User talk:Asav

TUSC token c3afe287a1669690e7d5e630ce3efd3a

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

File:Adil Khan.jpg

Hi Asav! I see that you've tagged this image as verified, using the ticked ID assigned to the e-mail I sent. Is it now safe to delete this image from en.wp? Regards, decltype (talk) 02:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I would think so. I wasn't aware that it existed on en.wp before you told me here. So go ahead. If there's a problem, we'll have a copy on Commons, where it rightly belongs anyway. Asav (talk) 04:12, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. decltype (talk) 15:17, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Ldb teddy.jpg

Hi, I cleaned up the file, added a category and a proper upload log, but it still misses a license. Please add the one from the ticket. Thank you Hekerui (talk) 21:33, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

You're right, I must have missed it. It's fixed now. Thanks for the clean-up and reminder! Asav (talk) 22:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Saemmler.jpg

Bitte passe beim Commonstransfer besser auf, der Autor fehlt noch. File:Saemmler.jpg Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 00:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Ich hab den Transfer korrigiert, aber bitte pass in Zukunft darauf auf, ob du wirklich die Informationen übertragen hast. Gruß Hekerui (talk) 08:55, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Tut mir leid, die Transfer-Tools scheinen nicht immaer ganz zuverlässig zu sein. Ich werde da man extra aufmerksam sein. Danke für den Tipp! Asav (talk) 10:18, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Genauer gesagt: Der Commonshelper hat immer ein Problem mit Dateien, die das OTRS-Template enthalten. Dort überträgt er fast keine Infos in das Info-Template. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 14:53, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Asav, bitte arbeite ordentlicher - so geht das nicht: File:Martin_Heidegger_for_WP.jpg! Die OTRS-Nummer fehlt in Commons - die musst du immer(!) manuell nachtragen. Außerdem ist unklar für welche Lizenz die Freigabe ist. Stand dort nur CC drin (weil du zusätzlich CC in dewiki eingefügt hast)? Oder auch GFDL? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 14:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Ich hab das korrigiert aber das muss wirklich besser werden, bitte. Du hast die Seite einfach aus dem Move-to-commons assistant rauskopiert und nicht ein zweites Mal raufgeschaut. Ich habe die cc-by-sa-3.0 Lizenz gewählt weil das die Lizenz war die du bei dewiki gleichzeitig mit der OTRS-Nachricht der Beschreibung hinzugefügt hast. lg Hekerui (talk) 18:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Und noch eine Extrafrage: das Bild wurde nach einer Fotografie von Fritz Eschen angefertigt, der 1964 gestorben ist, also unmöglich seine Zustimmung für Veröffentlichung einer Bearbeitung unter einer freien Lizenz gegeben haben kann und auch noch bei weitem nicht lange genug tot ist, dass das Urheberrecht nicht mehr greift. Ist die Zustimmung des nachfolgenden Urheberrechtshalters (Kinder etc.) in OTRS-Ticket vorhanden oder steht da, dass das Foto ein "Work for hire" war, d. h. hat der Fotograf sein Urheberrecht abgetreten hat? Falls nicht, könnte das Bild nicht unter einen freien Lizenz angeboten werden und eine Löschung wäre nötig. Hekerui (talk) 18:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Bei File:Nikospiperis.png hattest du beim Transfer nach Commons auch vergessen die Lizenz hinzuzufügen, es gab kein ursprüngliches Datei-Logbuch und der Name des Autors (sofern angegeben) fehlt. Es macht mich ein bisschen stutzig, dass das Bild von der Homepage des Künstlers kommt, da müsste doch in der Email stehen, wer es geschossen hat oder das der Künstler das frei lizenziert. Hekerui (talk) 18:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Wie gesagt war ich mir nicht im klaren, dass das Tool nicht funktioniert, und ich passe jetzt besser auf.

Die zwei Lizenzen betreffend: Ich habe nach einer ziemlich langen (15 Emails umfassenden) Briefwechslung etablieren können, dass die Lizenz autentisch ist. (Weitere Details sind im Ticket zu finden). Die Heidegger-Illustration ist weit vom Original entfernt, und dazu zweifellos vom Stil und der Ausführung her ein autonomes Werk. Das ein Photo als Vorlage gedient hat, ändert nicht daran, das das Urheberrecht ausschliesslich dem Künstler gehört. Gerichtliche Copyright-Praxis in der USA legt Wert auf "[the] amount of originality required for copyright protection", und die ist hier vorhanden. Asav (talk) 00:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Hallo Asav, wenn du meinen Kommentar von 14:53, 19 September 2010 oben gelesen hättest, hättest du wissen müssen, dass du insbesondere (man muss aber immer kontrollieren - nicht nur bei OTRS-Dateien) beim Transfer von OTRS-Dateien aufpassen musst. Wie auch immer. Wenn weitere Unklarheiten bestehen, dann frage bitte.

