Hi Wsiegmund, my primary source was this website: [1] (search for: Lebensbaum). While this site may not be of the highest standard, I assumed toxicity for T. plicata because the other species T. orientalis and T. occidentalis are without doubt toxic, were even used for abortions in former times.[2], [3], [4]. Sorry, but all pages are in German; but with your name you might have German ancestry ;-) . Well, after your hint, I looked for T. plicata in the USDA database and found "toxicity none". So if you prefer to remove the cat, that's fully okay for me. Thanks for your attention. --Túrelio21:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Túrelio; thank you for your kind reply. It is a common species in my area and Pojar and McKinnon said that its wood was used for drying fish by our indigenous peoples. I removed the cat. It is generous of you to think that I might know German, but while I can read a little French and Spanish, I never studied German. But it is true that my great grandparents' first language was German. Best wishes on adding the poisonous plant categories to the species pages. It sounds like a worthwhile project. --Wsiegmund21:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Kenkichi Tomimoto and unknown.jpg" and "Kenkichi Tomimoto and Shin'ichi Sasagawa.jpg" were very better without the dates: those are sufficient in the summary for the files. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirogane10 (talk • contribs) 09:25, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Can you delete also "Kenkichi Tomimoto (left) with unknown, circa 1917.jpg", "Kenkichi Tomimoto (right) with unknown, circa 1917.jpg", and "Kenkichi Tomimoto and Shinichi Sasagawa, circa 1917-1918.jpg"? Shirogane10 (talk) 15:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two photos that I took of the Chicago skyline from the Willis Tower observation deck were taken down by you because someone sent a report with links to articles from several years ago featuring different copyrighted and non-copyrighted images of the same buildings which look to be taken from the same observation deck with the same angle/focal length. The photos show the same buildings, but they were very clearly taken in different seasons and in different years (with new buildings in the photos I took not appearing in the other ones). In other words, it is very evident (to human eyes?) that they are not the same photos.
My bad, seems I overlooked the differences between the uploaded and the external images. Now restored. However, you credited "Robert Barthell" for both images, as you did for 2 other uploads. If that is your real name and if you don't bother it to be disclosed, it might be good (recommended) to put it also on your userpage. Otherwise, patrolers may assume that you uploaded Mr. Robert Barthell's images, but that you are a different person. --Túrelio (talk) 10:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. It isn't helpful when an admin makes a decision to keep an empty category allowed within the criteria, then when the user reverts an admin, the next admin just comes along and deletes the category. — billinghurstsDrewth14:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. However, as the deletion seemed to be uncontroversial to me (C2), I hadn't checked the edit-history. By the way, it's still speedy-tagged now. --Túrelio (talk) 14:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your answer and the link. It's a free interpretation that inspired the original model, not quite a pure and simple copy. What do you think about ? Is it really a Copyright violation ? ON the site the licence is "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 Deed". I don't really know the term of these licence. Would you want, to explain me, please ? ̴̴ Cjldx (talk) 08:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, formally per our policy COM:L we only accept freely-licensed works. NC is a restriction (no commercial use) of the CC-license, which is not allowed on Commons (if it's the only license). Now, whether this coat-of-arms is indeed to be considered an original work of art which is still in copyright might be a matter of debate. To proof otherwise would require quite some substantial research. If you want to do that, I could put the file into a regular deletion-discussion, which allows a debate. --Túrelio (talk) 08:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
In January 2023 (below the information), you removed a map that I integrated into a historical article on wikipedia. I am the author of this map and I indicate the sources of my book. My publisher is also aware that I am going to include this map. I don't understand why it was removed. Can it be reintroduced?
Thank you for your help.
Ηere the informations: 16:39, 27 January 2023 Túrelio talk contribs deleted page File:Οι εκτοπίσεις των Εβραίων από την Ελλάδα.jpg (Copyright violation: The file's description mentions as souce "from Anastasios Karambaba's book In the footsteps of the Jews of Greece (Psychogios Publications, 2022). Design: Anastasios Karambabas, Romuald Cardinal, Adelaïde Naxos-Allalou". It is unlikely that the uploader is connecter in some way with the creators.) (thank) (global usage; delinker log) Anastasios Karababas (talk) 16:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Anastasios Karababas ,
said file had be uploaded to Commons in 2022 by User:IstoriaGnwsH and had been tagged as copyvio-suspicious nearly 1 year ago by another Greek user, who had provided the above cited deletion-rationale, which credits the map to Anastasios Karambabas. Your account-name is Anastasios Karababas, which is similar to the first one, but not identical. Anyway, in the web said book is credited to Anastasios Karababas. So, you could either upload the image by yourself or send a confirmation for the free license of the upload by IstoriaGnwsH to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). The latter is our dedault path for images uploaded by a user who is not the author. --Túrelio (talk) 17:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Túrelio, before deleting or moving files used on an index page (like this action), please consider asking the uploader which file to keep. Index pages dont work with redirects. Regards --Mapmarks (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please delete my uploads from today? I wanted to upload 50 audios, but unfortunately, they got uploaded with wrong names. The upload wizard added a digit after the first item and then incrementally added to all following items. Once you've deleted these, I can reupload them with correct names. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 16:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry to bother you, I messed up again. Same problem, but this time I stopped the soon enough, so there are just a handful of files to delete. Could you remove the uploads from yesterday again? I will then reupload them one by one instead of using Wizard and trying to upload many files at the same time. That way I can make sure the naming isn't messed up. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 18:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I want to report this file where is a picture of me with my name, surname and place where I am from. The picture was posted by my friend for a joke on the page about my place. Since some admin from Serbia deleted all nonsense he wrote on the page when I reported, I thought that was all, but today I saw my picture. I asked the same admin to delete the picture as well, but he told me to contact you because this is on Commons.I would really appreciate it if you could delete it, thanks a lot. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aleksa_Micic_The_Frog_of_the_village_Doljevac.jpg#filehistory93.87.220.1110:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio, Du hast Category:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501 gelöscht. Category talk:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501 existiert weiterhin. Aber bitte nicht einfach löschen!
Finoskov gefiel anscheinend der bisherige Kategoriename nicht. Damit habe ich kein Problem. Er legte eine neue Kategorie an, verschob den Inhalt dahin, und stellte dann den Löschantrag auf die bisherige Kategorie. Dadurch geht die Versionsgeschichte verloren. Und die Kategoriediskussion geht unter, wird vielleicht sogar gelöscht. Richtig wäre es meines Erachtens gewesen, Kategorie und Kategoriediskussion auf den neuen Namen zu verschieben.
Wünsche:
Category talk:Bugatti Type 101 s/n 101-501 verschieben nach Category talk:Bugatti Type 101 Gangloff cabriolet 1951 (chassis 101-501) Habe ich bewusst noch nicht selber gemacht.
Finoskov ansprechen, er möge in Zukunft solche Kategorien verschieben anstatt Neuanlage und Löschantrag. Gruß
Es ist mir klar, dass es keine Diskussionsseite gab, die hätte untergehen können. Die Versionsgeschichte der Kategorienseite konnte ich nicht mehr einsehen. Ist denn der Weg, den Finoskov offensichtlich häufig wählt, regelkonform? Schließlich werden damit doch (zumindest seine) Beiträge bei der alten Kategorienseite vernichtet. --Buch-t (talk) 10:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio, Du hast leider nicht geantwortet. Die Kategorien wurden gelöscht. Heute habe ich wieder 5 entdeckt (Bereich Talbot-Lago wie hier), weil ich davon eine selber angelegt hatte. Ich habe 5 mal Einspruch eingelegt. Du könntest mal reinschauen, wirst aber wegen der Vorgeschichte sicherlich nicht selber entscheiden. Gruß --Buch-t (talk) 08:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the wording "fake source" was by the one who tagged the image as copyvio-suspected. Anyway, you gave "www.instagram.com" as source, which is useless, as 1) you did not provide the actual source-site, where the iamge is offered, and 2) material on Instagram is not free per se. --Túrelio (talk) 09:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming that you are referring to Instagram: whether images, which a user has uploaded to his/her own Instagram or Facebook account are legitimate, we cannot really know. However, even if they are, putting them on said social media-accounts does NOT mean they are under a free license. Of course, you could try to contact the account-owner and ask them whether they are able and willing to release a specific image under a free license (such as CC-BY or CC-BY-SA). If they are, you could then upload said image to Commons, add {{Permission pending}} and then ask the owner to directly confirm the choosen free license for that image to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). --Túrelio (talk) 10:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Приветствую! Восстановите, пожалуйста, все удалённые сегодня категории Крыма, которые участник расформировал без обсуждения. Речь идёт о категория типа Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Chornomorske Raion и прочих. Подробнее см Commons:Форум#Крым. Заранее спасибо. Mitte27 (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Спасибо, но дело не только в удалённых категориях. Пользователь массово изменил всю категоризацю, включая файлы. Поэтому нужно отменить все его правки с указанной даты. Теперь чтобы отменить это нужно делать вручном режиме (например так), это займёт слишком много времени в таком темпе. Поэтому прошу отменить все правки участника с 08:24, 1 февраля 2024. --Mitte27 (talk) 18:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, you recently deleted three images that were uploaded from Instagram. These photos were used with permission from the creator- and the written permission was attached to the description of the file. Would you restore the files?
I sent a message to Inquisitivemuse over Messenger, I said "I would love to use your image (of the temple) on the Wikipedia page, would you give me permission to upload it there? I will credit the photo to you!" Inquisitivemuse responded with: "Sure! Glad you liked it!" I asked if they wanted me to use just the username or full name, and if I could use other photos of the temple that were uploaded, and the response I got was: "My username is fine! And I wouldn't mind if you use any others." I can post a picture of the conversation here if it will help. Thanks for your consideration! Itsetsyoufree32 (talk) 18:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Itsetsyoufree32,
if you mean by "written permission" the above cited statement, sorry, that is not sufficient. 1) A permission "for Wikipedia" is generally not sufficient. Required is a release under a license, which is compliant to our policy COM:L. Recommended is the CC-BY-SA license ({{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}). 2) The copyright-holder needs to send his/her permission directly to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS), from his/her official email address. --Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, along my contributions there are plenty of screenshot uploads from YouTube with Creative Commons license. Could you please review the images as they haven't been yet since time ago. Majority of my uploads are also Public domain images, and not sure if they need approval as well.
