User talk:Slowking4/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

→

User:Slowking4

User:Slowking4 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 user page, 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.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

LMC33 (talk) 13:08, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Catherine Lacey 2115.jpg

File:Catherine Lacey 2115.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!

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

LMC33 (talk) 13:15, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Unsupport

In the second to last argument for removing pictures due to Wikimedia SE vs BUS you stated " Support usually, not in this case". Would you mind change that to: " Oppose, in this case, usually I would support" or similar. Now it seems as if we agree when just looking at the green tickers and that may be confusing, and the argument regard this case only anyway:

Commons usually follow local rules.

Support: This is how Commons usually do.--LittleGun (talk) 02:52, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Support usually, not in this case. the commons decided in the National Portrait Gallery, London case to risk lawsuit in the UK over the copyright of scans of PD artwork. it can do so again. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 16:24, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

No offense intended.--LittleGun (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

i support the statement "Commons usually follow local rule" and i object to the phasing of the question, and the fallacy of the excluded middle. you could make it

Great! or

WTF? if you prefer. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 18:53, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States – Back for 2017!

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2017}} to your userpage!

Hi there! My name is Kevin, one of the organizers of Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Last year, you contributed to our 2016 event. It was a great success thanks to you and many others, with over 1,700 people contributing over 11,000 great photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the United States. Over 1,000 of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, making our open knowledge about United States history and heritage all the better.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information, including updated tips, lists, and prizes. Like last year, you'll be able to upload your new photos of any registered historical site in the United States through the end of September (even if the photos were taken before this month).

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, and we hope to see you in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 08:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Moat poppies 8114155.JPG

And also:

Yours sincerely, Nilfanion (talk) 23:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Help needed

Thank you a lot for the stroopwafels! Inside that context, may I ask a little help? We do have this document about that GLAM (you may read a google translated version of it clicking here), but we are still having problems in this and that cases. Pls, share your opinion on that pages. Regards, Sturm (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

International trucks

There is a discussion on this page whether images should be categorised as International trucks or International Harvester trucks. Not many wikipedia contributors have contributed to the discussion or voted with their preference, but you have contributed to material on International Harvester. I would be grateful, if you have the time, if you would share your own opinion on the page name. And thank you. Eddaido (talk) 00:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Creator:John Watkins

Hi Slowking4, looking closer to the image in the creatorbos, it seems to be a photograph of Charles Dickens. Imo it would make more sense to remove it because it is rather confusing now. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 18:08, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

it is a photo of dickens by watkins. go edit wikidata if you do not like it. do not see any images of the photographer available. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 18:14, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll keep looking for an image of John Watkins to replace it. Lotje (talk) 18:39, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Susan stewart 142812.jpg

File:Susan stewart 142812.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!

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

Kmdo52210 (talk) 23:18, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Susan stewart 142817.jpg

File:Susan stewart 142817.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!

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

Kmdo52210 (talk) 23:19, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Cuteness can diego 1320.jpg

And also:

File:Wikisource user group photo 201284.jpg

Yours sincerely, Fæ (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

error

Could you repair this change? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

thank you for the catch. timely blog point on the point. i see we have some editors who want to bend, "in an abundance of caution" Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 21:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

File:Team Magma & Team Aqua grunt cosplayers (23488464662).jpg

File:Team Magma & Team Aqua grunt cosplayers (23488464662).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!

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

Sw0 (talk) 03:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

File:Ash Ketchum & Pikachu cosplayers (23301310770).jpg

File:Ash Ketchum & Pikachu cosplayers (23301310770).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!

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

Sw0 (talk) 03:16, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States – Results!

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2017}} to your userpage!

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States during the month of October! The United States contest saw over 1,400 people (the most of any nation this year) contribute over 8,000 great photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the United States and its territories. Hundreds of these photos are already being used to illustrate pages on various Wikimedia projects.

