User talk:Firnanda.Reena
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 04:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
File:Medical Marijuana Petition.ogv 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. |
McZusatz (talk) 23:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Ethernet description.jpg
[edit]This file may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Ethernet description.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Registered voters signing in Ybor City, FL..webm 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. |
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
File:Police Report of Shooting of Markeis McGlockton.pdf 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. |
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
File tagging File:Michael Drejka.jpg
[edit]This media may be deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Michael Drejka.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.
Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you. |
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Kept. Removed npd tag. It's {{PD-FLGov}}, not cc-by-sa. JGHowes talk 20:02, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
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. |
Affected:
- File:Number of facilities and juvenile offenders by facility operation, District of Columbia, 2016.png
- File:Number of facilities and juvenile offenders by facility operation, United States, 2016.png
Yours sincerely EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Please do not remove deletion requests
[edit]
JGHowes talk 21:13, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- When the request is this ridiculous we must delete. This is a police report with straightforward information for Wikipedia.--Wyn.junior (talk) 21:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Do it again and you'll be blocked. (added): Please also look at this discussion: en:Talk:Shooting of Markeis McGlockton#Use of a police report as a source. JGHowes talk 21:19, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- When the request is this ridiculous we must delete. This is a police report with straightforward information for Wikipedia.--Wyn.junior (talk) 21:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Nike, Inc. 2017 e-filing.pdf
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Nike, Inc. 2017 e-filing.pdf. 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. |
Yours sincerely, JuTa 11:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- I looked up "license tag" so I could put an acceptable license tag on Nike, Inc. 2017 E-Filing with the Oregon Secretary of State to show this is properly licensed.--Wyn.junior (talk) 19:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- If there is no such thing as "license tag" then I am going to disregard.--Wyn.junior (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Wyn.junior, there is the overall Category:License tags here at Commons, which contains hundreds of different licenses by country, etc., and many sub-categories. In general, anything found on a website is presumed copyrighted unless specifically stated otherwise. There are some exceptions, such as Public Domain photos published in the US before 1923 (for which the uploader should include the license tag {{PD-1923}}) or works created by the US Gov't, such as {{PD-USGov-NPS}}, which are also in the Public Domain. These are just two examples. Note that most works created by US state governments are not Public Domain, except for California and Florida. So that is why the Oregon report you uploaded may be protected by Copyright. Because the mission of Commons is to create a repository of freely licensed works that may be used worldwide, even for commercial purposes, if there's any doubt at all about copyright, it gets deleted. And, the burden of proof is on the uploader to provide evidence that a work found elsewhere on the internet is allowable here. I hope that this explanation is helpful. The Commons Licensing policy is at COM:L JGHowes talk 22:32, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- I disagree. Anything created by any government entity is Public Domain unless wrongly stated otherwise. Wrongly because they should be and are going to be in the future with the help ZCI. License tag needs to be interlinked to the proper page so Wikipedia editors are able to properly license. How would you please give me a link to this template so I can adjust this? Is a license tag a "Subcategories" or "Pages in category "License tags"" from the Category:License tags?--Wyn.junior (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- "License tag" is a generic term we use for all license templates listed in the category by that name, Category:License tags. The complete list of tags is here. Click on the link and you'll see them. It's the uploader's responsibility to select the correct license tag. Let's say you photograph a Monarch butterfly. In that example, you as copyright holder would use the {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} "license tag", see File:Butterfly on Asclepias flowers 001.jpg. Or, suppose you find a picture of Queen Elizabeth taken by a British Government photographer on the website of Buckingham Palace: that license tag would be {{OGL3}} as seen on File:Queen Elizabeth II March 2015 by Joel Rouse (MoD).jpg.
- I disagree. Anything created by any government entity is Public Domain unless wrongly stated otherwise. Wrongly because they should be and are going to be in the future with the help ZCI. License tag needs to be interlinked to the proper page so Wikipedia editors are able to properly license. How would you please give me a link to this template so I can adjust this? Is a license tag a "Subcategories" or "Pages in category "License tags"" from the Category:License tags?--Wyn.junior (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Wyn.junior, there is the overall Category:License tags here at Commons, which contains hundreds of different licenses by country, etc., and many sub-categories. In general, anything found on a website is presumed copyrighted unless specifically stated otherwise. There are some exceptions, such as Public Domain photos published in the US before 1923 (for which the uploader should include the license tag {{PD-1923}}) or works created by the US Gov't, such as {{PD-USGov-NPS}}, which are also in the Public Domain. These are just two examples. Note that most works created by US state governments are not Public Domain, except for California and Florida. So that is why the Oregon report you uploaded may be protected by Copyright. Because the mission of Commons is to create a repository of freely licensed works that may be used worldwide, even for commercial purposes, if there's any doubt at all about copyright, it gets deleted. And, the burden of proof is on the uploader to provide evidence that a work found elsewhere on the internet is allowable here. I hope that this explanation is helpful. The Commons Licensing policy is at COM:L JGHowes talk 22:32, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- If there is no such thing as "license tag" then I am going to disregard.--Wyn.junior (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- You are correct that "edicts" of state and local governments are Public Domain, such as laws, court rulings, etc., and should be tagged {{PD-US-GovEdict}}. But photographs produced by a state are not Public Domain (except in Florida, California, and a few others -- that list of license tags is here). For example, here's a photograph on the Maryland Dept of Agriculture website: Spotted Lanternfly. It is not freely licensed. As to the Nike report pdf, it appears to be a company-prepared filing or report, not a state of Oregon edict, so a PD-US-GovEdict license tag is likely to be challenged. Simply because a document is obtained under a FOI request or is made visible online to the public does not necessarily mean it's free of copyright, you know. Or, you might contend that Nike's filing is not eligible for copyright as a simple statement of facts. If so, that license tag would be {{PD-text}}. But here's the thing — Wikipedia frowns on using primary sources and definitely disallows original research — so what's the point of it? The better practice is to use reliable secondary sources, my friend. JGHowes talk 00:46, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- So a License tags is the same thing as a Copyright tags? Why are we using two terms? This is going to confuse editors on Wikipedia. What do you think about SEC's Public Domain policy? This says anything on the SEC website is public domain, including Nike, Inc.'s Form 10-K.[1]--Wyn.junior (talk) 02:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- The SEC filing is properly cited as Reference #1 in the article's Infobox on the English Wikipedia article Nike, Inc.. JGHowes talk 16:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- What about the my questions about license tags and SEC's Public Domain policy?