Hi, I've reviewed the Youtube-source image, which weren't already, and scanned through the "PD-tagged" images, which seem to be ok. --Túrelio (talk) 18:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you recently deleted Category:Files needing categorization by index as empty. However, a user had recently moved Category:Files needing categories by index to that title, leaving a redirect at the old title. As you might know, my bot moves pages out of redirected categories, but it has a 7-day cooldown period in case a move is reverted. If you delete the target category as empty within the 7-day period, the contents of the old category are stranded there and can't be moved to the new title. It would be appreciated if you would please refrain from deleting categories as empty if they have been created within the past seven (7) days. Thanks! --R'n'B (talk) 20:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can try. However, given the huge number of empty cats tagged for speedy and that I am not the only admin deleting cats, of course, it doesn't seem a reliable solution. Couldn't your bot put a warning-note/tag into the target-categories, when detecting a redirected category, even if it takes further 7 days until he fills it? --Túrelio (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:시편촬요.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.
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!
Hallo, du hast um 10:10, am 13. Feb. 2024 die Category:House of Miklashevskiy gelöscht und nach Miklaszewski family verschoben. Mit der Namensänderung bin ich teilweise einverstanden.
Ursprünglich kommt dieses Adelsgeschlecht aus Polen und dessen Name ist polnisch, daher hat die Schreibweise "Miklaszewski" irgendwo ja ihre Berechtigung. Allerdings beinhaltet die Kategorie (zumindest bisher) nur diejenigen Familienmitglieder, die im Russischen Kaiserreich zur Berühmtheit gelangt sind (z.B. sie waren Gouverneure oder andere hochrangige Beamte, Politiker, Großgrundbesitzer). Auf Russisch wurde deren Name "Миклашевский" geschrieben, was in die lateinische Schrift überführt als Miklashevskiy transliteriert werden kann.
Als der russische Adel nach der Revolution geflüchtet ist, haben sich viele Miklashevskys in Deutschland, Frankreich und den USA niedergelassen. Dort haben sie ihre Namen an die jeweils örtliche Schreibweise angepasst. In Deutschland und Frankreich haben sie die Schreibweise Miklachevsky benutzt und im englischsprachigen Raum Miklashevsky. (Quelle: Miklashevskaya, Ludmila. Gender and Survival in Soviet Russia. A Life in the Shadow of Stalin’s Terror. London, New York, Oxford, New Delhi, Sydney; first published in Great Britain,Bloomsbury Academic, Bloomsbury Publishing Plc,[2007, 2012].ISBN 978-1-3501-3921-3. p. xii.).
Der Name heutiger Familienmitglieder wird amtlich als Miklashevsky von den russischen Passbehörden transliteriert. Einige Familienmitglieder leben in Deutschland und ihre Schreibweise ist genau diese (siehe z.B. hier).
Da bisher in der Commons-Category nur Familienmitglieder der russischen Linie der Familie enthalten sind, wäre die gegenwärtige russische Schreibweise für die Benennung sinnvoll - also Miklashevsky.
Gleichwohl arbeite ich seit Längerem an einigen Wikipedia-Artikeln zur Geschichte der Familie, die ich demnächst veröffentlichen werde, und darin werde ich auch auf die polnischen Ursprünge eingehen und einige polnische Familienmitglieder hervorheben und in die Commons-Category aufnehmen. Aus dieser Perspektive kann ich mit deiner Benennung der Kategorie mitgehen, denn in Kürze wird sie richtig werden. Dann (erst) wird die polnische Benennung stimmen.
So, nun abgesehen aber vom Namen, der Miklaszewski bleiben kann, finde ich, dass die Kategorie "House of..." heißen soll, statt "family". Es ist üblich, im Deutschen wie im Englischen, dass man von Adelsgeschlechtern bzw. -häusern spricht, und nicht von Familien. (siehe z.B. List of noble houses). Siehe auch andere Commons-Kategorien über Adel - Category:House of Hohenzollern, Category:House of Habsburg, Category:House of Windsor.
Ich habe deshalb versucht, die Kategorie nun nochmals zu verschieben als House of Miklaszewski, allerdings ist es mir nur halb geglückt. Ohne Administratorenrechte kann ich die darin enthaltenen Dateien und Unterkategorien nicht mitverschieben. Ich wäre dir dankbar, wenn du mir helfen würdest.
Hallo Liglioto, Category:House of Miklashevskiy war heute von User:Heroldicas als Weiterleitung erstellt und sofort danach wieder zur Löschung beantragt worden, mit der Begründung, dass "Miklaszewski family" der korrekte Kategoriename sei. Diese erbeten Löschung hatte ich ausgeführt. Ich habe nun einmal in die Oberkategorie Category:Noble families of Poland geschaut; dort findet sich tatsächlich nur das Namensschema "Familienname family". Auch wenn ich deine obige Argumentation nachvollziehen kann, wäre es gut, wenn du die Angelegenheit zunächst zur Diskussion stellen oder zumindest mit User:Heroldicas diskutieren und einen Konsens erreichen würdest. --Túrelio (talk) 16:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Túrelio, I just uploaded a logo [8] in jpg format instead of png, which I intended to do since I have it in png format with transparency and no background. However, upon attempting to upload it, I encountered an error stating, "File extension ".jpg" does not match the detected MIME type of the file (image/png)." What can be done in this scenario? Regards Throwawayjamal047 (talk) 09:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Throwawayjamal047,
indeed you cannot upload a jpg/jpeg-format file over ("new version") an existing png-format file, as they are different. You need to upload the jpg-file as a separate file (new upload). The filename can be identical, however, the extension needs to equate the file-format. --Túrelio (talk) 09:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour, je suis Jacques Lévi, frère de Jean Lévi. Je galère pour inclure le texte "Jean Lévi un Pionnier pédagogique" . Une amie m'avait fait le travail en oct. 2023 je crois. Tellement heureux que ce renvoi jean levi '2) marche à nouveau, car il ne fonctionnait pas depuis sans doute longtemps. Bref, pourriez vous me dire la raison le cas échéant du retrait. Pour moi c'est important et mémoriel. Si il y avait un pb de photo, il s'agissait d'un portait de mon frère réalisé en famille par moi, Jacques Lévi. Je suis personnellement incapable de faire inclure ce texte ni la photo noir et blanc de Jean. S'il vous plait, Merci infiniment de me joindre jacqueslevi78@gmail.com si vous vouliez bien m'aider. Cordialement. Jeanlev78 (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
innerhalb der Projekthierarchie m.W. nur Admins und Personen mit den darauf basierenden "höheren Weihen", d.h. Check-user, Bürokraten und Oversighter. Stewards natürlich auch, aber sie stehen ja ober/außerhalb der Projekthierarchie und spielen, als Amt, auf Commons eigentlich keine Rolle. --Túrelio (talk) 08:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello @Túrelio. You helped last time. I am here again with a request for you to kindly review some GODL-India images that I have uploaded or have worked on in past few days. Its presence in the given link needs to be confirmed. It will be of great help. Some of these are used widely by some of the most viewed pages on Wikipedia.
Although there are more files but I am stopping here bcoz the list gas already got too long. Also to ask Turelio can I get License Reviewer rights if not permanently then for sometime. I promise that I shall use it only to try to clear the backlog of GODL-India bcoz the list of unreviewed files under this license is very long. Even if I don't get the rights I will request to clear this much atleast. ShaanSenguptaTalk16:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Túrelio, I would request you to kindly delete previous version of File:Ruling Alliances in India.jpg which I uploaded. The file is my own work and previous versions have no relevance. And I also don't want it to be here. Especially the one which has black background on top and bottom of the main thing. I will be thamkful to you. ShaanSenguptaTalk07:17, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Túrelio Thank you once again for acting on my request. I have got some more GODL-India files for you to review. These are last of the lot. Next one if required won't be before April.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Original upload deleted as duplicate of posterior upload
However, the file that might be the original upload in this case also deleted as an duplicate, i think if i am not mistaken is File:SC 170022 - A French armored car at an airdrome in North Africa. 17 February, 1943. (52231775383).jpg (as per original flickr name, with a dot between 1943 and (52231775383). )I say this because i rarely chance the filenames of my uploads of this flickr account (except do to limitations on name lenght) and the source is named "SC 170022 - A French armored car at an airdrome in North Africa. 17 February, 1943." with the dot.
And the same can be said about your deletions of originals uploads of, as i always upload since 2022 all new files from the [https://www.flickr.com/people/signalcorpsarchive Signal Corps Archive flickr account almost as soon as they are available, sometimes only in a matter of few hours, so i know that all this files were the original uploads to Commons and those that have been redirected to are the real duplicates (aslso because they are the same exact resolution and differ only in very slight different exposures, crops, etc):
In summary around 50 images that were original uploads, but deleted as being duplicates of posterior uploads with the same source and resolution. And big waste of time to me that took the time to make this uploada and, besides other users, categorize them. So much time simply throw away into the deletion bin?
So, given that the error was of your doing, undelete the original ones and, if needed, delete the real duplicates. And i ask you how is this possible, as one or two is a comphreensible error but dozens of original images (many uploaded in 2021 or 2022) deleted as duplicates of posterior uploads (all made on January 2024) that are the real duplicates? Thanks. Tm (talk) 23:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suppression fichier Aile droite d'une statuette de Victoire, bronze, découverte rue Hoche, années 1960. Collections du Musée de Bretagne.jpg
let's stick to the available facts: the image was uploaded under the claim to be own work by the uploader.
