimedia.org, op 3 febr. jl al is gebeurd door de betreffende fotograaf, waarom kijken jullie dat simpelweg dan niet even na? Dat zou een hoop gedoe en ook de nodige ergernis schelen. Zie verder mijn recente inbreng op de OP van Edoderoo. Groet, Piet.Wijker (talk) 08:14, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Following your message you should have added the template {{OTRS pending}} on the file description (and the ticket you received) so that I would have known you've already sent a permission. Besides I'm not an OTRS member so I can't check your permission myself. Please think of it for yopu next uploads. Kind Regards, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:05, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello Patrick, thanks for the information, but that was exactly what I tried to do. However, for some reason the template was refused, so then I put the information about the email in its place. Apparently, something went wrong there. Anyway, fortunately the problem has been solved in the meantime, so I see. Regards, Piet.Wijker (talk) 14:07, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Welkom als "Filemover" (Bestandshernoemer)

---

Hi Piet.Wijker, 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.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Elly (talk) 14:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Britt Weerman - NK Senioren 2022.jpg

File:Britt Weerman - NK Senioren 2022.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!

Leonprimer (talk) 13:42, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

File:Tineke Hidding.JPG

File:Tineke Hidding.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!

Vera ^(talk) 12:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)