User talk:Raoli/Archive 2

← Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3 →

Italian FOP

Hi, Raoli! I greet your decision to clean the Italian files. I'm currently occupied with the Slovene FOP cases and other copyvios, so sometimes I also nominate the Italian files. You have my full support, but be aware that you'll need a tough backbone. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 12:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

chiarimenti

ora leggo e ti dico --Pava (talk) 15:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: Help: no-FoP Italy

You have marked a lot of pictures. It will take a lot of time to review them. Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 20:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Just a quick note: Listing over 1k files in a deletion request is IMHO not a good idea. There is no way a single person could handle this in a reasonable amount of time. I suggest splitting the lists up into several pages so they can be decided upon separately. The pages can then still be included in a big deletion request compilation page, but edit conflicts are avoided. Also I'd ask you not to post your request for comments on every single administrator's talk page. If you want to alert all administrators of an issue like this, please post to COM:AN. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 00:51, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Never mind what I said about splitting the request. I didn't notice you already did it. I just overlooked the subpages with only the number suffix. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 00:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: Help: no-FoP Italy

I really do not have the time to go through everything now. BUT I would porpose to handle things differently, as there seems to be an exception for state-ownd buildings, right? First, make a general deletion request stating that there is no FoP in Italy and that these files have to be deleted. Put some examples in the request (not more than 10, but from different categories, like buildings, sculptures, etc.). Link in the request to your listing. Second, if the request for deletion is successful, Administrators will delete the files without further case to case discussion. This is why including all files is not efficient. It just makes the discussion longer. --ALE! ¿…? 08:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

grazie a te

era solo una battuta. Mongolfierista... neanche io, per l'occasione ho scoperto che è un titolo di legge, credo necessario per guidare una mongolfiera in Italia. La solita burocrazia--Pierpao.lo (listening) 10:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Marilyn - Andy Warhol.jpg

File:Marilyn - Andy Warhol.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!

XARAdNAM • MAИbAЯAX 10:51, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I do not remember ever having loaded it. Maybe in a past life! :) Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Immagine frontespizio Lippmann su Commons

Ciao, ti ringrazio per il lavoro che hai compiuto con l'immagine di Theodor Litt in it.wiki. Potrei chiederti il favore di ripeterlo con quest'altra immagine nella wikipedia di lingua italiana? L'immagine è reperibile al seguente link:

File:Lippmanns Cold War

Te ne sarei molto grato, dato che non possiedo un account su Commons e non sono molto esperto (vorrei evitare di combinare disastri).

A presto e grazie per tutto l'aiuto che potrai e vorrai darmi!

Stefano.Volpato

ok, fatto --Raoli ✉ (talk) 13:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

PD-Italy

Ciao, ti scrivo in italiano perché sono più comodo. Ho visto i tuoi annullamenti: il secondo ho sbagliato, quell'immagine è presente su it.wiki, non su commons; il primo in parte è stato dato dal fatto che nella pagina principale la pagina numero 3 non era stata inserita. Però penso che se effettivamente in Italia non esiste il FoP, le due immagini vecchie non possono andare in PD perché contengono degli elementi che sono protetti da copyright e il cui copyright non è ancora scaduto. In teoria anche le foto di più 20 anni fa ("fotografie generiche e prive di carattere artistico") devono rispettare l'ipotetico No-FoP.--Dega180 (talk) 21:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Come ho già scritto nella discussione di it.wiki, sono stato questa mattina al tribunale di Milano, però la signora che stava allo sportello ha detto che per trovare la sentenza le serve almeno il nome delle parti del processo. Non ho chiesto di darmi tutti i processi di quel giorno perché il tribunale di Milano è molto grande ed emette un gran numero di processi tutti i giorni (non so nemmeno se sia possibile richiedere un set di processi), ho scoperto però che sul libro da cui abbiamo preso la sentenza c'è il codice "Dinf, 2004, 691" che si riferisce alla rivista Diritto dell'informazione e dell'informatica uscita nell'anno 2004 a pagina 691. Questa rivista è presente nella biblioteca della mia università; lunedì provo ad andare a vedere cosa c'è scritto.--Dega180 (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

File: Giambologna-Crocifisso bronzeo - particolare.jpg

Questo crocefisso di proprietà della mia famiglia è stato donato alla chiesa di Vignoni e poi consegnato al museo di Montalcino che lo conserva . Nella pubblicazione del museo a pagina 27 è scritto testualmente "Giunto nella chiesa di Vignoni per dono della famiglia Amerighi, questo Crocifisso in bronzo mostra di essere opera di grande qualità e di avere caratteri di stile che consentono l'attribuzione al Giambologna"[1] . Altro non so dire. Disponete pure come credete. Un cordiale saluto Roberto Amerighi

This crucifix owned by my family has been donated to the church of Vignoni and then delivered to Montalcino museum that preserves it. In the publication of the museum on page 27 is written quote "Once in the church of Vignoni gift for family Amerighi, this Crucifix in bronze proves to be a work of great quality and style have characters that allow the attribution to Giambologna. More I can not say. Arrange well as you think. http://www.comunedimontalcino.it/documen/guida/04_museocivicomontalcino.pdf A friendly greeting Roberto Amerighi Grazie --Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 17:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

controllo immagini

ho due cose da chiederti:

• puoi controllare queste immagini? [2], se possono rimanere su commons ti va di categorizzarle insieme a me?