Another user found it to be published in a scientific paper from 2021[9], published under a Commons-incompatible license (CC-BY-NC-ND). The image itself was credited to Musée de Bretagne. As there was no license-specification for this image, it is reasonable to transfer the paper's license also to this image. Therefore, the deletion was justified.
hi, and thanks and for reading, I wanted to ask what was the problem in the file that was deleted about OpenHarmony HomeScreen? because it is an open source version and for free use,it was donated by Huawei to be freely usable as a part of its closed source operating system it is possible that it has been confused with HarmonyOS or HarmonyOS next? wiKipedia alerted me about the recent deletion of a similar file and that's why I didn't complete the upload an image file of OpenHarmony, could you help me to see the problem? Thx Ezequiel 449 (talk) 17:47, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
for the remaining one, you need to open a regular deletion-request, as it was uploaded quite some time ago and, IMO, has some value. --Túrelio (talk) 07:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Túrelio, I just wanted to say if you did your research the article that I found it from it said "This photo has only identifying purpose: no copyright infringement intended. If you are the author or owner of the photo write us an email to info at filmaffinity.com or contact us on Twitter to accredit you" so it's not copyright until someone takes credit Pupusareawesome (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pupusareawesome, assuming you are talking about File:Jake Tordesillas.jpg. The above cited text is typical for images, that are used under the U.S. fair-use rules, i.e. that the user has no copyright and no specific permission. However, fair-use material is not allowed on Commons. It can be used and uploaded directly to :en-Wikipedia, but must be claimed as fair-use. --Túrelio (talk) 07:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
die Datei war von User:Oursana, einem erfahrenen Benutzer, alc copyvio-suspect mit der Begründung "as non free frame still under copyright protection" markiert worden. Ich vermute, dass die zugrundeliegende Rationale ist, dass das Foto selbst nicht von dir stammte und deshalb {{PD-Art}} verwendet wurde. PD-Art darf aber nur für 2-dimensionale Bilder verwendet werden. Deshalb wird da üblicherweise der meist 3-dimensionale Rahmen weggeschnitten. Aber am besten fragst du Oursana selbst. --Túrelio (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Tag Túrelio, vielen Dank für deine Antwort. Nur noch 2 Bitten: Sollte ich selbst einen Löschantrag stellen wollen (Grund: 3-dimensionaler Rahmen) wo müsste ich das tun? (Könntest du mir den Link zusenden, bitte) und Folgendes von mir hochgeladene Bild habe ich falsch benannt (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SDg_030_KKS2956.jpg), könntest du es löschen, ich lade es danach erneut (mit richtigem Namen) hoch. Im voraus vielen lieben Dank LG Upti (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moin Upti,
das 2. Bild habe ich gelöscht, wie erbeten. Worauf bezieht sich der zunächst genannte Löschantrag? Das "Rogier van der Weyden .."-Bild war ja schon gelöscht. --Túrelio (talk) 07:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Tag Túrelio, danke fürs löschen. Ich wollte nur wissen, wenn ich selbst einmal einen Löschantrag (Grund: 3-dimensionaler Rahmen) stellen wollte, wo müßte ich das tun? (Könntest du mir den Link hierfür zusenden) LG Upti (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Tag Túrelio, ich habe mir in den letzten Tagen einige Kategorien auf einer Liste notiert, die chaotisch befüllt sind. Mache ich mir die Arbeit - dann könnte ich das auf einen aktuell gültigen Stand bringen, auch sollte es nicht zu neuen Komplikationen führen.
(1) Im Pool zur Flusskategorie <Tributaries of the Werra> tummeln sich inzwischen fast 50 Zuflüsse deren Schreibweise (Lemma) aber nur zum Teil mit dem zutreffenden Wikipedia-Artikel passen. Es finden sich auch einige Sonderfälle: Herpf (→Werra) Das Pfeilsymbol ist ein Sonderzeichen und somit nicht mit gewöhnlichen Tastaturen schreibbar - Barrierefreiheit. Es ist aber bei kleinen Bächen, die nur in einer Gemeinde existieren, sinnvoll, denn viele Gewässernamen der Zuflüsse sind mehrfach in DACH zu finden. Ansonsten findet (river) - (Fluss) und (Werra) häufig Verwendung. Ich bitte um einen Tip, denn demnächst kann ich noch weitere 50 Bäche und Flüsschen per Karte beitragen.
(2) Die Gemeindefusionen der letzten 30 Jahre haben dazu geführt, das es in den Ortsteilnamen ziemlich viele "Abweichler" gibt. Ein größerer Stadtteil von Bad Liebenstein ist der Ort Steinbach (Wartburgkreis). Momentan mit etwa 100 Dateien befüllt. Sinnvoller wäre es, alle Subkategorien in <Steinbach (Bad Liebenstein)> umzubenennen. Aber in der Geschichte der Nachwendezeit war <Steinbach (Wartburgkreis)> ja auch mal existent . Was macht Sinn: eine Weiterleitung oder ein Erläuterungstext um diese aktuelle Situation zu verfestigen. Was meinst Du? beste Grüße EACC80 (talk) 11:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore the file deleted under a possible copyright infringement
If I were to upload a new image under the same file name, would I be able to have that "old revision" image deleted, which is the common practice with fair use images on Wikipedia? or should have the current image deleted under a non-speedy proper process? Either way please let me know what is the best process to take. QuasyBoy (talk) 13:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. So from timestamps it looks as if on February 14, कटासमुला started some publicity work with photos on mugs, but on February 17, two other editors created additional spam photos to upload for their project at Commons. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem I see is that this image seems to be heavily used externally; see here. All sites hotlinking this image (which is not recommended), would loose it. --Túrelio (talk) 20:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The image is used by three low readability websites. Is this a reason for a potentially copyright violation image to remain on wikimedia commons? What will happen with the discussion? Will it stay open? Until when? What should be done to delete this particular image? IM-yb (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm quite familiar with our policies. The issue is, that your copyvio-rationale is not very convincing IMO. Therefore, my assessment was based on a "uploader deletion request". --Túrelio (talk) 17:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tut mir leid, dass du da nacharbeiten musstest. Ich bin davon ausgegangen, dass derjenige (nicht ich), der die Löschung der Kategorie angefordert hatte, eventuell nötige Umbenennungen selbst vorgenomemn hat. --Túrelio (talk) 21:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Das nacharbeiten ist ja nicht das Problem; sondern die recht große Chance, dass man es halt nicht bemerkt. Ich wusste jetzt auch nur, dass es verlinkt ist weil ich es gerade erst getan habe und die Änderung bei meinen Bildern gesehen habe. Ohne redirect bleibt es sonst halt unentdeckt und der Lese steht doof da ...Sicherlichtalk22:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Tag Túrelio,
ich habe 78 Dateien mit falschem Erscheinungsdatum versehen.
Frage: Hast Du ein Werkzeug, mit dem Du die Dateien (ohne zu großen Aufwand) verschieben oder umbenennen kannst??
Es handelt sich um die Dateien in dieser Kategorie: Category:Orchids to move 4,
die anstelle der Jahreszahl (1923) am Ende der Datei die Jahreszahl (1925) haben sollten.
....es würde mir viel Zeit ersparen, die Dateien einzeln zu verschieben
Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
…ich sage Dir ganz herzlichen Dank. Dass Du alles manuell bearbeiten musstest, hat mich nicht ganz zufrieden gestellt. Deine Zeit ist sehr wertvoll. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 09:44, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem too zealous with the copyright rules.
This is a badge displayed and sold on all Renault Alconi model vehicles sold 1966, 67, 68 to distinguish from sister cars.
It is same as Gordini sign or any other model!
Its not a copy or patent unless used on a vehicle that is fake or copy!
It should be undone.
~~~~Aldercraft (talk) 03:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have no deleted upload with a filename that resembles anything of your headline. What file are you talking about? --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is on the wiki Renault 8 site.
curprev 11:43, 28 January 2024 CommonsDelinker talk contribs 18,235 bytes −77 Removing Alconi_door_pillar_badge.jpg; it has been deleted from Commons by Túrelio because: Copyright violation; see c:Commons:Licensing (F1): Non-free logo above [[:c:Co undothank Aldercraft (talk) 04:09, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you or another reviewer or Admin like Taivo please review this image please that I uploaded? I had to crop the photo so it will have to be reviewed by hand eventually anyway. I persuaded the flickr account owner to license the image freely. It is a very rare jewellry. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all: Thank you very much for all your good work, for deleting (nearly) all the categories I nominate for deletion.
But now you deleted a file, where I have doubts about. This morning I added a question for Gnomingstuff about the deletion request for File:Barter System.png (see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Barter_System.png). According to a notification email I received, (s)he answered my question, but I could not read it, because you have already deleted it. I figuered out that perhaps the file might not be copyright violation because at least one of the figures on it is in the public domain. Is there another explanation? JopkeB (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi -- apologies that you didn't get to see my response. The gist: The thing with tineye is that unless there is a very obvious source of an image (like a news story where the photographer is sourced to someone on staff), the earliest hit that is returned is not necessarily the original source, because of linkrot and the fact that stock images tend to often be used on sites that don't stick around. Even with stock images it is often unclear what the original source was, because these sites cannibalize one another all the time and not necessarily in ways that honor license. This is why I usually go off whether there are hits that predate the supposed creation date that the uploader said, as it all but proves that they just grabbed it off the internet.