We're excited to announce that our national judging process has concluded, and that we have selected the winners of Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States! These photos are recognized for their photographic quality, artistic merit, and their encyclopedic value as illustrations of unique historical sites. We were amazed by all of the uploads, and regret only being able to formally recognize the top 10. That being said – congratulations to our national winners and their amazing shots! Our 10 winners will be sent to the international Wiki Loves Monuments jury, who will then select the winners of the international contest. If you're interested in seeing the winners of the other national contests, you may do so at Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 winners.

If you would like to view all the photos submitted for the U.S. this year, you may do so here.

Finally, we have also created a feedback form for all U.S. participants to fill out. The survey is optional and anonymous, and only takes a minute or two – we hope to use the feedback to organize better events in the future!

A quick thank you to our national jury, as well as Commons editors who have helped categorize and place photos for the event. And finally, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments and helping to preserve our history through photography - we hope to see you again for future Commons photography events!

~Kevin Payravi & Nikikana, from Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States (16:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC))

Teahouse for Wikimedia Commons

If you would ever propose this idea 💡 at the Village Pump for proposals I would gladly support it, Wikimedia Commons is ethically broken and people like you with a vision to improve it are needed. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 10:32, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

File:Edie meidav 142821.jpg

File:Edie meidav 142821.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!

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

72.79.212.36 04:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

pattypan

Thanks for your message. Unfortunately I already tried that tool, but it is too slow and complicated when you have to upload a thousand of different files. You can nevertheless propose to integrate more choices and functions in the normal "wizard upload" form in the 2017 Community wishlist. I tried to ask a few years ago, but some random people (who had maybe upload 20 pictures in their entire life, averagely) opposed, so nothing changed. I'm sorry! --Sailko (talk) 11:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Ti-anna wang 8685.JPG

File:Ti-anna wang 8685.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!

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

Techyan（Talk） 05:16, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations 🎉

Congratulations 🎉 Slowking4,

I just saw that you had passed the 100.000 edits mark a few days ago. I know that It’s relatively not that much compared to the millions of images here, but seeing that you mostly import GLAM stuff it's definitely on the high end educational usability-wise. So keep up the good work, and cheers 🍻 to your next 100.000 edits.

Sent from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 11:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading my Wiki Loves Monuments Photos!

The photos look great! I'm thinking now that that little side building isn't part of the Morrison-Clark House, since I don't see it on the hotel website. So I'll hunt around to find out what that is. It was great fun joining the WikimediaDC team, and again, big thanks for all your help! Uncommon fritillary (talk) 22:20, 9 September 2012

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:11, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Category:Silvana Straw

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States

Dear Slowking4,

Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States. The images you uploaded will help illustrate Wikipedia articles on historic sites in the United States. We are delighted to share the winning images and our top 10 finalists with you.

Click here to read our press release and view the winning submissions »

We invite you to continue uploading images to Wikimedia Commons and we hope you will return for Wiki Loves Monuments again in September 2014. For more information about Wikimedia Commons, please visit our welcome page. For more information about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, please click here. Once again, thank you for sharing your images and participating in our contest.

—

User:Mono

Organizing Team

Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United States

العربية ∙ català ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ română ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2013! Please help with this survey.

Dear Slowking4,
Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! We would like to ask again a few minutes of your time.

Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 365,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from more than 50 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place.

You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet).

If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help.

To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2013.

Kind regards,

the Wiki Loves Monuments team

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Gaston Hall, Georgetown University4a11816v.jpg

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Slowking4!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Request for permission top use image

Hello, I'm a publisher from Namibia. I would like to use an image of smoke stacks you posted in a publication of Natural Science and Health Education Grade 7 textbook I'm busy working on. I know that this image is in the public domain, but I need your explicit permission to use this image in this publication. Please contact me via email: malimap@nph.com.na to discuss this further. Thank you. I look forward to hearing from you. Warm regards, Patrycja.

Technically all images on Wikimedia commons are free to use as long as you attribute them correctly.