(edit) ma non sono un po' "vecchie" ? di solito non vanno in PD-Italy foto così storiche? e il pd-italy non è vietato su commons?--Pava (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

• come ci comportiamo quindi con le foto caricate da quell'utente che le ha caricate sia qui sia su flickr con licenze diverse?

(edit) va bene grazie, però io posso prendere la versione alta qualità di flickr e sostituirla a quella presente su commons? quindi non posso trasferire altre foto da flicrk a meno che non lo farà l'autore stesso? --Pava (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

ciao grazie --Pava (talk) 20:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

non so come categorizzare i libri :( --Pava (talk) 10:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

figurati se ti devi giustificare, grazie ciao --Pava (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

impeccabile :) grazie mille (PS non ho trovato quel progetto microdesign su en.wiki :( ) --Pava (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

FOP in Italy

Hi Raoli, after seeing your comment in the COM:FOP-entry for Italy, I wonder, has there been any conclusion/change from this discussion? I am asking as I was going to file a DR for all images in Category:Madonnina delle Lacrime (Syracuse), with much regret, but being forced by our policy. --Túrelio (talk) 11:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

A few more, which I have only no-fop-tagged. Please check whether they fulfill requirements of Italian law for copyrightability and eventually request for deletion:

• File:The statue of the photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt.JPG
• File:Rome murales 04.JPG
• File:Rome murales 03.JPG
• File:Graffiti to Rome 02.jpg
• File:MuralesRome2.jpg
• File:Oyace DSCN0273.JPG

Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 13:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Cancellazione foto monumento a Giovanni Acerbi

Ti chiedo cortesemente di porre in cancellazione anche questa immagine [3] dello scultore Vindizio Nodari Pesenti, scomparso nel 1961, di cui sono autore, per gli stessi motivi per i quali sono state oggi richieste le cancellazioni al Monumento ai caduti di Castel Goffredo. Grazie. Massimo Telò (talk) 20:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Grazie. Ma come fai a capire esattamente se contravvieni a queste regole? --Massimo Telò (talk) 21:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Cancellazione monumento agi aviatori

Cancellami gentilmente anche questa immagine di Desenzano del garda. Grazie. --Massimo Telò (talk) 21:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Gli autori sono gli scultori Quaglino e Bordogna, ma non ne conosco i nomi. In Wikipedia esiste Massimo Quaglino, ma non so se è lui. --Massimo Telò (talk) 22:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

No, infatti non è lui ma è stata realizzata dallo scultore Aurelio Quaglino e dal prof. Carlo Alberto Bordogna. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Informazioni minime: Aurelio Quaglino (Torino 23 Febbraio 1910 - Torino 7 Dicembre 1998) Carlo Alberto Bordogna (Torino 19 marzo 1913 - Torino 4 dicembre 1998). Guarda che strano. Nati e morti a Torino. Morti quasi lo stesso giorno a Torino. Pazzesco! Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

File

Pazienza. Lo sai cosa succede adesso? Io le ricarico su it.wiki. En.wiki le mette sui propri server. Siamo tutti felici e contenti. Chi non fa parte della comunità anglofona o italofona si attacca, perché non può utilizzarle. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 13:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Su it.wiki possono stare, non siamo così rigidi. Pure su en.wiki ci stanno regolarmente, perché dove non arriva il cc arriva il fair use. Delle altre foto non mi interessa, io ho trasferito le mie su it.wiki perché so di esserne io il proprietario e l'autore, le altre le cancello e basta. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 18:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

No. Su it.wiki solo le foto in palese violazione di copyright vengono cancellate, la discriminante è l'autore della foto, non il soggetto della stessa. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 18:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

"it.wiki soggetto alla legislazione italiana": Nì. I server stanno negli Stati Uniti, e wikipedia.org è un soggetto privato statunitense. it.wikipedia.org è solo un capitolo in lingua italiana, perché i capitoli sono linguistici, non nazionali. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 18:33, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Secondo wmf:Resolution:Licensing policy/it, una EDP è "una politica specifica, in conformità con le leggi degli Stati Uniti e con le leggi dei paesi dove il contenuto del progetto è maggiormente consultato ed utilizzato (se esiste)". Il contenuto di Wikipedia in italiano è maggiormente consultato ed utilizzato in Italia. Per Wikipedia in inglese, c'è en:Template:FoP-USonly e {{PD-US-architecture}}. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

ti ho impegnato in una discussione :\

Ciao Raoli, molto poco scrupolosamente ti ho procurato un "impegno" (a tua insaputa) è successo perché ti vedo come utente competente in queste cose, non volevo scaricarti un barile. qui capisci meglio Commons:Bar_italiano#non_ci_capisco_un_accidente.21_AIUTO scusami ciao --Pava (talk) 20:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

NO FOP ecc

Se hai ancora bisogno del mio aiuto grafico nei casi di NO FOP o quella cosa generica che volevi fare, fammi sapere --Pava (talk) 13:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Non penso. Il logo definitivo L'ho trovato. Più che altro ho da segnalarti che nella discussione sul no-fop di Pedia stavano erroneamente pensando di estendere il no-fop anche per le macchine e che ci sono stati sviluppi interessanti sulla questione. Ciao e buon divertimento Pava Raoli ✉ (talk) 16:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Sottopagina strana