With this particular user they seem to have uploaded a lot of diagrams with images of questionable provenance (and to be honest questionable quality) so it seemed to be a case where the precautionary principle would apply. Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes, it was claimed as own work by Spacedog228. If you are sure it is in the PD, I can undelete it and put it into a regular DR to give time to gather the required information. --Túrelio (talk) 11:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sinnloses Löschen von Categorien im Wartburgkreis (WAK)
Hallo, in den letzten Tagen bin ich mehrfach auf gelöschte Kategorien - z.B. "Wood in Geisa, in Seebach (Wartburgkreis), ... gestoßen. Ergo irgendjemand arbeitet im Verborgenen und sabotiert die Arbeit. Es ist aber sinnlos, denn ich arbeite systematisch und zyklisch den ganzen WAK nach Themen. Damals waren es hölzerne Gebäude, jetzt hölzerne Skulpturen, in Kürze hölzerne Zäune, hölzerne Kreuze, hölzerne ... Daher meine Bitte - wenn Du auf eine scheinbar leere Kategorie zum Wartburgkreis triffst - ignoriere sie - ich werde die zeitnah weiter auffüllen, und auch die gelöschten Dateien werden sich "erneuern" - ich habe eine tägliche Protokollliste und werde an Hand der Orte herausfinden welche Datei dort entfernt oder gelöscht wurde und somit komme ich dem Saboteur auf die Spur und dann gibt's Ärger. EACC80 (talk) 13:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, werds versuchen. Wenn du mir eine konkrete dieser Kategorien benennen kannst, kann ich in der Versionsgeschichte nachschauen, wer sie markiert hatte. Vielleicht liegt ja ein Mißverständnis zugrunden. --Túrelio (talk) 13:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo - ich danke Dir für die rasche Reaktion. Ich habe vermehrt bei Wooden buildings in ORT - heuer wars bei Geisa und Empertshausen bemerkt. Irgendjemand macht mir das Leben schwer. Hölzerne Gebäude sind in jedem Ort und bei der Fülle an Bildern kann ich da auch massig liefern, aber jetzt will ich den Kategoriebaum möglichst rasch und komplex hochziehen, denn diese Arbeit vermeiden die meisten Kollegen. EACC80 (talk) 14:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Tag! Wäre es möglich, dass du die letzten vier (von mir erstellten) Kategorien zum Offenen Bundesmeile in Bern wieder herstellen könntest? Weil ich möchte in Kürze die Dateien hochladen! Viele Grüße, Ahmet Düz (talk) 11:48, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I nominated a bunch of images (that aren't being used on any projects) for deletion. You said to start a DR. I'll be honest, my work here is very slim to nil (I'm mostly on en.Wiki). So could you point me in the direction of DR or tell me what I'm supposed to do? Thanks....NeutralHomer • Talk • 17:33, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You removed the image from the IShowSpeed page allegedly for copyright.
please check the copyright and information on the picture before removing it.
all the information is correct. MrRapide (talk) 09:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to ask you why you deleted File:Ohno.H.jpg since it's my own work.
I don't have that much of knowlege of Wikimedia Commons so teach me if something wen't wrong. KBO36 (talk) 06:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi KBO36,
it had been tagged as copyvio-suspect by another user and was indeed found published elsewhere. If you would like to discuss it, I can temp-undelete it and put it into a regular DR.--Túrelio (talk) 06:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This homepage is my own page, so I own the copyright.
Wouldn't it be a problem if I included more detailed information in the upload file name or is there another way. KBO36 (talk) 06:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was doing some research and came across a misunderstanding.
No idea how this can happen. One thing you might try: upload the last image-version under a filename without "special" characters, such as ª ç ã, just as a test. --Túrelio (talk) 06:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and recreated it as someone pointed out that I was wrong. I was afraid I would forget if I did not do it now. I made a redirect. If you do not agree, let me know and I will fix it the way you want. So sorry for all this. Krok6kola (talk) 00:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please remove misleading lines at the bottom of this article
This file which was deleted is a screenshot from a videogame under liscence GPL-3, which means the file I had published hadn't violated the copyright.https://github.com/Anuken/Mindustry
when I delete categories it is just for maintenance and usually only after being requested by other users. So, I am not really "involved" with that. That said, when thinking about whether a specific category is appropriate or not, usually I first look which kind of categories do exist already and then look at the category-level below the intended new category. In your case that would be Category:The Spanish Borderlands. If you judge that it is too crowed and/or too unspecific, just recreate the formerly deleted category. I leave that to your judgement. --Túrelio (talk) 12:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the cat was empty and had been tagged by another user for speedy deletion. The term "unuseful" is the default-wording of CSD C2 and added automatically by the script. Undeleted now. --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A while back there was a policy change that simply empty was not grounds for speedy deletion -- just obviously unuseful ones, without future prospects. Anyways, thank you :-) Carl Lindberg (talk) 09:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cher Túrelio, je découvre aujourd'hui ce vandalisme sournois d’un contributeur habituel de Commons MB-one. Cette avocate des Droit de l'Homme est mal vue par l’extrême droite. Je pense que, même tardivement, il est nécessaire de sanctionner ce comportement pour le principe. Un contributeur habituel de Commons ne devrait jamais faire de tels actes de vandalisme. Avec mes remerciements,
Dear Túrelio, today I discovered this sneaky vandalism from a regular Commons contributor MB-one. This human rights lawyer is frowned upon by the far right. I think that, even belatedly, it is necessary to sanction this behavior in principle. A regular Commons contributor should never engage in such acts of vandalism. With thanks, Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 10:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
while I don't know MB-one personally, I assume that this was an unintended, though very unfortunate misclick, as it happens also to me sometimes, though I would have corrected myself immediately. Anyway, as my colleague Yann had asked him already on his talkpage 2 days ago, I've contacted him directly and asked him to clarify this issue. --Túrelio (talk) 08:19, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
I have temp-restored the file. However, you need to correct to source- and author-entry, provided Telegram-user Fighterbomber said that he is the photographer. In addition, as I can't speak/read Russian and therefore can't verify the above linked statement by Fighterbomber, I will try to involve a Ru-speaking colleague to take care of that. --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for handling the speedy deletion of this copyright violation image! There are a few more similar case images of Google ChromeOS and Google Chrome that are also falsely claimed to be the user's own work, uploaded under a free licence in violation of the copyright holder's licence (in both cases Google's Terms of Service, as linked in the deletion) and which actually show the copyrighted portions of the ChromeOS or Chrome user interface. In the past I have had other admins not understand this particular copyright violation situation and decline the speedy deletion. I was wondering if I nominated some more files in the same situation, would you would be willing to assess them also for deletion? If so, I could nominate them and list them here for you to consider each case. - Ahunt (talk) 12:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio, Du hast diese Kategorie gelöscht, nachdem Finoskov für Fotos von einem der erhaltenen Fahrzeuge die separate Unterkategorie Category:Hispano-Suiza I 6 Vanvooren Pillarless berline 1924 (chassis 20-001) angelegt hatte. Die wird aber als Hauptkategorie gebraucht, in die alle vorhandenen und zukünftigen Unterkategorien zu den verschiedenen Fahrzeugen des Typs I 6 einsortiert werden. Also bitte wieder herstellen. --Buch-t (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
I see you delete my Lego truck photo. I owned this image, since now if you check in the other wiki, it’s gone, meaning that’s proof I didn’t copying it and it’s my work. If you can redo it, please do. If not, please try to otherwise I’ll contact other administrations to block you for your inappropriate act. Thank you, MinecraftPlayer321 (talk) 20:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I misstake the license of Nier Replicant cover art, how can use the Non-free video game cover license? sorry for misstake 千尋0096 (talk) 14:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, fair-use material is generally not allowed on Commons. Some projects, such as :en, have an exemption-policy for such material. So, you need to check whether your project has one, and then upload it locally. --Túrelio (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Du får det här meddelandet eftersom du tidigare har bidragit med bilder till de svenska deltävlingarna av Wiki Loves Earth eller Wiki Loves Monuments. Jag hoppas att du vill vara med i år också! Som vanligt ingår naturreservat och nationalparker, biosfärområden och naturminnen i tävlingen! Utöver bästa foto belönar vi även fotograferande av tidigare ofotograferade objekt samt bästa bildserie om minst tio fotografier av samma objekt. Tävlingen börjar 1 maj, och pågår under hela maj månad. Om du har varit ute i världen och rest kan du även se om resorna sammanfaller med övriga internationella deltävlingar, och i så fall vara med och tävla även där. Expeditioner, fotosafari eller en helt vanlig promenad? Via en smidig karta som visar ditt närområde hittar du bra ställen att besöka – eller varför inte damma av fotoalbumen och tävla med bilder du har tagit tidigare?
Hello, I've noticed you removed an image I uploaded. As I stated I've obtained this image from the social media account of Jo_the_femboy, and I've got his permission to upload it here. What can I do to get the image back up here? Do I have to provide proof?
such statements are considered insufficient. The copyright-holder needs to confirm the choosen free license directly (no forwarding) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). The permission needs to specify the image (URL/filename on Commons) and the license. To be sure, use this template: Commons:Email templates#Email message template for release of rights to a file, fill-in the variables, mail it to the rights-holder and ask him, if he is willing, to sign and date it and to send it to the specified address. --Túrelio (talk) 10:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I'm shocked to see that you deleted File:Syed Imtiazuddin.jpg, the image of my late father who was a prolific orator, writer, columnist, books compiler, poet, philanthropist, activist and engineer. I have myself provided many of his images to media outlets. With his knowledge and approval I've uploaded many celeb autographs on commons. So there's no copyvio even if any pic is published elsewhere. Here is an English writeup on him, if you would like to read.
there is no reason to be "shocked" about a deletion on Commons, as you should well know as a long-term user.
Anyway, wrt File:Syed Imtiazuddin.jpg: it is obviously a reproduction from print and the given date (2023) is hardly the date of the original shot. So, what needs to be answered is: 1) who created the original photography (not the reproduction), and 2) when was it really shot?
Hi. I think a replacement pic now suffices pic deficiency of the article for which it was intended. While guy in the other pic uploaded tons of his pics on Snapchat, no issues of privacy are breached in posting a pic I took personally. And this chap is not my son but his best friend (freund) as already stated. Anyway, I withdraw my request to undelete. Muzammil (talk) 18:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An image uploaded of streamer Adin Ross in 2024 was deleted by you. I am looking to get it restored as it was correctly licensed but looked as so as it wasn't when you viewed it.
I uploaded a review in Commons:Undeletion requests as I wasn't sure what steps to do first but after looking around I was suppose to reach out via talk page first.
I tried to upload a picture, but got deleted with this comment as a explanation:
14:07, 21 March 2024 Túrelio talk contribs deleted page File:14 Heimer og folk i Stiklestad-s328.jpg (Copyright violation: Print screen from a digitalized version of a book, on the Norwegian National Library. (Source URL is possibly limited to Norwegian IP adresses, contact me for a screenshot of the entire page, proving the copyvio.) https://www.nb.no/items/7eca901565dedcb987ce7592a0c178e5?page=327) (thank) (global usage; delinker log)
I dont know how I can send you a screenshot, but the page where the map is located are on page 327 on this book "Bind, Heimer og folk i Stiklestad, av Ottar Moholt og Solveig Ness, Bygdeboknemnda 2005" found under "Fullversjon" in this link [12]https://www.verdalsboka.no/nedlasting/
If needed I have contacts with the author of the book. He say that the map is free to use, but do we need to proof this?