Zu File:Martin_Heidegger_for_WP.jpg: Die Rechte des Fotografen, der die Vorlage produziert hat, sind hier auch nach meiner und nach von mir befragten anderen Leuten nach deutschem Urheberrecht (wenn das hier zur Anwendung käme) wohl nicht relevant. Das Gemälde ist doch sehr frei und selbstständig. Toll, dass du das für US-Recht nachrecherchiert hast!

Aber Als was hat der Maler das Bild denn freigegeben? Nur unter CC oder auch unter GFDL? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 01:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

"[the] amount of originality required for copyright protection" - du hast das mit dem Originalfoto verglichen? Link doch bitte das Foto, damit jeder den Vergleich machen kann. Das deutsche Recht ist wegen Commonsregelungen zum Glück unwichtig - der Standard auf dewiki für Urheberrechtsverletzungen ist sehr beliebig. Hekerui (talk) 08:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Saibo, das Bild har nur CC-Lizenz.

Hekerui, das es von einem Photo grundverschieden und ein autonomes Werk ist, benötigt keiner Vergleichuung mit dem Original. Es ist offenbar. Wenn es dich trotzdem interessiert, findest du hier ein Photo. Asav (talk) 11:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Danke Asav. Beim nächsten Mal lösche dann bitte in der de.wiki-Datei die falsch aufgeführten Lizenzen mit einem Versionskommentar wie "nur als CC freigegeben". Dann ist das klarer. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 00:08, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the turtle trap help

I am thinking we could use a better article on "how to get permission" over at the EN WP. I tried following the practice perfectly (and am getting stuff through), yet I feel like I have caused some extra efforts from the volunteers and from the granters.

• Think we should clarify what the granter needs to respond with (and make it incumbent on the requester to get that) prior to uploading a pic and an OTRS ticket. As it is now, NONE of the "boilerplate permission" letters adress this. But that is what is needed when things really go down.
• More and better guidance on what licence to request would be helpful. There is a blistering array of licences and without reading the full text of all of them, I'm not even sure what to cite and waht to ask for from the granter. I thought CCSA3.0SA was the generic one to use, but wonder now if I am in error.

TCO (talk) 16:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

[[File:Frederick Noronha.jpg]]

Hi! You uploaded this image to Wikimedia Commons, but I'm somewhat confused as to who holds the copyright. Do you know? I'll have to nominate it for deletion unless OTRS gets permission from the original author, even if publication is okay with the image subject. Asav (talk) 03:30, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The image was taken from flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fn-goa/4386544605/

My opinion is that Noronha himself is the copyright holder and that the image was taken from his camera by a friend. However, i suggest that you clarify it from the subject of the photo himself. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 05:28, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I have. There's no usable license information on the Flickr page, though. Well, we'll just have to wait and see... Asav (talk) 16:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Did you contact Noronha? Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 04:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

It's an OTRS matter, so if you have access, you can look it up in the queue. Asav (talk) 06:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

No. I don't have access. I've applied though. Thanks for issuing the ticket. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 14:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

File:George Hawi.jpg

Please delete this image. I uploaded it in Wikipedia under fair use terms, but another user has mistaken me for it's author and moved it to Commons. Thanks. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me} 10:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I've asked the original uploader for more information about the image (see User talk:Bilal66), and changed the authorship on Wikimedia Commons. As far as I can tell, there is no reason to outright delete the image, but maybe I've missed something? Asav (talk) 10:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

MAD-alfie-1960

Hi,

Du hast hier den Hinweis auf den Löschantrag entfernt, diesen aber nie geschlossen (was du als Nicht-admin ja auch nicht dürftest). Dieser ist nachwievor aktiv und hat keinerlei Hinweis auf den aktuellen Stand. Könntest du dich dort bitte äußern, was den in dem OTRS-Ticket steht, damit klar wird, warum du das Lösch-Template entfernt hast, damit endlich ein Admin diesen LA schließen kann. Danke. -- Cecil (talk) 18:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Der Löschantrag wegen fehlender Lizenz wurde entfernt, weil {{PermissionOTRS|id=2010080810000791}} eine gültige Lizenz enthält. Asav (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Den Löschantrag hast du eben nicht entfernt (dürftest du ja auch gar nicht), der ist nachwievor da und aktiv. Du hast nur den Hinweis darauf gelöscht, was eigentlich absolut nicht ok ist. Wenn eine Situation geklärt ist, dann schreibs in den Löschantrag oder benachrichtige einen Admin, damit der den Antrag schließt. Aber so halbgar bitte nie wieder. -- Cecil (talk) 00:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Dein Verweis zeigte auf die Bildseite, nicht die assoziierte Diskussion, deshalb has Missverständnis. Ich habe eine kurze Erklärung auf der Diskussionsseite zugefügt. Das Bild ist zweifellos ein autonomes Kunstwerk. Asav (talk) 03:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