Ciao, ti sei accorto di questa tua sottopagina: User:Raoli/form? È categorizzata in Italian FOP cases/pending ma non contiene nulla e nessuna pagina punta ad essa. Se serve fai pure, ma se non serve la puoi togliere dalla categoria? Grazie.--Dega180 (talk) 11:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Cancellazione Ara pacis

Ciao, ti faccio notare che c'è anche il messaggio che ti ho scritto ↑qui sopra↑. Ti scrivo per dirti che in questa cancellazione il buon Jameslwoodward ha cancellato anche il file Meier arapacis10.JPG che conteneva una foto dell'ara pacis simile a questa (solo un po' sovraesposta), ovviamente solo l'edificio che lo contiene è protetto da copyright ed in quella foto l'edificio rientrava nel concetto di De minimis. Dovremmo richiedere il recupero di quell'immagine non ti pare? Solo che non so quale sia la procedura più corretta per farlo e non sono tanto bravo con l'inglese per spiegare questa cosa.--Dega180 (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Mafalda monuments

Hi Raoli, do you see any possibility for these 2 images File:Mafalda 2.jpg and File:Mafalda como.JPG to remain on Commons? As the sculptures both are recent (first one by Mafalda's son Enrico; second one not stated), they seem to be still copyrighted and with no-FOP in Italy ... :-( . (I know this might be a sort of emotional issue and I prefer not to request them for deletion by myself.) --Túrelio (talk) 14:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Il casino che è successo sulle cancellazioni di foto di edifici recenti

Ho letto, ma mi spieghi in due parole, dopo quanti anni dalla sua edificazione si possono pubblicare? Per edificazione si intende inaugurazione o si possono prendere date del corso dei lavori? V'è modo di limitare la qualità e pubblicare qualcosa lo stesso? Mi sembra strano che adesso Commons impedisca la pubblicazioni anche di immagini di panorama autoprodotte. --Kasper2006 (talk) 08:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Vedi quante cose s'imparano. ;-) Dato che quelle foto le ho fatte 4 anni fa (sono uno che, per motivi professionali, l'opera l'ha vista nascere), pensavo che andassero bene. Ho spulciato la tua lista e no, mi pare non ci siano altre mie foto di panorami. La questione non è certo che il "censore" passa per impopolare, quanto il fatto che, nell'era di internet, sembra assurdo che ci possano essere "figli e figliastri" (fai che il 99.999% degli altri "panorami" mondiali sta su commons), e noi poveri sfigati di italiani, abbiamo le limitazioni che tu hai detto. --Kasper2006 (talk) 19:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

User rights

Hi Raoli. I've added the filemover and rollbacker rights to your acct so that you'll have the tools you need for your work here. INeverCry 20:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, the filemover right is very important for me. I can move a file if requested and in particular for Italian people, helping sysop. They're much-useful. Cheers! Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Stiamo sfiorando il ridicolo

Qui si sta sfiorando il ridicolo, e danneggiando commons, perlopiù penso ci sia gente che ci goda a togliere immagini italiane. Se ti va, leggi qui: File:Poltrone spogliatoio milan sansiro.jpg e qui Commons:Deletion requests/Files about Stadio Giuseppe Meazza --Pava (talk) 20:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

De minimis

Grazie per il suggerimento :-).--o'Sistemone^{tell me} 21:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Spero lo legga anche qualcun'altro. :) --Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:53, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Simpio ha cambiato la licenza su Flickr !!!!

Siiiii leggi pure il bar italiano!! Ora si tratta solo di trasferirle :D (speriamo non mi condannino per persuasione, ma io + volte ho detto che lo faccia solo se condivide)

Tu che fine hai fatto?? non mi rispondi più :P ciaooo--Pava (talk) 17:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC) Non hai ricevuto il mio messaggio che diceva che se volevi offro di nuovo il mio contributo per creare icone di edifici tolti per NO FOP e quella cosa + generica che volevi fare e inizialmente avevo rifiutato? non ricordo dove telo avevo scritto, o forse me lo ero solo immaginato?--Pava (talk) 17:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Più che altro ora bisogna trasferire un botto di immagini e subito mettersi sotto (ma farsi proprio il c*lo) per risolvere questa infelice questione Commons:Bar_italiano#selezione_immagine_dell.27anno:_su_centinaia_di_foto_SOLO_una_.C3.A8_inerente_all.27ITALIA :(. Ciao --Pava (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Amerighi

Ciao Raoli, scusa se ti disturbo. Vorrei farti una domanda. In che modo si crea una Subcategorie? in che modo si mettono le immagini in una Subcategorie? Vorrei crearne due nuove:

"Terriesi"

"Documenti Amerighi"

puoi aiutarmi? grazie--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 19:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I solved the problem. But I made a mistake. I created a page Francesco Terriesi I proposed to delete. Sorry,

--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 22:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

ti ringrazio per l'intervento. Puoi darmi un chiarimento?... dove ho sbagliato dando il nome il nome Francesco Terriesi? Posso, nel caso, cancellare la pagina e mettere il non me giusto? o non è il caso.  :). Ti prego di avere pazienza.--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Grazie! :)--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 18:13, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Livorno Stadio

Salve, ho visto la richiesta di notifica per una eventuale cancellazione dei files riguardanti lo stadio Armando Picchi di Livorno. Se le regole del copyright sono queste non ho nulla da obiettare. Il problema è un altro. Ho caricato il File:Livorno ATL bus stop 8228.JPG riguardante la fermata dell’autobus presso lo stadio. La società che gestisce le paline delle fermate (non l’ATL) ha utililizzato la mia imagine (ritoccata), che deve essere cancellata, ripresa da Wikimedia Commons ovviamente non rispettando nè il copyright nè le procedure utilizzate da Wikimedia. La stessa imagine è stata utilizzata da alcuni siti web di architettura.Chesipiero (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Ho cercato in rete i due siti di architettura che avevano ripreso i files dello Stadio di Livorno, ma non sempre i risultati sono gli stessi. In compenso ho trovato due siti in cui sono utilizzate nella gallery le mie foto.