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Please remove image

File:Ailish Hopper 201538.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:145:4000:D8A6:2917:5E5A:176C:CADB (talk) 03:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Please stop being POINTy

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

delete Megs photoʃ

̼hi, I tagged my photos of Megs to delete in 2016 and I just found out that the request was denied. On March 1, 2017, I followed procedure to appeal to make sure it was deleted by the admin WDwd talk page. Please tell Megs I tried.∼∼∼∼

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

DACA image use

We have posted an article that features one of your images and want to confirm it's OK to use it. Also can you confirm permission for use in an email newsletter as well? Just want to make double sure!

http://www.thebody.com/content/80382/hiv-groups-assail-trump-decision-expire-daca.html?ic=tbhtrump — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.249.87.125 (talk) 20:53, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

A signature for the ArchiverBot. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Error with the archiving bot

Hello 👋🏻 Slowking4,

I noticed that the ArchiverBot doesn't archive threads without a proper signature so I placed my signature below some threads above so they will be properly archived tomorrow. If it was your intention that they won’t be archived feel free to revert it back.

Sent from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:10, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

TUSC token e0cf6d760c337600fe1ad5f9b4063930

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Is a TUSC account something I need to open a ticket 🎟 like this? Is there perhaps an alternative way for me to upload that book 📖 here to Wikimedia Commons by perhaps converting the file 📁 type and then simply using the Upload Wizard?

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 10:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

no the tusc was a way to verify an identity. the OAth does it off wiki for uploading big files. if you download and change filetype, use chuncked uploads for large file. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Syntax of Template:Artwork

Thank you for all your improvements for many appearances of Template:Artwork! When you work with it, please be careful to shift the date of the photo to the source parameter (not like this) so that the date parameter is free or used for the date of the artwork and does not end up in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. I write you because recently I stumbled upon some of those cases you probably overlooked. Thank you! --Marsupium (talk) 10:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Anna & Elsa cosplayers (23514985211).jpg

Yours sincerely, — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 16:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Adminpedia-image.png

File:Adminpedia-image.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

— Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 06:11, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Slowking4. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

— Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 02:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

thank you for the good laugh. what a wonderful confirmation of a remark. can you actually communicate without a semi-automated script? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:40, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but that template is dictated by the top matter at COM:AN/U. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 02:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

i do not recall a welcome to wear out, rather i recall a welcome wall of template deletion notifications, all of which were kept. [1]. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:57, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

With regard to Jeff's comment on the template, AN/U says you can use the notification template, but it does not require it. In practice it is not always used. --Fæ (talk) 09:52, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

'Sup

Where the fuck do I sign up for whatever club you are a member of. I think I'm starting to get this now. - Alexis Jazz 07:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

oh - the photographer club? the editors with over 1000 images in use, are self-selecting. [2] Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

There can be a big difference between distinct images used and image usages. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 13:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

thanks for clarifying that point, what tool do you use to track images in use? [3] Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:21, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

No, that's not it. But I've calmed down a bit now. You want any more banners or anything like that, just ask.. - Alexis Jazz 16:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

File:WMDC New York Wikimedians meetup165730.JPG

File:WMDC New York Wikimedians meetup165730.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!

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

Hexatekin (talk) 08:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

File:WMDC New York Wikimedians meetup165734.JPG

File:WMDC New York Wikimedians meetup165734.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!

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

Hexatekin (talk) 09:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Sander.v.Ginkel

I keep seeing that name pop up, who is he, and why do you put his name in your signature? --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: UTFS (Use The Force Sir) m:User:Slowking4/english wikipedia has cancer - Alexis Jazz 11:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

and also m:User:Slowking4/The Farmbrough effect. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	As you're one of the most active photographers and importers on the project (Wikimedia Commons). Donald Trung (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