Thanks. Pederw95 (talk) 09:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lithografiestein zum Titelblatt von David Poppers Spanische Tänze
Hallo, Túrelio. Vielen Dank, dass Du das nebenstehende Fotos des Lithographiesteins elektronisch entspiegelt hast. elektronisch gedreht hast. Es wird dadurch für Anna Normalverbraucherin lesbar. Zur Visualisierung der Arbeit des Lithographen benötigen wir jedoch insbesondere das Original, die Ursprungsversion, um sichtbar zu machen, dass die ausführenden Künstler und Lithographen spiegelverkehrt lesen, schreiben und gravieren können mussten. Darf ich Dich bitten, neben Deiner entspiegelten Version (Danke!) auch das Original wieder sichtbar zu machen? Dank für die gemeinschaftliche Arbeit sendet Dir Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 11:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Bernd,
ich habe die Datei einfach auf die Originalfassung zurückgesetzt, in der Annahme, dass das deinem Wunsch entspricht. Außerdem habe ich in der Beschreibung als zusätzlichen Eintrag |Other_versions= eingefügt, mit einem Link auf die oben von dir verlinkte gespiegelte Fassung. Den Eintrag kannst du aber wieder entfernen falls das nicht deiner Systematik entspricht. --Túrelio (talk) 12:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you asking? At least for Commons, I am not aware of any "sanctions". It seems you uploaded some images, which were found to be unfree. You then discussed it with a patroler. We assume you uploaded these images in error or without knowing they are still copyrighted. So far, this would not merit any sanction. However, for future uploads, if they are not your own work, first try to check or ask experienced users whether the upload would be ok. --Túrelio (talk) 10:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I had written already in the note on your talkpage, NC (= no commercial use) is a restriction, which is not accepted on Commons and Wikipedia, see COM:L. --Túrelio (talk) 18:57, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recently uploaded a work by Adrian Nichols of a photo of the Eurotunnel Class 0031. You deleted it under the pretext of free use files not being allowed on Wikipedia, but I was given permission to upload the file by Adrian himself. Surely, if the original uploader gave me permission, uploading shouldn't be a problem, no?
Hi, assuming you are referring to File:Eurotunnel Class 0031 No. 0035.jpg: you did not provide the source; writing "Flickr" is useless, as nobody can evaluate the source with this information. Another editor took the pain to search for the image on Flickr and found it at https://www.flickr.com/photos/36034969@N08/14328654844 and with "All rights reserved". So, where is said permission now? Thereafter, an IP (likely you) changed the alleged CC-Zero to "fair use". However, fair-use material is not allowed on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 10:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The permission was located in the comments, I'd asked for permission to upload it and he said yes, so long as I credited him as the author, which I did.
Ok, that's something. But, it's not sufficient, as "permission for use in Wikipedia" is not an accepted substitute for a free license. Per our policy COM:L, uploads to Commons need to be freely usable, even for commercial purposes and for derivatives. Recommended licenses, which allow these uses, are CC-BY and CC-BY-SA for example. So, you might contact the Flickr-photographer again (best on a private channel, if available) and ask him if he would be willing to do this. If he agrees, but wants to have the image on Flickr still under "all rights reserved", there are 2 ways to do this. 1) He could change the license on Flickr for at least 1 hour at a prespecified point of time to CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. Our Flickr-Review-bot could then read the license from his Flickr-site and record it here on Commons. Thereafter he could change the license on Flickr back to ARR. However, this would make it necessary that he tell us/you at what time he would do this, as we then would need to "activate" said bot. 2) The other way would be that he sends to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org an email from his Flickr-account stating that he releases said image under the CC-BY or CC-BY-SA license. --Túrelio (talk) 15:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. But you were the one who tagged it for deletion per "{{SD|Variation of [[:File:CHE Céligny COA.svg|CHE Céligny COA.svg]], not usefull.}}". --Túrelio (talk) 16:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't remember asking for the deletion but given what's going on the other file it's best we keep both. Sorry for the confusion. - Espandero (talk) 17:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Please stop deleting the (flag) redirects, they exist for a good reason, and the redirects are within policy. That we have a user who now thinks it is a good idea to nominate them is the problem, and that is exacerbated when you actually do them. Thanks. — billinghurstsDrewth05:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Túrelio. Thank you for deleting my upload that was a duplicate. Flickr2commons used to check for duplicates, but that does not appear to work any more. How did you find the duplicate so quickly? Is there a duplicate-finding tool that I don't know about? That would be very useful! Thanks for any information. — hike395 (talk) 16:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hike395, this would be a perfect template to tell a magical ability of admins. ;-) But, no. It wasn't even me who detected the duplicate. It was the work of the bot User:OptimusPrimeBot. It detects and then tags such files. Only then comes an admin and likely deletes the file. As I don't mass-upload from Flickr, I am not aware of a currently working tool/bot that warns of duplicate at the time of upload to Commons. However, you might ask at COM:VP. --Túrelio (talk) 17:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To answer the "how": my bot parses Special:ListDuplicatedFiles every 15 minutes (but the page itself is updated only every three days). If there is less than 200 files in Category:Duplicate, it fills the category up to 200 files with the more recent files listed on Special:ListDuplicatedFiles. The code is here. vip (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The file is unused and is likely covered under pictures of non-contributors, and a speedy delete candidate. I guess I just feel a frisson of annoyance at an uploader treating us as his personal filing system. I think I am correct in my assertion there, and I "just don't want to accede to his request" 😈. However I feel it is probably right to do so. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 08:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, while you are correct wrt the evidence, the website, where this image is said to be taken from (though I couldn't really find it), states indeed[13] "The content of this webpage is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License". As the depicted is dead since 1994 and due to the low quality, it's unlikely that an assumed copyright-holder would file claims in the case odishaassembly.nic.in's claim is bogus. --Túrelio (talk) 10:59, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to bother you. I checked the website's licence and the correct permission should be GPL. Can you undelete it? Rinna (Talk)10:38, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to acquire the necessary rights to replace duplicate files as you have done here with the maps of municipalities in Akershus (your work here)? I am considering restarting my work with maps, and have many older files I want to replace. Worldlydev (talk) 14:38, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind. I see that I would need administrator rights for this. Please let me know if there is another way. This is really the only tool I am interested in. Thanks for your time. Worldlydev (talk) 20:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Worldlydev, sorry for my late reply. Indeed, processing duplicates requires admin-rights, as a file is deleted. However, every user can nominate duplicates, ideally using the template {{duplicate|<targetfile>}}, which needs to be placed onto the to-be-deleted/replaced file. This template is linked to a script, which replaces the uses of the to-be-deleted file on all Wikimedia projects by the "target-file". Duplicate-nominations are usually processed within a day, as they are speedy-request. --Túrelio (talk) 07:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I saw some users were trying to upload contents (mainly photographs) of members of Lok Sabha, but were deleted due to copyright infringement. If I get a consent from the Lok Sabha secretariat for the permission to upload, can I upload it? If so, how will I start the process with? Regards, CSMention269 (talk) 15:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes to your 1st question. One important caveat: content uploaded to Commons needs to be under a free license, per our policy COM:L. It is not accepted if it is only a "permission for Wikipedia".
So, if the rights-holder is willing to release the work under a free license, you can upload the file to Commons and then immediately prepare a permission-text, using the boxed text-portion on Commons:Email templates#Email message template for release of rights to a file, in which you should enter the filename (or full URL) of the uploaded file and the name of the choosen license. Then send the completed permission-text to the rightsholder and ask them to read, sign and date it, and to send it back directly (no forwarding) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). Their sent-in permission/email will not be published, but treated confidentially by our OTRS-volunteers. --Túrelio (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ist deine Frage technisch oder rechtlich gemeint? Am besten wäre es natürlich, wenn man den Hochlader davon überzeugen könnte, die Fotos ohne WZ, dafür aber mit vernünftigen Metadaten hochzuladen. Letztere haben sie nämlich nicht, sondern nur einen Facebook-Code, der früher oder später zu einem Copyvio-Verdacht führen wird. Eine andere Alternative wäre es, "unsichtbare" WZ (z.B. mit SignMyImage[19]) zu benutzen, weil diese die Nutzbarkeit der Fotos nicht einschränken. Rechtlich ist die Entfernung von Urheberrechts-bezogenen Wasserzeichen (wie in diesem Fall) strittig; auf Commons:Watermarks#Legal issues with the removal of watermarks findest du ein Gutachten der WMF-Rechtsabteilung, das von der Entfernung abrät, und ein deutsches OLG-Urteil, das in der Entfernung eine Verletzung (und damit Ungültigmachung) der CC-Lizenz sieht. --Túrelio (talk) 10:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You deleted Category:Maps of Palestine on stamps on 22 April 2024 as empty. I'd just like to point out that this was the result of disruptive edits such as this and this, although they could have been done in good faith.