[4] [5] Chesipiero (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Warning

Please stop voting against files of FOP. FOP does not allow to delete files, you can mark files as FOP, only. The right of a some country is only in this country and not all over the world. Your action is destructive for Wikimedia projects. Subtropical-man (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but in Italy there is no FOP. I would not do this if in Italy there was FOP. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:04, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

You do not understand what's going on. For example, Eiffel Tower is also modern artworks and also French law prohibits the publication of this BUT Wikimedia is not France, servers of Wikimedia not lies in France and Wikimedia not need comply with French law. This is international project, not French, Italian etc. In Spain, Poland, Australia and in 100 other countries, French law not applicable. To pictures of France, Italy etc you can add a note about FOP, and do not delete files. I repeat: the right of a some country is only in this country and not all over the world. Wikimedia projects is multi-international projects. Your action is destructive for Wikimedia projects. Subtropical-man (talk) 23:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

The current guidelines of Commons prohibit the publication of images under copyright. Now the exception is for everyone because you apply the "lex loci protectionis" in the international law. So if there is a fop in a specific state that law must be respected in every state that publishes the photos. The rules are these, I have not written myself, but I respect them. Do not worry. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

You wrote: "So if there is a fop in a specific state that law must be respected in every state that publishes the photos" - this is tommyrot. Maybe tomorrow, North Korea prohibit the publication information about Asia, and Wikimedia will need to delete data about Asia because these data are breaking the law of North Korea and as you wrote "if there is in a specific state that law must be respected in every state". This is joke? I'm sorry, but users removing data for FOP or similar laws of specific state, should be blocked for the good of the project because they act to the detriment of the Wikimedia, multi-international (and not country-specific) independent project. Wikimedia is a independent project, not subject to the law of individual country. Tommorow, law of Poland (etc) may prohibit any publication of images about Europe, Wikimedia can not delete European images because this is multi-international independent project, independent of the law of a specific countries. Subtropical-man (talk) 00:29, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia projects are not independent of the law of a specific countries. The international law demand "lex loci protectionis" and "lex loci originis". The Community of Commons and now the Community of Wikipedia accepts this law. I'm like thee, I do not want to delete these images because Italian law in this regard is medieval and ridiculous, but please do not blame me. Discuss it with the other admins of Commons. Hello Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:29, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Just, do not expose files of nFOP to remove on Commons:Deletion requests. For some time will be broader discussed about FOP, to not delete files and insert template of FOP to files. In Wikimedia projects, there is small discussions about this and many users will support this compromise. In the meantime, please stop delete nFOP files. Subtropical-man (talk) 12:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Raoli, per piacere fermati. Te lo chiedo per piacere (per adesso). La cosa sta assumendo proporzioni bibliche e qualcuno si sta risentendo. Non puoi mettere in cancellazione foto che riguardano eventi sportivi, stai abusando dello strumento della cancellazione e ingolfando le procedure. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 10:01, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Non sto aggiungendo file di eventi sportivi, ma solo quelli che rappresentano architetture. I file in questione comunque stavano già nella lista e molti utenti li hanno controllati. Non mi merito quindi di sentirmi dire che sto abusando dello strumento. Ciao --Raoli ✉ (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Raoli, mi spiace dirlo ma stai inserendo in cancellazione immagini che non vengono minimamente toccate dalla legge, stai interpetando proprio male il caso FOP, stai mettendo in cancellazione una foto come questa File:Stadio Renato Curi Gradinata.JPG dove non si vede minimamente lo stadio, ma dei anonimi triangoli di cemento fatti a gradinata. Non puoi fare un sacco e cancellare tutto così senza selezione, è solo che dannoso e immotivato perchè foto come quella non posso minimamente rientrare nel caso FOP. Mi spiace dirtelo ma usato così è proprio un abuso dello strumento --Pava (talk) 03:07, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Gradinate = elementi d'architettura rientranti nel caso FOP?