G5 is essentially book burning

I saw that you were against the Deletionist agenda to implement G5 here on Wikimedia Commons which is good, it's ironic because the troll that causes people to want to make it here a policy was also one of the handful of admins here that actually used G5 here on Wikimedia Commons, and it would almost be them influencing policies "from beyond the grave" (so to speak, as a WMF ban is essentially the only "WikiDeath" that exists), I really hope that G5 won't ever become policy here as it's basically a modern form of book 📚 burning, content only gets deleted because it was created by a certain person the deciding admin hates, it has very little to do with building Wikimedia Commons, and is essentially admitting that blocks are punitive and not preventative. The worst part is that some might want G5 to become retroactive (damnatio memoriae), let's just hope that the Deletionists won't prevail. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 13:29, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

yeah, it is all about winning at deleting items. and why waste time at DR when you can prod via license review, or speedy. and bring the vindictiveness across wikis as with SvG. the GLAM admins are appalled, but the deletionist admins are unashamed. they imagine they have a permanent majority because their vindictive friends support them. we need some adult supervision. i have been talking up a "hostile takeover by librarians" with the OCLC editors. they have a code of ethics, but it will take some organizing. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Releasing low-resolution version in alternative free license

I can't email you because your "Email this user" is disable, so I'm using your talk page instead. I've been wondering. Why not uploading or releasing low-resolution versions into one or two acceptable free licenses? Here are the following example below to see how restrictive copyright holders are:

I also wonder whether you've seen this answer: https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-cc-license-to-low-resolution-copies-of-a-licensed-work-and-reserve-more-rights-in-high-resolution-copies . George Ho (talk) 11:22, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

hmm, email was disabled, and required re-enabling, how kludgy.

yeah the two size licensing is the last hope of fee income of recalcitrant GLAMs and photographers. if they keep high resolution off line and email it, then they have to manage and track all their images. the revenue is small and cost of management increased. if they put high resolution online with an NC, then they risk the commons community invoking template:PD-art. (and hosting the high resolution versions) see also

Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2010/11#Portraits_from_National_Gallery

User:Dcoetzee/NPG legal threat/Coverage

Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/09#List_of_images_the_Prado_would_like_changed_(Copied_from_list_provided_to_us_by_the_Prado,_links_added_by_us)

we advise GLAMs that the increased traffic outweighs the lost image income, but the licensing tends to get set by the legal department. photographers have also tried the dual license, but it is obtuse, so no one uses it. exif helps tracking but is editable. watermarks are old school, but the community crops them out, i.e. File:Lars Ahlfors - MFO.jpg Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I see your point about dual-licensing on images.... I hope. Have you or they considered using an image/photoshop software, like IrfanView, Windows Live Photo Gallery, or Adobe Photoshop, to resize or create low-rez copies of the images? I have used both Windows Live Photo Gallery and/or IrfanView. George Ho (talk) 13:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

too lazy to store two versions. o do use photo gallery for light crops, and lightening, but would like some better color correction. i just upload as it comes. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 18:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Well.... .... Do as you please. Still, I think releasing a low-rez version under at least one free license makes a photo easier to use for the public. Moreover, it helps copyright holders establish and/or show their ability to control their own content. If you like, you can simply download your own existing uploads and then re-release them under at least one free license and no non-free license. For Photo Gallery, I just right-click (i.e. use secondary button), click "Resize", and type in whatever resolution as custom size, or I simply crop photos. --George Ho (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Deletionism in action

Maybe User:Donald Trung/The unfair deletion of File:Thai-binh-hung-bao.gif is a fun read for you, it genuinely makes me wonder how many free images get deleted from Wikimedia Commons without proper review and bad deletion reasons, but as Admins are "trusted users" we simply have to "trust" their reasons. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:41, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

yeah, the auto-deletion of transferred items, led to the VP conversation about stopping migrations. don't you know coins are 3D ? - however, i would be tempted to go to DRV to establish the archive of disputes, saving you making a user page, and elevating to community about wrongful deletions. you could set up a task flow of reviewing deletions of images previously in use, or of problematic admins, but it would be a huge backlog. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 18:54, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

CC-BY-NC

I would just like to let you know, you appear to have uploaded a large amount of images under a CC-BY-NC license. That license is not a free license and is not compatible with commons. Images such as File:Caitlin_Ryan_1234753.jpg and many recent ones such as File:Mary beth maxwell 2265171.jpg. There appear to be many more as well. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 18:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah my mistake. I see now "Commons-compliant, GFDL 1.2 Only license. I missed that before. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Non-Free Wiki