MAD program output PD reason

I've posted a question at File talk:MAD-alfie-1960.jpg#Copyright/PD chain, because I can't figure which level of work is PD-ineligible as opposed to PD-old or PD-self. Since you were involved in the tagging, and have OTRS access, I'm hoping you (or someone) can explain what is going on there, and which tags apply to which level of that work. --Closeapple (talk) 05:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

OTRS of File:Ok5.JPG

Hello Asav, you had added the OTRS tag to File:Jeanderuyt3.JPG. Is it also valid for File:Ok5.JPG? Was it not own work or why was an otrs tag needed at all? Thank you! Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 21:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not. That ticket only specifies Jeanderuyt3.JPG. Asav (talk) 22:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Was it not own work or why was an otrs tag needed at all? As you can see there is OTRS pending on the Ok5.jpg. Thanks for your help! Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:16, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Bombing in Oslo 2011 Infographic, english.svg

Hi Asav,

I went ahead and translated File:Bomb attack on Oslo 2011 (Infographic) Last version.svg to English (here: File:Bombing in Oslo 2011 Infographic, english.svg) since I found the illustration very nice. Unfortunately I was under the impression that UploadWizard had the appropriate functionality for indicating that this was a minimally altered version of an original on Commons, but as it turns out it treats this case as an entirely new upload. I've attempted to manually add the appropriate attribution information to make clear that this isn't my work in any meaningful sense of the word, but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the template system and requirements on Commons to be sure I've got it right. Could you take a look at this image and make sure it's correct? I would have preferred to simply say it was your work, but was worried there would then be some question regarding the difference between alleged author and the uploader. If you don't think this will be an issue, please do feel free to set yourself as the author (as far as I know, simple mechanical translation of very short text strings does not impart a new copyright under any legal doctrine, neither Norwegian nor Amercian). Anyways, kudos on the excellent work on this image! --Xover (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Please be aware that the image has been updated to reflect changes to the bomb placement. I've marked older versions for deletion. The updated version can be found at File:Bomb attack on Oslo 2011 (Updated infographic).svg. The attribution is fine, thanks! And thanks for the kudos, too :) Asav (talk) 21:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Asav, the graphic is nice but unfortunately wrong. The vehicle needs to be turned 90° counterclockwise so that its front is towards the lower entry part of the building and it stands parallel to the road "Grubbegt." - or in other words it must show its back to the user, not its right side. I have this info from the surveillance video, that captured the vehicle, when it was parked there minutes before the explosion. Please turn the vehicle or eliminate it and show only the red circle. --92.228.80.80 00:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I see you've already raised that question on the German WP. It's a question of time, and I'll see if I can make the adjustment you suggest. Asav (talk) 15:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Foto

Warum soll das Bild gelöscht werden File:Sternwarte Hannover im Betrieb kleiner.jpg??? --AxelHH (talk) 09:37, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Ich verstehe nicht, worin die URV liegen soll, das Bild ist von Benutzer Skyman 1693. Bitte benachrichtige mich auf meiner Disk. --AxelHH (talk) 21:56, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Hatfield College Chapel.jpg

Hello, seeing your deletion request message at File:Hatfield College Chapel.jpg, I have started a deletion request. From the comments I got there, I don't think it should be speedy deleted.--Zolo (talk) 16:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not at all happy with your actions in this matter, and have responded on the image's talk page as well as reinstated the tag. Please do not remove OTRS tags without access to the relevant ticket! Thank you. Asav (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Amino acids

Regarding amino acid table. Thank you for your compliments and suggestions. However you are confusing the proprieties of polarity and hydrophobicity. Tyrosine is classified in my table as hydrophobic, which is correct. Thank you for you oppinion. Dan Cojocari

File:TwistPhelan.jpeg OTRS

Hallo Asav, I hope you do check the license which is onl file pages when you apply a OTRS tag? ;-) Has File:TwistPhelan.jpeg a license tag as specified in the OTRS mail? Not really.