Raoli, senti io non so se tu hai una fonte che supporta quello che dici, ma se ce l'hai fammela leggere. Non voglio peccare di presunzione ma sull'argomento credo di poter affermare con assoluta certezza che una gradinata di quel tipo non rientra nella firma dell'architetto, basta che vedi un qualsiasi progetto dello stadio le cui gradinate utilizzate sono quelle di tipo standard. Inoltre tutti gli stadi che hai messo in cancellazione non illustrano nemmeno un sistema studiato e quindi rientrante nel fop di gestione degli spettatori (come invece avviene per san siro) quindi nemmeno da questo punto di vista entra in merito la legge. Se non ti fidi, chiedo allo studio di architettura ed ingegneria edile a cui faccio sempre riferimento di intervenire di persona o di portare degli esempi e dei progetti, tuttavia è una fatica e del tempo che vorrei risparmiarmi visto che su questa cosa ti potresti fidare. (le gradinate con le coperture progettate da un architetto e che portano visibilmente la firma quelle non te le contesto, poichè si rientrano nel caso fop, ma le altre no Raoli, sei in fallo, enormemente :D --Pava (talk) 16:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

FOP

Ok ho letto il tuo ultimo contributo relativo ai casi di più autori di opere. ;) Buon proseguimento. PS: che noia sto FOP però...speriamo che l'Italia si allinei agli altri paesi...--o'Sistemone^{tell me} 00:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Ho risposto alla questione sulle Stazioni dell'arte. Comunque a questo punto è già un miracolo che esista wikipedia...ma ho paura a dirlo, visto che ogni tanto nasce la possibilità di mettere una legge che mini la stabilità del progetto... (Notte) --o'Sistemone^{tell me} 01:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Attenzione a non esagerare. Lo Stadio Artemio Franchi di Firenze è un'opera di architettura, tutelata oltretutto dalla soprintendenza, lo stadio Renato Curi di Perugia no. --Grifomaniacs (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Conosco il tema Freedom of Panorama da anni. Non si tratta di un'opera di architettura, nulla a che vedere con l'Auditorium di Roma progettato da Renzo Piano, Luigi Corradi non è un architetto. --Grifomaniacs (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Ripeto, anche se mi pare di parlare arabo: Luigi Corradi è un ingegnere, non un architetto. L'opera deve essere contraddistinta da creatività per rientrare nei canoni della legge sul diritto d'autore 633/41. Nel caso di un'ingegnere, dovrebbe aver introdotto novità sostanziali di carattere tecnico. --Grifomaniacs (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Ripeto, stai esagerando nell'applicazione di una misura necessaria. Se qui su Commons qualcuno ha fatto l'immane cavolata di caricare la foto panoramica di un'architettura italiana di Renzo Piano, adesso non puoi cadere nell'errore opposto di interpretare in maniera troppo ferrea la noFoP per l'Italia. Lo Stadio Renato Curi è stato costruito in fretta e furia in 3 mesi nel 1975, in occasione della prima e inaspettata promozione in serie A del Perugia. A me piace, lo trovo ancora moderno dopo quasi 40 anni, ma ti garantisco che forse qualcuno tra 10 anni richiederà di metterlo tra le strutture tutelate perché storiche, ma attualmente è un normalissimo stadio senza elementi architettonici, nè colonne, nè vele, nè tensostrutture, archi, volte, nulla di nulla. Per non parlare dello stadio di Empoli poi, un bambino con i lego fa un'opera più originale. --Grifomaniacs (talk) 23:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Piazza dante, metropolitana.jpg

Yours sincerely, Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Screenshot a video

Ciao, scusami se sto facendo la pulce ai tuoi uploads ma ieri per curiosità ho voluto vedere i file che hai caricato su commons (penso che un po' tutti facciano queste cose...) e mi sono imbattuto in questo screenshot: File:Raffaello - La nostra storia.jpg, ho visto che l'immagine è stata accuratamente degradata ma mi sa che non può stare su common sotto CC By-Sa perché gli screenshot dei film italiani sono sotto la legge del fair use italiana, tant'è vero che se l'avessi pubblicato su it.wiki avresti dovuto metterlo con questo template che mostra molto bene il simbolo di copyright e dice espressamente "...poiché trattasi di [...] riproduzione di brani o di parti di opera [...] utilizzati per uso di critica o di discussione, o per mere finalità illustrative e per fini non commerciali", la CC By-Sa ammette i fini commerciali. Non sarebbe meglio cancellarlo e ricaricarlo su it.wiki?
PS: scusami se ti rompo in questo momento in cui tutti scrivono per quello che stai facendo con il FoP.--Dega180 (talk) 11:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Cancellazione foto

A seguito mia richiesta dell'11 gennaio di cancellazione di alcune foto, ho osservato che queste non sono state ancora cancellate. Da te inserite qui. Potresti verificare? Grazie. --Massimo Telò (talk) 14:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Grazie per la risposta. --Massimo Telò (talk) 20:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Campagna di cancellazione per il NO-FOP Italy: (è fatta molto male)

Dopo alcuni miei interventi diretti a te che ti spiegavano come mai la campagna che stai facendo è sbagliata in molte sue parti e stai abusando di uno strumento veramente rischioso, ho aperto questa discussione qui Commons:Bar_italiano#Campagna_di_cancellazione_per_il_NO-FOP_Italy_.28_.C3.A8_fatta_molto_male.29. Ti tengo a precisare che il mio intento è quello di collaborare con te, non aggredirti, ma se vuoi fare una cosa o la fai scrupolosamente (come fai sempre le cose che ti ho visto fare) oppure è meglio che non la fai (visto che il motivo del perché la fai così è perché so meglio di te che stai facendo una cosa che bisogna fare, non una cosa che ti piace fare o capisci fino a fondo come farla). Spero vivamente che la situazioni migliori, a tal proposito ti offro la mia massima collaborazione. Ciao --Pava (talk) 13:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Triennale di Milano