Have you seen the proposal to create a non-free wiki? It's like Wikimedia Commons but for fair use images, honestly I can see how that would work if it would completely supersede local uploading, originally Wikimedia Commons was created because many local language Wikipedia's had duplicate files 📁 and Wikimedia Commons doea work for truly free files but not for millions of files on the English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, Russian Wikipedia, Etc. that are fair use. I think that the Non-Free wiki could work, it can also just delete unused files after 7 (seven) days like the English Wikipedia does which means that there's less need for administrators and less need for fighting spammers, especially if it only considers images in article space to be "in use" (or other content pages depending on the Wikimedia project), I often see duplicates of locally uploaded files between the English, German, and Russian Wikipedia's and this would solve it. What do you think 🤔? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 02:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

yes, it is a perpetual proposal, m:NonFreeWiki the creating new projects process is daunting. m:Proposals for new projects auto-delete would not reduce admin action, the ideologues would want to dominate the deletions. an automated deletion process would continue the problem of "free" image "replacing" the fair use, and then being deleted, for example w:The_Lone_Sailor; w:File:Lone-sailor.jpg -- Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Julia dodd.png

File:Julia dodd.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Aavindraa (talk) 15:52, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Alamy/Getty

You might be interested to know the $1 billion lawsuit actually concerns Alamy: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2999596/Gov-Uscourts-Nysd-460787-1-0.pdf. It's a Getty affiliate. - Alexis Jazz 16:21, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

i would not get distracted by the corporate shells and shields. it is the conduct, and the response including not crediting their copyright claims. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:18, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Garza, Xavier headshot.jpg

File:Garza, Xavier headshot.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!

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

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:49, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Erickson, John R headshot Western Horseman.jpg

File:Erickson, John R headshot Western Horseman.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!

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

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:50, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Van Prooyen, Laura headshot.jpg

File:Van Prooyen, Laura headshot.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: ©-David B. Frank, http://poetryatroundtop.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/1-2-Laura-Van-Prooyen-2014-%C2%A9-David-B-Frank5-e1405625526354.jpg

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Lewis, TImothy headshot.jpg

File:Lewis, TImothy headshot.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!

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

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Alison Bechdel at the Boston Book Festival.jpg

File:Alison Bechdel at the Boston Book Festival.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Found everywhere such as https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Flovelace-media.imgix.net%2Fuploads%2F25%2Fc45444f0-20ad-0132-7159-0add9426c766.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bustle.com%2Farticles%2F40281-the-female-winners-of-macarthur-genius-grants-are-your-latest-greatest-role-models&docid=w0afIum0QPn0KM&tbnid=YKFy_n9QWf818M%3A&vet=10ahUKEwjkxaSB6LnaAhVFxRQKHYoSCi4QMwgnKAAwAA..i&w=4928&h=3264&bih=756&biw=1536&q=c%20est%20un%20homme%20ou%20une%20femme&ved=0ahUKEwjkxaSB6LnaAhVFxRQKHYoSCi4QMwgnKAAwAA&iact=mrc&uact=8

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Lenhardt, Melissa headshot cropped.jpg

File:Lenhardt, Melissa headshot cropped.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.facebook.com/MelissaLenhardtAuthor/photos/a.796543867034687.1073741825.796542577034816/1595744767114589/?type=1&theater

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Pantoya, Michelle headshot 2.jpg

File:Pantoya, Michelle headshot 2.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.depts.ttu.edu/stem/membership/pics/238_pantoya.jpg

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:59, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File tagging File:Wiggerman, Scott headshot.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Wiggerman, Scott headshot.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Wiggerman, Scott headshot.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:00, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Poch, John headshot.jpg

File:Poch, John headshot.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://www.depts.ttu.edu/english/faculty_profiles/photos/Poch_4.jpg

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Flickr account of Lubbock Book Festival 2017

Hi. Beware of pictures put at this Flickr account by Barbara Brannon. Some are perhaps by her but most of them are author headshots, book cover images, event logos, and montages available for publicity use by permission of authors and festival and are copyrighted works by each of their authors. Kind regards, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:07, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Sikes, Frank headshot cropped.jpg

File:Sikes, Frank headshot cropped.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/8104UJHcFAL._UX250_.jpg

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:09, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Sikes, Frank headshot cropped.jpg

File:Sikes, Frank headshot cropped.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!

