User talk:Salavat

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

File:KLyraTSV.png

[edit]

I have no idea if the image is really a problem. I actually just re-uploaded it from another wikimedia file (the french version) because I was unable to link it to the articles where I wanted to put it. So not sure if it is a problem or not. If it is a problem: it would be strange the file (picture) is up on the website for years (the french version). the logo itself is also not really protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garnhami (talk • contribs) 13:54, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question about this. I noticed you deleted the file from the dutch wikipedia however the same file is still on the english version of this article. So I am confused. It is legal to have it at the english wikipedia but not the dutch one? (see english one here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._Lyra_TSV) And what if I want to add this picture to the dutch wikipedia page (https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koninklijke_Lyra_TSV) ? --Garnhami (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)--Garnhami (talk) 16:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Commons is used for images which are free of copyright, to put it simply, sports logos are nearly always copyrighted by the clubs. If an image is copyrighted then they can be uploaded to Wikipedia's under a fair use license (like the one on the English Wikipedia). I had nothing to do with the deletion of the logo on the Dutch Wikipedia but I assume it was deleted because it was incorrectly licensed. In summary, anything that is copyrighted can be uploaded to any Wikipedia under a fair use license (assuming there is a valid reason). Commons is only for freely licensed images. Salavat (talk) 00:07, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I see. Now I have another stupid question: the image was deleted on the dutch version, but it is still on the english/french version. So how can I now link the image form the french or english version to the dutch wikipedia page? Or is this not possible? --Garnhami (talk) 18:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know if it is possible to link across different language Wikipedia's (might be something to do with the different fair use requirements). I think you may have to upload the logo directly to the Dutch Wikipedia. Salavat (talk) 05:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok I get that. It does make sense. However: can I just download the image from the english wiki and then upload it to the dutch one? It should be possible and not a problem unless of course the different fair requirements are different. Strange situation.--Garnhami (talk) 13:37, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think you should be fine in doing that, I have never done it myself but I assume the process is the same. Maybe have a look at similar fair use images on the Dutch wiki to see if there is any major differences in fair use. Salavat (talk) 00:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miracle in Cracow, Address Unknown, Regina posters jpg

[edit]

Hello, the posters jpg we have uploaded is our propetry. I am the director and producer of the productions, and the member of the producing company katapultfilm: www.katapultfilm.hu, we own the rights of these posters. We have just started to get know the rules here at the WIKI, we probably we might have missed with the right description of the files. Could you help us with your advices, how we can uploas these files properly? Thank you very much for your help. (Paulista95 (talk) 23:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

  • Uploading images on Commons under the licenses you were using are essentially releasing all copyright to the posters. I would of thought that katapultfilm would prefer to retain any copyright it might have on the posters. If this is the case I would suggest uploading directly to Wikipedia where you can license as fair use, and so keeping any copyright you may hold but also being able to display your posters on the articles you want (assuming they meet Wikipedia's fair use policy). If you want to go down the path of releasing all copyright to the posters you might want to look into using Commons:OTRS which helps establish the status of the license you might want to use. Salavat (talk) 05:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:GillinghamSchool.png

[edit]

I created the work, I only used CC0 images in the creation of the file. Hence, I don't see how on earth you arrive at the conclusion of copyright infringement. The only potential hazard is Commons:DERIV, but does "deer on green shield with motto" really count as derivative? Because, if it does, there are plent of examples of "Own Work" in the wikipedia (and I dare say commons) namespace that would have to be recategorised. Bellezzasolo (talk) 03:57, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging copyvios

[edit]

Hi, When tagging copyright violations, please inform the uploader. This is best done using the gagdet. See in your preferences to enable them, tab "Gadget", section "Maintenance tools" : "AjaxQuickDelete" and "Quick delete". These add links in the left column (or right column for Hebrew, Arabic, etc., language interface). Regards, Yann (talk) 12:29, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Hanooz 21:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2017 is open!

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2017 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in R2.

Dear Salavat,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2017 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the twelfth 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 (2017) 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. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top 2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2017.

Round 2 will end on 22 July 2018, 23:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 11:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)


File:Spinel- Gastev iunost idi .jpg and File:Ivan-the-Terrible.jpg

[edit]

Hello Salavat, I find the deletion of these two files absolutely unfair. I am the grandson and heir of Iossif Spinel and the owner of all his works - photographs, sketches, paintings, woodcuts, etc. The photos were taken by him around 1950. I also own the original works, which I am now preparing for an exhibition. I would be pleased if you would request their restoration, because these pictures illustrate the quotes that are there. Best regards from Munich, Vladimir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amade58 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Amade58: Hi and sorry about the recent image deletions. It might be better talking to the deleting admin, User:Polarlys, about restoring the recently deleted files. It also might be worth contacting the Commons:Volunteer Response Team (email: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) to see how you can go about establishing the appropriate permissions for works. As you are not the original creator of these works, having just inherited them, some form of permission would likely need to be established for them to be released into the public domain. Salavat
  • Thank you! Sorry, but I didn't understand exactly how to reach this admin - I just get to his page in Wiki User:Polarlys, but then what? I don't want to do anything wrong. About inherited archives - who should give me such a certificate? That was in 1981 in Soviet Union. User:Amade58

File:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2023 logo.jpeg

[edit]

Sorry to bother you again. But it appears that someone had uploaded this file under the impression that it was the film logo for the Untitled Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles film. It was obtained from this Twitter thread by the Paramount+ during their event in February 2022.[1] The problem is that this is NOT the film logo and in actuality the franchise logo. In that event Paramount+ was announced numerous projects for franchises they own, and specifically used the franchise logos to refer to them. You can see this with Transformers and A Quiet Place.[2][3] It would be helpful if you coud request for it to be deleted, since it has already been uploaded to wiki commons. Averyfunkydude23 (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, if there is a second logo that has been uploaded to Commons which is incorrect you can either request a File move (under the More tab in the top right) or nominate it for deletion (in the left side bar under tools). Salavat (talk) 03:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ↑ https://twitter.com/paramountplus/status/1493707572972429315
  2. ↑ https://twitter.com/paramountplus/status/1493706271207292928
  3. ↑ https://twitter.com/paramountplus/status/1493707036973928450

File:Made 4 Entertainment logo.png

[edit]
File:Made 4 Entertainment logo.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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Taivo (talk) 11:36, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ring Lardner and The New Klondike

[edit]

Hi there. Earlier today I created the category "Screenplays by Ring Lardner" and added that category to that for the film The New Klondike, per the wikidata for the film. I looked a bit further, though, and found that the American Film Institute credits the scenario to Thomas J. Geraghty, based on an original story by Ring Lardner. The Production and Reception sections of the Wikipedia article for the film also indicate that Geraghty wrote the screenplay from Lardner's short story. — WFinch (talk) 02:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry for reverting you. I just saw the Wikidata and thought the category change was a mistake. Had to quickly revert myself after doing a couple of checks though. I should of done more checks first instead of assuming the Wikidata was correct. Salavat (talk) 11:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite understandable — I should have taken the time to correct the Wikidata and the article itself instead of simply adding a category that didn't match. I'll work on that today. — WFinch (talk) 12:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Salavat&oldid=830526999"