Sorry, I just had a mean feeling. :-) Please add the license. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The file is properly licensed under CC-by-sa 3.0, using our standard license text in ticket 2011111610055521. Where do you see a problem? Asav (talk) 06:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Err, please look at the file page please and search for the license - to you see it? Or do I have bad eyes?! Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

thanks. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 20:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

File:MilesChinn (BW).jpg

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

Takabeg (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Farmand 1947.png

File:Farmand 1947.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Stefan4 (talk) 14:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Poet David Mason Outdoors, 2012.jpg

You added OTRS permission here. It says that this is licensed under both CC-BY-SA 1.0 and {{Attribution}}. Are you sure that this is correct? It looks like a strange licence combination. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

You're absolutely right! It was uploaded as 1.0, but the OTRS ticket says 3.0. I corrected the tag. Thanks for paying attention! Asav (talk) 21:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

And is the {{Attribution}} template supposed to be there? --Stefan4 (talk) 21:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, it was added by the original uploader. "Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed." essentially says the same as cc-by-sa-3.0, don't you think? Asav (talk) 21:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

OTRS ticket 2012082110002073

Hello Asav. The above ticket licenses a manual's text in wikibooks (Talk:InteriCAD T6 User Manual). I want to ask you if, apart of their text, they also license the images that they uploaded here (but were deleted aw copyvios). Through an email exchange I understand that they want to freely license both text and images -I suggested contacting the OTRS which they did, but did they also license the images as well as text? If they didn't, I'll have them send another email. Thanks, Badseed ^talk 15:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The ticket license applies to the pdf files as such. It make no exceptions for images, so both text and illustrations are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License version 1.3, according to the e-mail. Asav (OTRS) | Talk 15:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick answer. So i take it that the images are OK to stay as GFDL, under the aforementioned ticket. However I'll see if I can get a CC-BY-SA license as well for the images. - Badseed ^talk 16:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ticket:2012090410009838 and File:Jade Alexis Living Jade9.jpg

I just let you know that I deleted this file upon request of Rjd0060. You tagged it with Ticket:2011111010013747. Regards -- Rillke^(q?) 20:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

RfA

Moin! Hier fehlt noch die entsprechende Unterseite. Viele Grüße, NNW (talk) 08:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Danke! Ich hatte den entsprechenden Abschnitt Commons:Administrators#How do I become an administrator? nicht gesehen. Ich versuch's jetzt. Asav (OTRS) | Talk 08:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Cal Rein by Peter Coulson.jpg

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

FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Blender 2.65-splash.png

Könntest du die Quelle bitte vollständig angeben, also die Seite, wo dieses Bild gezeigt wird. --Túrelio (talk) 17:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Wie du auf der Seite Category:Blender 3D splash screens sehen kannst, ist das Bild eines der 38 »splash screens« in der Serie der Blenderausgaben. Das Bild erscheint im Programm an sich. Die Illustration gibt es auf der Seite http://www.blender.org/development/release-logs/blender-265/ zu sehen. (Ich habe die Adresse in der Beschreibung zugefügt.) Blender ist GPL-lizensiert, und das umfasst auch das Eröffnungsbild, nur das Logo ist als Trademark beschützt, allerdings hat das Blender Institute immer den Gebrauch auf Wikimedia zugelassen. Ich hoffe das beantwortet deine Frage! Asav (OTRS) | Talk 17:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Alles klar. Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 19:41, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Abel-statue i Slottsparken.png

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

Túrelio (talk) 13:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the Year voting round 1 open

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:

1. Users must have an account, at any Wikimedia project, which was registered before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC].
2. This user account must have more than 75 edits on any single Wikimedia project before Tue, 01 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0000 [UTC]. Please check your account eligibility at the POTY 2012 Contest Eligibility tool.
3. Users must vote with an account meeting the above requirements either on Commons or another SUL-related Wikimedia project (for other Wikimedia projects, the account must be attached to the user's Commons account through SUL).

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.

To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons

Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

---

Delivered by Orbot1 (talk) at 08:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC) - you are receiving this message because you voted last year

File:Cal Rein by Peter Coulson.jpg

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

– Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 11:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Bent Patey.jpg

Asav, you added OTRS ticket to the above file. Can you look up it's license - I have no access to it. --Jarekt (talk) 14:23, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

OK I've added the license. Asav (OTRS) | Talk 16:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Shostakovich Symphony 7 (Leningrad) Flute Theme.ogg

File:Shostakovich Symphony 7 (Leningrad) Flute Theme.ogg 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!