I guess we must frequently see overly enthousiastic editors switching the words "Israel" and "Palestine" one for the other, in both directions. I just had to look into mirror Category:Maps of Israel on stamps to find content that shouldn't have been there. So do you think a quick check of this kind would be appropriate before deleting a category with either "Israel" or "Palestine" that comes up as empty? PlaceClichy11:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Clichy,
sorry for my late reply, I'm currently in holidays and have limited online-access. I'll try to delay performing deletion of speedy-tagged categories. --Túrelio (talk) 15:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have just provide the correct license for this file there is no options in the upload procedure to set the right license, so, I need to edit after the upload. Please make a review and let me know. Regards. --Marcric (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ok. I`ve changed it to "wrong license", which does not result in speedy-deletion. IMO, CC-0 is not appropriate here. Please take a look at older uploads of the same series and use the accepted PD-tag. It might be PD-US oder PD-old. --Túrelio (talk) 08:23, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Túrelio, I have based my decision in the logical (IMHO) license option made by someone else in a similar situation here in 2008. The product being announced, the Red Ryder BB Gun, was produced between 1940 and 1942, so it is fair to suppose the ad is from the same period. And in the upload procedure there is no option for other licenses then the creative commons ones anymore, so, the changes must be done after the upload. I was just trying to edit and update the permission parameter when received you notification. Let me know any decision, because this file is important in both contexts the w:Red Ryder and w:Daisy Outdoor Products articles. Regards. 🤜🤛 --Marcric (talk) 09:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, Túrelio, Sorry, I had been a bit grouchy last time I'd talk to you because all those English Wiki folks who had blocked me, and sure, I did nothing, even if you think I did it. Now a whole bunch of blocked computers can't be used in the computer lab at my school for Wiki, not my fault. Anyway, I had just provided for the following files and this to be be reviewed. Please let me know soon. Thanks, MinecraftPlayer321 (talk) 01:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chances, if you could recovered the deleted files* I had made, that would be awesome for me to change the wrong license. If not, that's okay. *P.S I don't have the photos files on my PC, so yeah. MinecraftPlayer321 (talk) 01:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MinecraftPlayer321,
I'm currently in holidays and have limited online-access. The Zuru-log might be ok. Wrt the Lego Bricks Truck it's unfortunate that nobody has commented at the DR. A DR should not be closed by the same user (me), who had opened it. --Túrelio (talk) 16:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the image had been G3-tagged by User:ДолбоЯщер, which might have been not the optimal choise. However, I would have deleted it as being out of COM:SCOPE, as surely nobody would have used it. In addition, putting a "handycapped"-icon onto the faces of these people might be well seen a personality-rights violation, even if that was not your intention. --Túrelio (talk) 06:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Michael Lucas (Puerto Vallarta, 2024) by Mano Martinez is marked with CC0 1.0. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Guten Abend Túrelio. I would like to ask you a question. Yesterday I mistakenly uploaded an image that I had already uploaded a year ago (here the original and here the repeated version). What is the procedure to delete the second image? Dank im Voraus. CFA1877 (talk) 11:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Túrelio. I got worried as there were 50+ uploads from the same source with a possibility of getting nominated. --Gpkp (talk) 08:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your attention to detail on Wikipedia. However, I would like to clarify a couple of points regarding the removal of my profile picture.
The image I used is a promotional touristic photograph of the Kingdom of Spain and, as such, is under a license that allows its free use without copyright restrictions. Therefore, it does not infringe any laws or regulations.
It is common to find images used in various contexts, including personal profiles on platforms like Wikipedia. In fact, your profile picture can also be found on other websites.
Hi, ich hatte nicht vor, das File, dass der verifizierte Benutzer Emotion Group unter seinem Benutzernamen hochgeladen hat, jetzt gelöscht zu bekommen, weil er sich in den Exif-Metadaten e|motion schreibt und ich das (ohne Auftrag) leichtsinnig in die Autor-Information übernommen habe. Ich habe eigentlich keinen Zweifel, dass das dasselbe ist. Ailura (talk) 13:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @User:Ailura,
Danke für das zwischenzeitliche Verlinken der betroffenen Dateien. Da ich relativ viel lösche, ist es ziemlich mühsam, das über die Log-Liste herauszufinden, zumal wenn die Löschung schon einige Stunden zurückliegt. Es geht also um:
Wenn du den Eindruck hast, dass die Uploads in "guter Absicht" erfolgt sind, weil du den Uploader schon "kennst" oder betreust, dann bitte ihn doch einfach, für beide Dateien eine formelle Genehmigung, idealerweise vom tatsächlichen Fotografen an OTRS zu schicken. Wenn er das zusagt, kann ich die beiden Dateien entlöschen und mit OTRS-pending markieren. Grundsätzlich ist es so, dass auch bei verifizierten Benutzern nicht einfach davon ausgegangen wird, dass die Rechte für alle Uploads schon vorliegen (hatte ich früher auch mal angenommen, wurde aber eines besseren belehrt). --Túrelio (talk) 16:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gelöschte Files zu finden, wenn man keine erweiterten Rechte hat, ist auch nicht so einfach. Ich frag mal an. Nur nochmal zum Verständnis: Wenn der Benutzer verifiziert ist, muss er für Werke, die er als eigene angibt und bei denen er u.a. in den Exif-Metadaten steht trotzdem eine formelle Genehmigung schicken? Ailura (talk) 07:54, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ja, genau; mit Ausnahme der Anmerkung zu den Exif-Daten, das hatte ich selbst noch nicht. Das kommt von den OTRS- bzw. VRT-Kollegen (zähle ich nicht dazu), die sich um Genehmigungen kümmern; ggf. kannst du vorab, z.B. Kollegen User:Krd, wegen der Exif-Besonderheit nachfragen. --Túrelio (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, All three accounts are belong to (Sockpuppetry) one person. This person are uploading promotional files in Wikipedia. Yesterday all uploads were deleted by you. But today user uploaded again the same files with different names. Please block all three accounts in commons and delete all new promotional uploads
Hi
You deleted this image with stated reason being: "twitter doesn't appear to license freely".
The twemojis are released under a CC-BY license.
(If you had looked at my latest edit on that page, you would have found out about it and maybe you wouldn't have deleted it.)
regards Emdosis (talk) 22:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
du hast heute ein hochgeladenes Foto "BONEZ MC Primary.jpg" mit folgendem Grund gelöscht "Copyright violation: https://www.reddit.com/user/Bonez-MC/comments/bp3t65/luv_him/" ... der Upload des Fotos erfolgte mit Zustimmung und Wissen des Urheberrechtsinhabers / des Künstlers selbst. Warum löscht man dieses Foto und gibt als Quelle ein Bild bei Reddit an welches eine Urheberrechtsverletzung ist? Wir fordern die Widerherstellung und zukünftige Unterlassung von derartigen Mutwilligen Handlungen. Gib doch beim nächsten Mal eine Quelle an die auch den Account des Urhberrechtsinhabers zeigt und nicht die eines X-beliebigen Fake Accounts. Jaidenkioken (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
du hattest das Foto File:BONEZ MC Primary.jpg 1. heute hochgeladen, 2. als urheberrechtlich dein eigenes Werk deklariert und 3. angegeben es sei vom 26. August 2024.
Von einem anderen Benutzer wurde es aber auf Reddit[21] gefunden, wo es bereits vor 5 Jahren hochgeladen wurde. Damit ist zumindest deine Datierung als falsch erwiesen. Derjenige, der ein Werk als erster publiziert, gilt prima facie als Urheber. Gemäß den Commons-Spielregeln steht dein Upload daher unter URV-Verdacht und wurde gelöscht (COM:PRP).
Dein Wording "wir fordern ..." und "Zustimmung und Wissen des Urheberrechtsinhabers / des Künstlers selbst" legt zudem nahe, dass du nicht selbst der Urheber (Fotograf) bist, sondern vermutlich im Auftrag des Abgebildetenen (Agentur) tätig bist. In solchen Fällen ist es erforderlich, dass der Urheberrechtsinhaber gegenüber dem Commons:Volunteer Response Team (permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org) eine formale Erklärung zur Urheberschaft /zum Nutzungsrecht abgibt und die gewählte freie Lizenz bestätigt. Diese Erklärung muss vom Urheber oder Urheberrechtsinhaber direkt an die o.g. Adresse gesandt werden (also keine Weiterleitung). Eine (deutschsprachige) Textvorlage für diese Erklärung findest du hier: Commons:E-Mail-Vorlagen#Einverständniserklärung (Rechte-Inhaber). --Túrelio (talk) 14:28, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Es ist schon alarmierend zu sehen welche Unwissenheit hier zu Tage gefördert wird. "Derjenige, der ein Werk als erster publiziert, gilt prima facie als Urheber." Diese Aussage ist komplett falsch und basiert offensichtlich auf gefährlichen Halbwissen. Der Urheber ist derjenige der das Werk erstellt hat. Es ist dabei irrelevant ob das Werk veröffentlicht wurde oder nicht. Jaidenkioken (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spar dir deine Belehrungen. Ich habe dir geschildert was nach unseren Regeln erforderlich ist, damit das Bild wiederhergestellt werden kann, werde mit dir aber nicht weiter kommunizieren, zumal ich im Genehmigungsprozess auf Commons nicht involviert bin.--Túrelio (talk) 18:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since a few days Croptool is not working for me. When I go to the image I want to crop, it just leads me to the "Enter the URL or filename for an image you would like to crop." page and when I type the file name again, it just gets stuck in "File:«name of the file.jpg» found on «commons.wikimedia.org». Nothing like this happened before to me. I have tried everything, clearing the browser data and restarting but without any success. Could you please assist me in this matter or let me know what can be done. Regards JayFT047 (talk) 15:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, but I never used this CropTool and therefore don't have any experience with it. I use the crop function of the freeware IrfanView[22]. --Túrelio (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weirdly it just started working now... Thanks for the recommendation anyways. Just one thing, I just uploaded this screenshot from a video from Youtube under free license. However, I have changed the aspect ratio as it is quite unfavourable because it's recorded by phone and I'm unsure if that will affect the YoutubeReview check. Could you please review it. Cheers and thank you very much JayFT047 (talk) 22:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the deletion was performed on request by User:Adamant1. So, while I have no problem to undelete it etc., I would recommend you to discuss the issue with said user in order that you both eventually come to an agreement. --Túrelio (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Shouldn't this image be approprite to remain on the commons since on the web-site it says that the images have the Attribution 4.0 license as long as they do not have one of those QR codes?