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

- Alexis Jazz 17:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Poch, John headshot.jpg

File:Poch, John headshot.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!

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

- Alexis Jazz 18:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Pantoya, Michelle headshot 2.jpg

File:Pantoya, Michelle headshot 2.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!

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

- Alexis Jazz 18:31, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Alison Bechdel at the Boston Book Festival.jpg

File:Alison Bechdel at the Boston Book Festival.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!

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

- Alexis Jazz 18:32, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Van Prooyen, Laura headshot.jpg

File:Van Prooyen, Laura headshot.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!

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

- Alexis Jazz 18:34, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Erickson, John R headshot Western Horseman.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, - Alexis Jazz 20:36, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Odalisque couchée aux magnolias.JPG

File:Odalisque couchée aux magnolias.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!

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

Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:13, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Picasso apple.JPG

File:Picasso apple.JPG has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Copyrighted work by Pablo Picasso (d. 1973).

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:14, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Les rues de Paris, panneaux pour Henry Bernstein- Seconde série, La Place Vintimille.JPG

Copyright status: File:Les rues de Paris, panneaux pour Henry Bernstein- Seconde série, La Place Vintimille.JPG

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Les rues de Paris, panneaux pour Henry Bernstein- Seconde série, La Place Vintimille.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.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:22, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:Helen Greiner TechCrunch 2015.jpg

Yours sincerely, Majora (talk) 18:15, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Chaussons de danse.JPG

Copyright status: File:Chaussons de danse.JPG

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Chaussons de danse.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.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

dupe - Alexis Jazz 03:01, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Input on DR Consolidation would be appreciated

I'm not aware on what is the proper protocol for consolidating DRs of this magnitude, but I'm very close to being blocked for it. If you can share your views on Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Creation of page I would be very grateful. -- SLV100 (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Moulin à Saint-Jacut or Les Villas.JPG

Copyright status: File:Moulin à Saint-Jacut or Les Villas.JPG

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Moulin à Saint-Jacut or Les Villas.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.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:21, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Another low resolution upload without license. Why does this keep happening? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 05:51, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

because the old uploader will upload files without license. only way to upload artwork template, other than mass pattypan. the low resolution is a function of christies website - have to snip auctioned thumbnail, there may be slightly higher resolution in press release, no high resolution. some bot operator should upload from the auction sites, but so far it has been hand done, and the links rot. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:34, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

So far I'm just following your archive.is link, click the image and I get the high resolution (several times higher than what you upload) Christies image. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

thanks, the right click on image is working for me now. it was not before , so i used the snip tool, which is smaller. a ten fold increase is still "suitable for web" only. need 10 to 100 Mb to be print quality. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:15, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Message on VP

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Copyright&diff=next&oldid=301565071

This is probably not a good idea. I won't report it, but it may be a good idea to change that message. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 05:37, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

if low edit sea-lions want to throw around the a- word, let them chew on the voluminous scholarship on this topic, (that i have lectured on). Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:51, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

As I said, I won't report it, but some may interpret it as a personal attack. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Art

If you like artwork, here is some more: http://www.henriettaberk.com/works. (Category:Henrietta Berk, also see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Califpaint) Looks like everything before 1977 can be uploaded as {{PD-US-no notice}}. ({{PD-US-1978-89}} would probably apply as well for slightly later works. I wish I had time to look at everything I run into. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

oh - great. yet another "wall of deletion template welcome" and now mass deletion rather than curation? and i am the a-hole? and you wonder why this place has a sh-hole reputation. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I never called you an a-hole and I've written some fairly extensive and vocal texts on the flaws of this place. It would indeed be good idea if there was some sort of curation process, deletion nomination is now effectively used for this purpose. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

i don't say you did. yeah, talk pages are for warning templates, and deletion is for policy consensus building. however, when a new editor is deleting obscure files, like a veteran admin, and does no uploads, am i paranoid to think it is User:INeverCry ? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 22:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Nope. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 22:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

A rabbi, a priest and a minister walk into a bar (Getty strikes again)

Honestly, I have no idea what this is. Forget about the DW, I am just confused what this even means.