Salve Raoli, ma cosa c'entra questa chair con il FOP. Non capisco!--Nevertime (talk) 16:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

chiese

Ciao Raoli. Senti, ma il FOP vale anche per le immagini di queste chiese vero? [6] [7] ed ingenerale tutte quelle moderne in questa voce?--o'Sistemone^{tell me} 14:20, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Imho, purtroppo ce ne sono ancora tantine. Basta aprire una qualsiasi voce sulle chiese dell'ultimo secolo. [8]. Esempi: [9] [10] etc etc --o'Sistemone^{tell me} 21:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

sensibilizzare l'opinione pubblica

Io sto stendendo una richiesta al Partito 5 stelle (è l'unico che io sappia con programma libero) per inserire la proposta di eliminare la legge sul non diritto di Panorama in italia, almeno per le opere pubbliche e gli edifici. Lasciando stare wikipedia, secondo te, alcuni utenti di wikimedia e la stessa wikimedia Italia può unirsi a me a tale richiesta? --Pava (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Sedia

Sei duro come i sassi. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gae aulenti, sedia da giardino, 1964.JPG --Sailko (talk) 07:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Se fosse come dici tu, a quando una pulizia delle foto di Fiat/Ferreari/Maserati/Alfa Romeo ecc.?? Non sono oggetto di design anche quelle? Via, ti avevo già dato una profusione di link, speriamo che se non credi a me crederai agli admin di commons. --Sailko (talk) 09:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

anche il design è prodotto industrialmente.. vedremo chi ha ragione. --Sailko (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Scusatemi se mi intrometto ma il punto non è una questione di aver ragione o torto; riguardo questo caso in particolare abbiamo un esempio di qualche anno fa, si chiama caso FLOS-SEMERARO dove l'Italia per la prima volta ha dato in via eccezionale il riconoscimento di opera d'arte a un oggetto industriale, ma è un caso unico e isolato; l'unione europea infatti è intervenuta nella questione e si è espressa contraria a tale attribuzione. E' facile evincere quindi che un prodotto di disegno industriale non è considerato un'opera d'arte ma un oggetto destinato ad un'utilizzo di massa, sia da parte dell'Italia (sennò il caso FLOS-Semeraro non sarebbe un'eccezione) sia da parte dell'UE. ciao :)--Pava (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Design vuol dire anche "opera di design", cioè un oggetto prodotto industrialmente e progettato in modo da valorizzarne l'estetica. --Sailko (talk) 18:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Quindi penso che i problemi nascano dall'interpretazione del termine. Design significa disegno, null'altro. Quindi non è vero che significa prodotto industrialmente. Forse tu intendi il disegno industriale che è ben diverso. Disegno industriale o disegno artistico non cambia molto visto che per la legislazione italiana vi è la stessa protezione per entrambi. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

design significa progettazione, progetto, il designer è il progettista. (non confondiamo quindi con draw/disegno o stylist/stilista/disegnatore) In italia progettista è detto anche disegnatore tecnico, ma non ha nulla a che vedere col disegno. Il termine design in italia è spesso erroneamente usato come sinonimo di Industrial design ovvero disegno industriale ovvero progettazione eseguita in vista di una produzione industriale. Trovate tutto (seppur, e la cosa mi fa un po' vergognare, con un livello di informazioni non di qualità) sulla wiki in italiano. L'affermazione di Saiko pur inesatta (aimè ancora a ricondurre il design a un fattore estetico) se riferita a design come sinonimo di disegno industriale è riferito proprio alla produzione industriale. Che poi in Italia una cosa giovane come il disegno industriale (50 anni) più recente dela legge del 1941 e quindi da essa non menzionata, sia poi stata inserita qualche anno fa nel diritto d'autore c'entra ben poco con la questione FOP/NOFOP in Italy. Comunque per dirla tutta, basta con ste discussioni a chi argomenta o parla di più, è una sedia si può fotografare e pubblicare liberamente, è destinata ad un uso di massa e non è un'opera d'arte. Poi se vogliamo continuare a dire opinioni su questa cosa diciamo pure, ma forse è meglio iniziare a supportare le nostre affermazioni con delle fonti che dicono che una sedia di un designer famoso in Italia non si può fotografare, così come un'automobile ecc.. ecc.. --Pava (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Calmati

Raoli, ti posso chiedere (a parte spiegarmi perché vai a lamentarti a mia insaputa invece di chiedere spiegazioni a me come è successo qui) di fermarti? -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 13:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Per sapere se quella era prassi oppure erano stati due casi isolati. Giusto per regolarmi. Non dire a me di calmarmi, dillo a quelli che che si arrampicano sugli specchi e citato cose strane (i disegni industriali senza copyright non sono legge italiana, ma statunitense, i c.d. oggetti di design sono anch'essi arte e qualora comunque qualcuno li giudicasse disegno industriale anch'esso è protetto dal diritto di autore, per non parlare della c.d. lista degli architetti pro-fop che sembrerebbe una cosa inventata e non ne trovo corrispondenza ne in altri utenti nè in rete ne dagli stessi architetti che nemmeno sanno della Libertà di Panorama e anzi vogliono che le loro foto rimangano, ma la legge italiana non lo permette). Insomma sono in ballo. Eh fammi ballare! --Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

No, lo dico a te di calmarti, perché stai esagerando adesso. Commons non è un gioco, e il gioco che stai conducendo è distruttivo. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 09:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