- >Are License tags the same thing as Copyright tags? Why are we using two terms? This is going to confuse editors on Wikipedia.
- >SEC's Public domain policy says anything on the SEC website is public domain, including Nike, Inc.'s Form 10-K.[2]--Wyn.junior (talk) 20:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- What about the my questions about license tags and SEC's Public Domain policy?
- The SEC filing is properly cited as Reference #1 in the article's Infobox on the English Wikipedia article Nike, Inc.. JGHowes talk 16:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- So a License tags is the same thing as a Copyright tags? Why are we using two terms? This is going to confuse editors on Wikipedia. What do you think about SEC's Public Domain policy? This says anything on the SEC website is public domain, including Nike, Inc.'s Form 10-K.[1]--Wyn.junior (talk) 02:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- ↑ Website Dissemination, SEC.gov, accessed 8/30/2018
- ↑ Website Dissemination, SEC.gov, accessed 8/30/2018
File tagging File:Oculus Quest fun 04.jpg
[edit]This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Oculus Quest fun 04.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:Oculus Quest fun 04.jpg]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
GMGtalk 20:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- also file:Phosforce 01.jpg
- also file:Phosforce 02.jpg
- also file:Oculus Quest fun 03.jpg
- also file:Oculus Quest fun 02.jpg
- also file:Oculus Quest fun 01.jpg
- also file:Oculus Quest.jpg
Your account has been blocked
[edit]Эlcobbola talk 20:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose What part of "© Facebook Technologies, LLC" and "the Services are the property of Oculus or our licensors and are protected by copyright, trademark and other laws of the United States and foreign countries" do you interpret as "free"? Are you unaware of the distinction between gratis and libre? Appearing on a website does not mean an image may be uploaded here - see COM:NETCOPYVIO and COM:PRP#5. Эlcobbola talk 20:38, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you--Wyn.junior (talk) 17:40, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
-- Marchjuly (talk) 21:38, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- The above also applies to File:Coors Light.jpg, File:Crispix cereal.jpg, File:Totino's Pizza.jpg, and File:Raisin Bran.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Your account has been blocked
[edit]Эlcobbola talk 16:42, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
- Facebook metadata? I have never uploaded these photos any place but here. Not on Facebook--Wyn.junior (talk) 21:03, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose We were all new at one point, and yet tens, hundreds of thousands of accounts have managed never to have been blocked even once, let alone twice. Your most recent copyvios were uploaded with en.wp upload wizard; when you clicked "This file is entirely my own work," what part of the description "I made this myself, from scratch, without copying or incorporating anybody else's creative work" was unclear to you? This careless disregard for information directly in front of you is identical to issue for which you were previously blocked. COM:BLOCK requires an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Despite a block a numerous warnings, you have not demonstrated an ability to information yourself before uploading images and you have not even bothered articulating here why your uploads were unacceptable (the requisite understanding). Why should we find you credible? What has changed this time? ("I promise not to make the same mistakes twice" should actually be thrice.) It also bares noting that you posted this request a mere six minutes after the block--precious little time to investigate, read, and learn the relevant issues and then compose an unblock request. That doesn't speak particularly well to its credibility. Эlcobbola talk 17:17, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
File:LEP-COMPARISON.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. |
Fram (talk) 15:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
File:LEP-COMPARISON.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.)
|
-- Marchjuly (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Your account has been blocked
[edit]Эlcobbola talk 21:47, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Veronica Cintron.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.
|
Эlcobbola talk 21:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Arenza.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.
|
Эlcobbola talk 21:50, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Mahdiya Merchant.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.
|
Эlcobbola talk 21:52, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
File tagging File:Muscle Reena Ninan.png
[edit]This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Muscle Reena Ninan.png. 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:Muscle Reena Ninan.png]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Yours sincerely, Belbury (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
File:Lisadamourphd.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.
|
And also:
Yours sincerely, Belbury (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
COM:AN/B
[edit]
Belbury (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
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. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Andrea Shaw.jpg
- File:Side walk picture.jpg
- File:Oak Cove, Church of Scientology.jpg
- File:Clearwater Main Library 03.jpg
- File:Clearwater Main Library 02.jpg
- File:Clearwater Main Library 01.jpg
- File:Picture inside bus.jpg
- File:Flag picture 01.jpg
- File:Flag picture.jpg
- File:Bus bicycle rack.jpg
Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 16:28, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I am very sorry. I am now going to learn the Library of Congress. This should help for future uploads. Firnanda.Reena (talk) 20:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Firnanda Reena, if these are your own photos, you can upload the original, uncropped file with full EXIF metadata attached to Google Drive, and I'll help you transfer them here. That's the only way to allay our suspicions. 0x0a (talk) 18:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Blocked
[edit]You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently uploading media that is in violation of Commons' licensing policy, despite our warnings not to do so, and despite our instructions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|your reason here}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See block log.
(toolbox: contributions • page moves)
|
--Yann (talk) 16:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
I am very sorry. I am now going to learn the Library of Congress.--Firnanda.Reena (talk) 20:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)