My best guess is that this is Getty's version of {{Copyright notes}}. (and unlike Commons, Getty doesn't have to care about the source country) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 22:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

ugh, pictures of pictures. i guess we can have not pictures of really creative protest signs because copyright. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 22:53, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I need to edit with my eyes open, I forgot the link this was about:

https://www.gettyimages.com/license/53112445

But what you said too. I have seen a fair number of protest photos nominated because of DW. Way for Commons to censor itself. Sometimes every single photo of a protest has DW in it because everyone has stuck photos on signs. Getty and the likes doesn't give a shit, nobody in the world really seems to, except Commons. Maybe we should apply DM a bit more freely. I mean, things like this (thankfully kept, converted from dw no source) seem over the top to me. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 23:33, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

this precautionary bowing towards getty (because they could sue us) is sad: we do not own them a profit, especially given the lack of concern for the public (they are as bad as Elsevier) i'm trying to stop noticing the dramaz. too busy rolling in the mud category:2018 Gaithersburg Book Festival. fuzheado was saying, that everipedia is flawed, but it demonstrates the threat of a rich multimedia fork. but maximum content with minimize risk, is not a consensus alternative. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:22, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

It's indeed a mess. I don't think I have seen something like a Farsnews image on Getty before. I also wasn't able to find other examples. What it makes me question is if I should speak about it so Commons knows Getty doesn't just do {{PD-old}} but {{Copyright notes}} as well. But on the other hand I'm thinking: better keep my mouth shut or someone calls PRP/PCP and deletes everything from Farsnews and Tasnim. (some photographers work for both, I doubt Tasnim will be safe if PRP is called on Farsnews because of this) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 07:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Revert of an image

Hello!

Sorry, but I reverted your edit of File:Bredevoort (NL), Rembrandt's Hendrikje -- 2018 -- 1847 (cropped).jpg. IMO the template {{Information}} is much better for a photograph. My bot checks all my images every few weeks and the bot can't work with {{Artwork}}. The template {{Artwork}} has another structure and some informations aren't contained. {{Artwork}} is better for artworks only, but I'm taking photographs. The photograph is described, the artwork only the subject. And the artwork itself is described in the {{Information}} template too - as subject. --XRay ^talk 04:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

you are taking photographs of artworks. you might want to collaborate with Commons:Structured data. and you might want to update your bot to work with artwork, the way forward since it works with wikidata, rather than remain on your own bot island. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:43, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Dorothy Bendel 4080049.jpg

File:Dorothy Bendel 4080049.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!

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

Jomama39 (talk) 18:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Dorothy Bendel 4080054.jpg

File:Dorothy Bendel 4080054.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!

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

Jomama39 (talk) 18:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

English Wikisource with Mandarin Chinese books?

Can books that aren't in English like Category:Qin Ding Qian Lu be used at the English Wikisource without a translation? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

they tend to discourage it. is this not the right one? [4] ?? or [5] i talked to some mandarin wikisourcers at wikimania. (about rule of the lesser term regrets) - if you cannot find the right language code they will incubate you at the main wikisource. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 20:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Books?

Hello Slowking4,

I'm interested in creating a Commons:WikiProject Books here on Wikimedia Commons to create a unified database of where users can find books 📚 that are in the public domain and create a collaborative project to help upload and organise these books better within Wikimedia Commons, do you think that this would be a good idea? Do you think that any of your Librarian friends would also be interested in working together with the rest of Wikimedia Commons to help scan books and upload them here? I think that a WikiProject Books should have a taskforce dedicated to contacting and working with librarians to scan more books that aren't on the internet today. I just want to hear/read your feedback before I'll draft the project. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Flag, Detroit, Mich. 1a35405v.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Flag, Detroit, Mich. 1a35405v.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Yours sincerely, — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 05:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