L'ago e il filo di Claes Oldenburg

In riferimento a questo, ti faccio notare che l'opera si trova al centro di piazzale Cadorna a Milano, e non c'entra niente con la Triennale, che si trova circa a 300 metri di distanza. Ovviamente, essendo Oldenburg vivente, la cancellazione è corretta, ma non nella categoria "Triennale".--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 20:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Stadio_Is_Arenas

E' sperabile che ti dia una calmata, stai mettendo in cancellazione cose improbabili? Te lo chiedo per l'ultima volta. Stai rasentando l'abuso di pagina di servizio. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 22:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Ciao

Ciao, ho visto che avete cancellato delle mie foto dell'Università della Calabria. Le avevo fatte io personalmente, un architetto ha i diritti su un'opera pubblica? Preferirei una risposta sul mio conto in it.wikipedia, grazie.--Francescost (talk) 16:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Day 203.jpg

File:Day 203.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!

Jespinos (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

File:R0013970.jpg

File:R0013970.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!

Jespinos (talk) 02:02, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Dubbio immagine

Ciao Raoli. Sono LUIGINAPOLETANODOK, potresti controllare le mie immagini che ho caricato ultimamente? Sono caricate bene? --Parmiggiano (talk) 08:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

De minimis

Ciao. Ho visto che delle 9 immagini che avevo fatto del Palacultura di Messina, ha lasciato alcune perché de minimis. Volevo chiederdi, se scatto una foto da lontano, tipo dall'altro lato della strada, diciamo che occupa 1/10 dello spazio della foto, è considerabile "de minimis" quindi caricabile? --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:51, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Apartment building in Dubai.jpg

Yours sincerely, russavia (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

LdP aka FoP in Italy

Do you agree with the content of this file File:Freedom of panorama and Wikimedia Commons.pdf ? Please, reply in my it.wiki talk page. Thank you :) (A few month ago I quoted you here. You can find you with your nickname "Jim". :-) ) Raoli ✉ (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I think it is generally OK, although it covers some complex topics very rapidly. I think the "Problems: section is one person's opinion and while strictly accurate, puts a different emphasis on things than I would. Jameslwoodward (msg) 12:10, 27 set 2013 (CEST)

In general, therefore, apart from the section "Problems", would you subscribe this file as a propedeutic guide for new users? Raoli ✉ (talk) 10:52, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Leggi italiane all'anglosassone

Appunto per questo ti si è detto di evitare l'argomento FoP su Commons, e di lasciare che le foto si valutino caso per caso. Ti aveva consigliato Jim di non proporre cancellazioni di massa, te l'aveva consigliato Gianfranco seppure in altre forme. Te ne sei fregato. Non devi dare per scontato che un tedesco o un inglese interpretino la legge italiana secondo il contesto giusto. Come te lo si deve spiegare che dall'argomento-FoP devi stare lontano, perché come ti muovi combini solo casini? -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 12:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Raoli, come ti vuoi mettere in testa che in Italia non esiste una giurisprudenza sul no-FoP e che non esistono precedenti legali perché un'opera di architettura non è né un libro, né un disco, né un film, ovvero non è un'opera ripetibile della quale si vendono migliaia di esemplari? Se tu copi un disco, un libro, o un film, stai copiando un'opera di cui l'autore detiene diritti intellettuali e materiali (ergo: lo sfruttamento economico di un'opera gli toglie guadagno e lo lede direttamente). Un'opera architettonica della quale l'architetto non detiene la proprietà non è mai stata tutelata in sede giudiziale proprio perché nel 95 per cento dei casi stiamo parlando di 1. opere non originali o non rilevanti e 2. di proprietà dello Stato o di amministrazioni pubbliche, liberamente e pubblicamente esposte e accessibili e sulle quali l'architetto, una volta pagato, non vanta più diritti di sfruttamento (tant'è vero che giornali, riviste, etc. sono pieni di fotografie di opere di architetti anche viventi). Le questioni FoP vanno valutate caso per caso proprio perché mettere in cancellazione opere tipo il Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana o lo Stadio dei Marmi, tanto per fare un esempio, sono uno schiaffo al buon senso, essendo oramai largamente riprodotte ovunque e non oggetto di accampamento diritti da chicchessia. A margine, non ti considero abbastanza competente per potere trattare questa materia, che non si può risolvere in una mezza sentenza che col FoP non c'entra nulla e un parere legale senza background giurisprudenziale specifico. Se ne sono occupati altri senza giungere a soluzioni definitive, vuoi adesso mettere in pericolo non tanto il lavoro su wikicommons, ma addirittura la contribuzione di gente che ho convinto in ginocchio a non abbandonare questo progetto quando ha visto la prima infornata di proposte di cancellazione selvagge? Già te l'ho detto: lascia perdere. Non stai aiutando affatto Commons. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 13:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Mi ripeto: cosa c'è di non chiaro nell'invito a soprassedere, se ben sai che la cosa è controversa e crea più casini che altro? Ti va proprio di creare problemi e casini? Lo capisci se te lo dico più semplicemente? -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 08:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

No, già ti ho spiegato perché crei casini. Perché te ne freghi dei consigli che ti vengono dati, e perché gente valida che contribuisce con foto e altra roba non vuole più collaborare se vede azioni come la tua. Lascia che le questioni FoP - Italia si vedano caso per caso quando escono all'attenzione. -- SERGIO ^{(aka the Blackcat)} 12:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Abbellimenti_Libri

Abbellimenti Libri 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!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Abbellimenti_Libri

Abbellimenti Libri 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!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:It.Wikisource

It.Wikisource 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!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Embellishments_of_Books

Category:Embellishments_of_Books 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!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Ribbon, Twitter.png

File:Ribbon, Twitter.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. 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!