Hello, this image was deleted due to an image displayed on the phone screen, but even as the central focus, you can just redact the "Friday night Funkin'" asset from the phone's display. the primary purpose of the image is to show off the specific phone model. 2603:8001:8400:DC34:8D91:1C06:45FB:BE3205:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. But, is there really no better image of that model? I mean, if we remove the displayed icon, the remaining image shows near-to nothing. So, we can redact the icon, but is the resulting image worth the effort? --Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found this photo on Flickr. At least the image in the middle would pose no problem. The left one would need further evaluation due to the screen. But not sure whether it's the right model. --Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Danke für den Hinweis. Auf die Schnelle habe ich die 3 Bilder jetzt erst einmal mit {{Fact}} markiert und auf der jeweiligen Disku ein Link nach :es hinterlassen. Morgen werde ich für alle 3 einen LA stellen, in dem dann ggf. die Indizienlage diskutiert werden kann. --Túrelio (talk) 20:05, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I would like to include the Spanish version of this image, but for any reason I made a bad job. I am rather new in wikipedia and learning... Can you tell me why you delete it, please? Thanks Beatriz.V1.0 (talk) 01:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ahhh...I can see, there is an Spanish version by Victor Atallah in X. Sorry I am not in X and I have no user in this social network. How to proceed? Beatriz.V1.0 (talk) 01:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, by "Spanish version" you mean a version where all the text is in spanish, right? You can access content on Twitter/X without having an own account. I doubt that the text in this diagram is above threshold of originality. So, you could simply copy it. On the other hand, as the original comes from the FDA and as Spanish is a relevant language in the U.S., the FDA might themselves have a Spanish version. --Túrelio (talk) 10:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, complete text in Spanish and yes, I can access the X, but I assume that X is not a confident source of information. I will try to get the files at FDA or contact them. Thanks --Túrelio. Beatriz.V1.0 (talk) 11:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry, I hadn't seen the past history. However, the file has now been protected by a colleague. So, before taking any action, first we need to come to an agreement/consensus. --Túrelio (talk) 10:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for answering! That protection is clearly wrong and unreasonable… But how can we come to an agreement if that colleague ignores requests? 81.23.164.4509:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chiedo scusa, invece che continuare a cancellarmi le foto e le modifiche che faccio, mi puoi dire dove diavolo sbaglio??? Almeno risolvo il problema una volta per tutte!!! La foto è mia, l'ho scattata io, non ci sono diritti sopra, è di libero utilizzo!! Se per cortesia mi dite COSA devo scrivere e DOVE mi fareste un favore. Continuare a cancellarmi tutto ogni settimana fa perdere tempo a me e a voi! RolanddiGilead1971 (talk) 10:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the most important question is whether YOU are really the photographer. I doubt that, as none of your uploads has metadata from the camera. In File:Emilie Haavi in azione con la maglia della Roma - stagione 23-24 2.jpeg you wrote "Foto scattata da un amico durante una partita di campionato e concessami in uso gratuito e libero per Wikipedia". As the other images are of a similar appearance, I assume at best that they come from the same "friend". If that is true, then 1) you cannot write "own work", and 2) your friend needs to personally confirm to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS) that he/she agrees that his/her photos are released on Commons under a free license, that also allows commercial re-use. AFAIK, the same has been told to you already on your talkpage on :it.--Túrelio (talk) 11:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, your userpage User:Frv24 is not the right place to write/develop a page/article about another person. Use your talkpage for that or create a subpage, such as User talk:Frv24/Fernando Veloz for example. Anyway, Commons is not the place for articles, but just for files/media.--Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you access the file? I purged the page for a few times, but at the end I only get File not found: /v1/AUTH_mw/wikipedia-commons-local-public.d5/d/d5/Typhoon-Yagi_5.jpg when I clicked into the image. What problem do you think it is?廣九直通車 (talk) 09:11, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. It is shown without any problem; I now checked all resolutions. If you have a second browser on your computer, eventually try it with that one. If it works well, it might be a cache-problem of the first browser. Just try to clear its cache. --Túrelio (talk) 09:16, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's strange. I tried my computer's Microsoft Edge and my phone's Google Chrome. None succeeded. Also the smaller resolutions returned 404 error. Maybe I'll send the matter to COM:VPT. Anyways thanks for clarifying the file is not broken.廣九直通車 (talk) 12:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, ich habe den beschädigten Totentanz fotografiert und eine Unterkategorie angelegt, der ich die „destroyed“-Kategorie gegeben habe. Das Original wird ja wohl wieder restauriert werden … liebe Grüße aus Köln Elya (talk) 10:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for deleting File:Ümminger Straße 23 4.jpg. I'm not even sure how it's possible to upload a duplicate in a batch upload from a technical point of view...
If you don't mind, I think you can also delete the file redirect that was left behind. The duplicate wasn't used anywhere, so the redirect probably won't be missed. Nakonana (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, well it was first uploaded to iNaturalist and quite some months later to Commons. Please send a confirmation of the free license (without NC) for the Commons-file from your iNaturalist-account/address to permissons-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS). --Túrelio (talk) 21:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 1898 Maltese Red Ensign was not decommissioned until 1943, so this redirect link is no longer necessary. So I recommend deleting this redirect page. 反共抗獨光復民國 (talk) 04:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't delete categories like this that are well-established and arguably correct. If the category is to be renamed (which should happen after a discussion) then at least a redirect should be left. This was NOT a valid speedy deletion.
Because it was uploaded >7 days ago and is still in use. You may open a regular deletion-request (w. discussion), but should first offer/look for a replacement for its current uses.--Túrelio (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Within 7 days after upload, the uploader can request speedy-deletion for whathever reason, provided the image is not in use on any Wikimedia-project. Outside of these conditions you can request (regular) deletion, which is open for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 09:35, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
because they had four or five images + a heading/subdivision before the requester emptied the gallery pages + asked for a speedy deletion? I think before deleting such galleries they at least deserve a proper deletion request, not a speedy deletion (which is for galleries with less than two images). See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard for more information. JopkeB (talk) 07:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care that the galleries were restored but appreciate it if @JopkeB: stopped lying that GA1 only applies to galleries with less than two images. That's clearly not what the guideline says and I don't think pages should be restored purely because of patently false information. Otherwise there's zero point in wasting the time doing this.
BTW JopkeB there's been several times recently where I Deferred to you about something even though I thought you were wrong. I'm not aaying your obligated to return that, but you might want to think about if coming after me over this just because of a couple pointless galleries that don't have any views anyway is really worth it. I could really give a crap about two or three galleries at the end of the day, but its really not collaborative or conducive of a civil atmosphere to make this much of an issue out of it when I've more then gone out of my way to accommodate you even when you were clearly wrong. The galleries are meaningless, the needless drama on your end over it just makes me not want to work with you anymore though and personally I think that would be a loss to the project. Since I think we've done some good work together. So maybe think about it if its really worth it on your end. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a side to that Túrelio someone on the admin board suggested she take it to the undeletion request board. I think that would have been the better option here. Maybe think doing it that way instead next time. There's normal proccess for dealing with things like this and there's no reason a page should be undeleted the second someone asks an admin about it. Especially in cases like this where the reason for the request is clearly baseless. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:41, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Túrelio please restore the file File:Virginio Simonelli shot by Marco Melfi.jpg that you deleted, the person who uploaded the file is the photographer Marco Melfi, and so the copyright owner, of the image. I complimented him on his work one day and I mentioned that Italian singer-songwriter Virginio Simonelli has a very old picture on his Wikipedia page and that one of his pictures would look great there (because I always update the page and it's annoying to see a really old picture on the page, as the one that appears now). So the photographer actually offered to upload one of his images, and he did so by himself. Indeed, he used his personal mail to create the wiki commons account, and you can easily check that if you contact him on that mail, I'm sure he is willing to offer whatever piece of information to confirm that it is him, because he wanted the picture to be used freely for Wikipedia because he considered it a homage to the community. Please, check what you have to check, but restore the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravenlions (talk • contribs)
Okay, thank you. I asked the photographer if he sent the email to confirm his identity and he said yes. How many days could it take for it to be verified? So that I know when to come back to relink it to the singer's page. Thanks! Ravenlions (talk) 18:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I've restored the file already, you could link it already. Usually the OTRS/VRT-volunteers act rather swiftly and change the tag already when the permission-email has arrived (even if not evaluated). --Túrelio (talk) 18:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am a screen printer in Hungary. I am making prints about Budapest. I've just found your image about the buda castle on wiki. I downloaded before and turns out, it is mixed with my copyright free images on my pc, i thought i am able to use it and then i made a 20-30 screen print from it. I totally change almost everything on the pic, but it is still yours. Can i get permission to sell this series in my way, then i wont use it if you say it cant be used anymore.. of course i can show you how it looks, and send you a one of them. :) 2001:4C4C:1551:1D00:0:0:0:100113:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Unknown,
sure. My images, as all on Commons, are under a license that freely allows commercial use. The only thing necessary is to credit me. And I would be glad to receive a link to you finalized work. --Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo Túrelio, ich verstehe die Löschung der Seite nicht. Ich hatte sie vor Jahren angelegt und befüllt. Benutzer:Kev22 hat sie ohne Angabe von Gründen geleert. Jemand hat sie zur Schnelllöschung vorgeschlagen. Ich habe es relativ schnell gesehen und sofort Einspruch eingelegt, siehe Webarchiv. Trotzdem hast Du die Kategorie gelöscht mit der Begründung ((incorrectly named) duplicate, content moved to Category:Fondation Marius Berliet). Das Conservatoire Berliet ist nicht falsch benannt. Wie ich in meinem Einspruch schrieb: Fondation und Conservatoire sind 2 verschiedene Dinge, auch wenn die Fondation das Conservatoire betreibt. Die Fondation ist die Stiftung, hat ein Gebäude in Lyon-Innenstadt mit Büros, Archiv und präsentiert dort ein altes Auto. 35 km entfernt in Le Montellier befindet sich das Conservatoire - das ist die große Fahrzeugsammlung mit 200 Fahrzeugen. Die meisten Fotos in der Category:Fondation Marius Berliet zeigen Fahrzeuge aus dem Conservatoire. Bitte stelle die Kategorie wieder her, damit sie sinnvoll beschriftet und gefüllt werden kann. Gruß Buch-t (talk) 06:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo @Buch-t, ich wusste nicht, dass sie vorher geleert worden war. Ich habe sie jetzt erst einmal wieder hergestellt auf den Stand vor der speedy-Markierung. --Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) You must ... obtain permission from the Parliament if you wish to charge others for access to the material ...., which IMO contradicts our COM:L-terms of allowing commercial use.