Takabeg (talk) 11:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Images

Hi Asav, You do realize Blake is only here to turn the article in to a brochure ? .... Anyway before you mass revert I'm currently adding free images of the rides, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

It's not up to me to make any assumptions as to contributors' motives, except to assume good faith in keeping with Wikimedia guidelines. Furthermore, the images you seem to object to have all been properly licensed, as can be confirmed on ticket #2015110210012603 by authorized users. I assume whatever images will be used on the article page proper will be determined by their quality as long as they're properly licensed. Asav (OTRS) | Talk 16:32, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

My problem is is Blake is only here to promote (If you check the Diggerland article there's been 3 or 4 editors doing the exact same thing .... Promoting!) and those images are clearly promotional, Well I've unwatched the page so whatever, I was simply under the impression this was a promotional-free encycloepdia but I've clearly been wrong for 3 years. –Davey2010^Talk 16:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

The actual content of any encyclopedia article is entirely within the remit of the Wikipedia community, and not a matter within the OTRS realm. OTRS volunteers are merely there to help users in practical matters and to acknowledge the receipt of valid media license statements. Asav (OTRS) | Talk 18:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Damn we edit conflicted - I wanted to apologize for my outburst earlier, To be fair you were only doing your job and that's it, I obviously disagree with it all entirely but I may aswell suck it up & move on ,

Anyway my apologies for earlier,

Anyway thanks & happy editing :), –Davey2010^Talk 18:23, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Exactly I filed a no permission tag, permission was proven ... So it's not really your problem in that respect, Perhaps I shouldn't of filed the tag but meh I guess images are better than nothing at all, Anyway sorry!, I'll sod off now , –Davey2010^Talk 18:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

File:IRIX på SG1 O2-sensurert.jpg

File:IRIX på SG1 O2-sensurert.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Elisfkc (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Sproget i fare.png

Hmm. The text of the article would fall under Knut Hamsund's (estate's) copyright, and since he died in 1952 it won't expire until 2023 (70 pma.). Only the layout and graphical elements of the newspaper expired in 1988 as anonymous works (publication + 70), if one can count those as anonymous (it is presumably entirely possible to find out who did layout and typesetting etc. for Aftenposten in 1918). There's also the issue of its copyright status in Norway on the URAA date (1996 for Norway, I believe) which would have restored US copyright even if it had expired in the US (which, as per the above, I don't think it did). No? --Xover (talk) 13:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

No, since the text itself isn't legible. The only point with this illustration is to show that the Norwegian language conflict was sufficiently important to warrant a full front page in Norway's leading newspaper. (The title reads soemthing like "Our language is in danger"). Also, there's nothing copyrightable in a typeset, seven column newspaper page with absolutely no distinguishing features. Asav | Talk 13:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

2019 UK Election Results for the European Parliament.svg

Hi, I do not know why you destroyed the file description. Please, do never such categorizing which is deprecated and completly unwanted! I will repair what you made wrong, and I hope not to find more of that nonsense. -- sarang♥사랑 10:03, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

What on earth are you talking about? I did not "destroy" (whatever that's supposed to mean) the file descripton for my own file which I created with Blender and Inkscape, so that belongs in the file description as well as the category. Stay away from other peoples' work, please. Thank you. Asav | Talk 18:22, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Brexit short one star.png

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

Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 07:36, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:200117-A-PD249-003 Supreme Allied Commander Europe visits Alliance Ground Surveillance aircraft in Italy (cropped).jpg

Copyright status: File:200117-A-PD249-003 Supreme Allied Commander Europe visits Alliance Ground Surveillance aircraft in Italy (cropped).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:200117-A-PD249-003 Supreme Allied Commander Europe visits Alliance Ground Surveillance aircraft in Italy (cropped).jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 13:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Valhalla Mjød-01.jpg

Wikimedia Commons does not accept derivative works of non-free works such as File:Valhalla Mjød-01.jpg. It only accepts free content, which is images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Reproductions of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this file must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk. The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that this file was not a derivative work of a non-free work, you may request undeletion.

--EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

File:Okjökull glacier commemorative plaque.jpg

Hi. I'm puzzled by the copyright status of this image. Did you get permission from the school to upload this to Commons. On https://news2.rice.edu/2019/07/18/lost-glacier-to-be-honored-with-memorial-monument/ it states that Grétar Thorvaldsson is the copyright holder. So why did you list the school as copyright holder? Steinninn ♨ 07:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The photo was taken for Rice University, which properly released it under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license in writing. As stated, the correspondence is available to trusted volunteers as ticket #2019082010004668. Asav | Talk 08:07, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

File:LSk-logo.svg

File:LSk-logo.svg 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!

K.I.Skau (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)