志賀 慶一 Keiichi SHIGA (talk) 04:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Un mucchio di euro.jpg

Eleassar (t/p) 08:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

De minimis however. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Editor @ ar.wiki

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 07:25, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi

I'm happy to help you. You asked about Gibraltarpedia, but the video is about Monmouthpedia. Im guessing that it is Monmouthpedia that you want help with. Is your language arabic? regards Roger Victuallers (talk) 12:56, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

There is an explanation of Gibraltarpedia in arabic - but the video is only in English Victuallers (talk) 12:58, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

THank you for the thank you. I have improved the text. I think there is just one timing problem. Do tell me when "I can speak Italian" :-) .... well in one video !!! Merry Xmas Victuallers (talk) 13:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Como, ex casa del fascio 04.JPG

File:Como, ex casa del fascio 04.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!

84.61.176.82 19:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Epic buzZ.jpg

File:Epic buzZ.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!

Kelly (talk) 06:39, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't know — Raoli ✉ (talk) 14:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Translations for Picture of the Year

Hi Raoli,

I wanted to take a moment to thank you for helping us with Italian translations for Picture of the Year last year. For this year, the organizing committee has worked hard to streamline and simplify all of the instruction pages in English. I'd like to ask for your help again this year to make the contest accessible to Italian Wikimedia contributors. For everyone with the organizing committee, I'd be deeply appreciative of your help with translations. If you are interested, please visit Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Translations - instructions are on that page and it should be easier than last year because we are using the Translate extension.

Thanks so much, —Mono 00:16, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'm ready to lend a helping hand. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:28, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! —Mono 00:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

See this edit. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:41, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

For now I've translated everything into Italian. I have also marked two more unmarked words for translation. Commons:Picture of the Year/2013/Rules Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Ayn Rand has a posse.jpg

File:Ayn Rand has a posse.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.

 

Vera (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

The next time, you consider giving more time for a response. I could not answer. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Ribbon, Deviantart.png

File:Ribbon, Deviantart.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.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Vera (talk) 07:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The next time, you consider giving more time for a response. I could not answer. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 11:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

• ⧼Wikibase-terms/Archive 2⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

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

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

• In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Raoli,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

• In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
• In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Angelo Brofferio 1867.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Angelo Brofferio 1867.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Lippmanns Cold War.jpg

File:Lippmanns Cold War.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!

JuTa 19:36, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

BUON ANNO!!

Auguriii Buon 2015!!! --Pava (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

File:View from my hotel room at night.jpg

File:View from my hotel room at night.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!

EI-DAS 738 (talk) 06:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Mario Monti, Bocconi.jpg

Yours sincerely, 106.68.123.120 13:29, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Raimondo Vianello, Sandra Mondaini 1960.jpg

Yours sincerely, — Racconish^☎ 18:15, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:View from my hotel room at night.jpg

And also:

• File:View from our room.jpg

Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Firenze, lungarno e ponte alle grazie.JPG

And also:

• File:Florence seen from Ponte Vecchio.JPG

Yours sincerely, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 09:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Shakira on Soundcheck.jpg

And also:

• File:Shakira on Soundcheck.ogv

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Cars (film) shopping iguatemi.jpg

Yours sincerely, Guanaco (talk) 05:08, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Davisentertainment.jpg

File:Davisentertainment.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!

Trivialist (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

File tagging File:Praga 1a jan palach.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Praga 1a jan palach.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Praga 1a jan palach.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

 

Sealle (talk) 20:14, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Stamps of Germany (DDR) 1973, MiNr 1815.png

Yours sincerely, Fæ (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Crystal Project Quicktime.png

File:Crystal Project Quicktime.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.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: copyrighted image fails COM:FAIRUSE Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

DBigXrayᗙ 12:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

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.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

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)

File:Praga 10 moody blues.jpg

File:Praga 10 moody blues.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!

- FlightTime Phone (open channel) 06:00, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Category:Crystal_Project_Device_Icons

Crystal Project Device Icons 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!

200.180.114.162 22:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Theodor Litt.jpg

Copyright status: File:Theodor Litt.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Theodor Litt.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

ZioNicco (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

L'immagine non è stata pubblicata in italia, ma in germania, il PD-Italy non mi sembra adatto. ZioNicco (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

OK

that's okay

TUSC token 88d45d7f5a01a18d7b92172877d87c26

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Merry Christmas

		Holiday Cheer
		Victuallers talkback is wishing Raoli Season's Greetings! Thanks, this is just to celebrate the holiday season and promote WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - Vic/Roger inspired by this - you could do the same

File:Torre Unicredit - Cesar Pelli.jpg

File:Torre Unicredit - Cesar Pelli.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.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: This file is an image of a structure with a copyright-protected design, captured in a jurisdiction without the "Commons:Freedom_of_panorama freedom of panorama," and the uploader did not supply a license from the architect. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : MxRox.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 15:10, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Giovanni Paolo I Sforza.jpg

File:Giovanni Paolo I Sforza.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!

Beaest (talk) 08:15, 26 March 2023 (UTC)