2) or modify the material, which IMO contradicts our COM:L-terms allowing to create derivative works.
3) on the condition that such use is not for the purpose of advertising, which IMO contradicts our COM:L-terms of allowing commercial use .
However, if you prefer a broader discussion, I can convert the speedy into a regular DR, which allows discussion involving other parties. --Túrelio (talk) 13:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Túrelio, I notice that you are an active administrator, so I would like to ask for your help. Namely, I recently left a message on Vilage pump and Commons:Administrators' noticeboard, but unfortunately no one responded. I need a person with admin rights who can create certain pages for a project supported from WMF via Rapid Grants. The syntax for pages are there, just need to do the move from my namespace to main. Very quick and small job. My understanding is that only admins can do this, so if you have some time please look at my request at Vilage pump or admin noticeboard. If you are not able to help, can you advise me who to contact. Thanks for taking the time to read the message and take any action --MikyM (talk) 15:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MikyM,
though I've never worked in the campaign-space, I tried to move User:MikyM/Campaign:wlpac-r to Campaign:wlpac-rs. However, it didn't work and I got an error-message "Der Inhalt „Wikitext“ ist auf der Seite Campaign:wlpac-rs im Schlitz „main“ nicht erlaubt" (in German), which is not really understandable for me.
Thank you. It is possible that the redirection (simple move option) cannot be done but the page must be created manually. Can you try to copy the syntax manually (Edit my page, copy text, and go to create Campaign:wlpac-rs and paste). in the meantime I'll look at the list of admins who might know this, if you can't do it this way either. Thanks once again for your time. MikyM (talk) 11:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to revert my edit. When I created and uploaded it, the thumb of your upload was empty, showing just the pdf-symbol. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am trying to use a picture of Professor Theodor Economu for wikipedia page.
The file "Economu Theodor foto revizuita.jpg" is offered by the family of Theodor Economu to be used in the Wikipedia page of the professor Economu Theodor.
I have the license authorization from the family, please see the emails below.
Please advise me what procedure to follow.
Thank you !
luni, 23 sept. 2024, 17:45 Alex <alextivan@gmail.com> a scris:
Dear descendants and legal heirs of Professor Theodor Economu,
I am a volunteer editor of Wikipedia with the username ALEX T IVAN. I would like to include a photo of Theodor Ecomonu in the Wikipedia article at [23]. However, Wikipedia can only include such a photo if it is released under a Creative Commons "Attribution-ShareAlike" license or a similar free license listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:File_copyright_tags/Free_licenses.
If you are able and would agree to provide a freely licensed photograph (it need not be newly created) for use on Wikimedia projects, please follow the instructions at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates, or alternately, email the photo and consent text from that page to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, and to myself at [alextivan@gmail.com].
I personally thank you for helping further Wikipedia's goal of public education and outreach; Wikipedia faces a limited availability of freely licensed media, and your time and generosity are tremendously appreciated.
Ivan Alexandru
+40723644873
Cristina Economu <economuancacristina@gmail.com>
23 septembrie 2024 la 18:19
I hereby affirm that I am Economu Anca Cristina, the daughter the of Economu Theodor sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the picture of Economu Theodor as attached to this email and as shown here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Economu_Theodor_foto_revizuita.jpg ,
and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.
I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
Hello @Túrelio,
I hope this message finds you well. I noticed that the image of the Tulunad flag was deleted due to a claimed copyright violation, referencing a post on Facebook.
I wanted to clarify that the content in question pertains to a flag that represents the cultural identity of the Tulu-speaking people. If possible, could you provide more details about the specific reasons for the deletion? Understanding whether the issue is related to licensing, attribution, or the use of the Facebook post as a reference would be helpful.
TuluveRai123 (talk) 14:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Could you have a look at this file? Who is the photographer? It seems the file page was created in 2005 but the file was uploaded in 2020? --MGA73 (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi MGA73,
if you look at the edit-history, you see that it was uploaded in 2005 by User:Stefan Flöper. In 2020 the file was moved by another user. Then I made some edits, but I don't remember whether I was asked for by the uploader or I did this on my own. Anyway, there is no doubt that the image was uploaded in 2005 by the claimed author. --Túrelio (talk) 19:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, about the image you've deleted around a month ago [24], what is the procedure I should follow? Should I acquire some sort of a permission letter? I live in Republic of Türkiye. Krsnaquli (talk) 16:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the site mentioned for permission, https://bbt.info/information/permissions/, does not speak of a CC license, but instead of fair-use. However, fair-use is not permitted on Commons. It can be claimed on :en-Wikipedia on a case-by-case basis and then needs local upload.
So, you might ask the rightsholder if they are willing to release it under a CC-BY or CC-BY-SA license. However, it's unlikely they will do that. --Túrelio (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I drew this picture for Wikipedia, it is nowhere else on the Internet. I am very afraid that it will be deleted. How can I prove that the author I and I renounce the copyright? Нейроманьяк (talk) 09:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
so far there has been no deletion-request and I can confirm that Google-Lens did not yield any hit. You might send an email from your personal or business email-address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (OTRS) and just state that you did draw this image (mention the filename and the license). They may (or not) ask further questions, but if convinced will put a so-called OTRS-ticket on your image, which makes it somewhat immune against deletion-requests. As our OTRS-volunteers a bound by a non-disclosuse agreement, your email-address and real-name is safe with them. --Túrelio (talk) 10:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Du hast offensichtlich das hier gemacht. Das Bild war richtigerweise ein Duplikat von diesem Bild. Jetzt ist es so, dass das von Dir "entfernte" Bild eine Qualitätsbild war und sämtliche in der alten Bilddatei enthaltenen Angaben (QI-Kategorie, QI-Badge) nun beim neuen, aktuellen Bild hinfort sind. Ich bitte Dich, diese Infos in diese Datei einzupflegen.
Hi @Túrelio, I received a notification that you deleted a file that I had added. Granted, I am not the most well-versed with practices on Wikimedia Commons and if i did something wrong, it's on my. This being said, the file in question is the logo of a European political party and it was (when I added it), the only European political party logo not on Wikimedia Commons. I checked other similar logos and they all seemed to rely on the same reasoning to be accepted. Is there a reason for this specific logo not to qualify? Are there other things to take into account? Or, by the same logic, should all the logos of political parties be likewise removed? Thanks for your guidance. Julius Schwarz (talk) 11:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick reply and the proposal. Indeed, I would welcome a discussion on this. To be fair, while it is perfectly understandable that the content of the website would be covered by a copyright, I would personally find it surprising that this would prevent the logo of a political party from being displayed here, since all other political parties (European or otherwise) have their logo here too. And I am certain that all parties have similar copyright statements on their website. This may be different with the logo of a corporation, but I feel like a different approach is taken for political parties. Of course, like I said, I am no expert and am happy to get guidance, it just seems in line with established practice. Julius Schwarz (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Túrelio (talk) 17:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
_by_Ron.jpg)
Thank you.. Reverted one more instance - Gabuxae (talk) 07:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![2.130 Deletion of "File:JoshuaHabkaBio-Hacking.jpg"](#Deletion_of_"File:JoshuaHabkaBio-Hacking.jpg"){kind=link}
![2.131 Deletion of "File:Motorola moto e (2020) Front.jpg"](#Deletion_of_"File:Motorola_moto_e_(2020)_Front.jpg"){kind=link}
_-_en.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg).){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[8]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mehran_FC_logo.jpg%7Clogo){kind=link}
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capital_Defense_Command_logo.png){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:First_ROK_Army.png){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ROKA_The_12th_Infantry_Division.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ROK_III_Corp.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:25th_Infantry_Division_(South_Korea).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[6]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ROKA_9th_Infantry_Division_Insignia.png){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:%E9%99%B8%E8%BB%8D%E6%9C%AC%E9%83%A8.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[8]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ROK_I_Corp.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[9]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ROK_5th_Infantry_Division.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[10]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Third_ROK_Army.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[11]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capital_Division_(South_Korea).png){kind=link}
![[12]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:%EC%A0%9C51%EB%B3%B4%EB%B3%91%EC%82%AC%EB%8B%A8_%EB%B6%80%EB%8C%80%EB%A7%88%ED%81%AC_2014-01-29_02-22.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[13]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:1st_Rok_Division.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_distributes_Poshan_during_Viksit_Bharat_Sankalp_Yatra_program_at_Green_vatika_park_in_Mahipalpur,_New_Delhi_on_December_31,_2023.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_who_were_inquiring_concerning_their_friends._20_February,_1943_(52233497374).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_by_Major_Paul_Aubrey,_commanding_officer_of_the_regular_French_Army_(52009840622).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_at_the_top_of_Mount_Pantano_(52273649537).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_stand_at_the_entrance_to_their_encampment,_awaiting_orders_from_the_Allies_(53399856198).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_sit_near_their_foxhole_on_the_slopes_of_Mt._Pantano_after_they_have_helped_to_chase_the_enemy_from_the_rest_of_the_hill._18_December,_1943_(52274087349).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_unload_boxes_of_American_%22K%22_Rations_from_a_pack_train_which_hauls_supplies_partially_up_the_slope_of_Mount_Pantano_for_troops_on_the_heights_(52272343931).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_is_being_carried_down_the_slopes_of_Mount_Pantano_to_the_town_of_Pantano_where_he_can_be_evacuated_for_further_treatment_(52271398367).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_title_page_art.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14780173741).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[14]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Sagat_(SFV).jpg&diff=prev&oldid=881740683){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[20]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:S._Narayan,_Prema.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=912239781){kind=link}
![16:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Túrelio/Archive1#c-StructuredWookie-20240829165700-Deletion_of_"File:JoshuaHabkaBio-Hacking.jpg"){kind=link}
_Front.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![05:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Túrelio/Archive1#c-2603:8001:8400:DC34:8D91:1C06:45FB:BE32-20240830055900-Deletion_of_"File:Motorola_moto_e_(2020)_Front.jpg"){kind=link}
_-_en.svg){kind=link}
_-_en.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