GLAM's and your status at Wikimedia DC

Hello 👋🏻 Slowking4,

I've been running into a bit of GLAM trouble especially with the British Museum and a few others lately, on your meta user page it said that you're affiliated with Wikimedia DC, how much affiliated? As in that you could send a rather "official looking" message? Due to some trouble from long ago this now haunts me with several GLAM's and I'm not sure if you have the right positions or anything to ask you to help me with this. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 16:43, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Donald Trung - well, i just went to an editathon at NARA. email them https://wikimediadc.org/wiki/Contact or message User:Ariel Cetrone (WMDC), she's great, and more diplomatic than me. Liam Wyatt also had some experience with BM - see also w:en:Wikipedia:GLAM/British Museum. cheers Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Well, I’m not sure how much authority you have to write “an official apology” or the sorts, you see I approached this bloke called Gary Ashkenazy (manymore) via e-mail, the first time was last year and I didn’t get a response, then almost a year later I approached him again and initially he seemed willing to donate his images, and for people interested in Chinese cash coins, pre-modern Korean coins, and Chinese charms this is kind of a big deal, not only does his website (Primaltrek) have more information about those subjects than literally any other English language website on the internet (at the time), but it also has images of most variants, enough even to write an authoritive catalogue on the subjects even. While talking about the value of his donation and how much it would mean to collectors worldwide (for reference his website is like www.chinaknowledge.de plus images to actually illustrate what’s being written), I casually mentioned about how I was globally banned a year prior and that Dirk Beetstra accused me of being a paid editor hired by him and started “removing any reference to his website” (such as here where a link was placed 5 years before I even used that source by someone else, and actually sourced most of the content in an article), I just said how while some people who like to get others banned by making up false accusations of paid editing and “an obvious COI” don’t care about content or verifiability I’m pretty sure that other will like his donation (note that those were the words I used in my e-mails to him, it's not to be taken personal by anyone here), I showed him that most of the links removed were placed by other people, and that the accusation was bad faith bogus, rather than being happy he started insulting me and saying how I “tarnished his reputation” and how he “doesn’t want to donate anything to a community who hates knowledge”, I then jokingly called him “Gary Ashkehytler” and haven’t heard anything from him since, I tried to apologise but he seems unresponsive to me. A few months later I approached the Asian numismatics department of the British Museum, first I contacted Dr. Helen Wang (and for reference sake, she uses Primaltrek A LOT in her blog and sometimes even her research), she just said how she had no time to donate and that it’s not really her field to donate to Wikimedia projects, no issue there, then when I approached others like Peter and John I suddenly started getting reactions like “Gary warned me about you, you won’t get the BM blacklisted” and “Gary said you would spam us, go away”, this problem extends beyond the British Museum, top experts in the field of Chinese numismatics such as Novak and Krause claimed that some Gary has “warned them about me”, experts in Vietnamese and Japanese numismatics haven’t said this yet, but as Gary Ashkenazy’s Primaltrek / Primal trek is literally the only English language online source on Korean coins, and as all experts in Chinese cash coins and Chinese charms I approached have gotten hostile I don’t know what to do, I am forced to get Images from Jean-Michel Moullec, I’m kind of happy that John Ferguson does want to donate scans of his collection and I’m still trying to convince User:Quistnix to donate scans of his Chinese coins and Chinese charms to Wikimedia Commons. Could you please e-mail ｢chinesecharms@gmail.com｣ and try to write “an official looking apology” maybe even “on behalf of voluntary contributors of Wikimedia projects”, and whatever you do do NOT mention me as I think he’s still upset about me calling him “Gary Ashkehytler” or maybe because of how his website was removed here, I just want this sustained campaign of cyberbullying to end, I saw how he did this too to fellow CoinTalk.com member Loong Siew, and I just want to be able to talk to experts in Chinese numismatics without this to haunt me, I don’t even know which experts he approached, heck I used David Hartill’s book more as a source back then than Primaltrek yet Hartill’s book didn't get blacklisted, w:en:User:Davidhartill donated half of his book to Wikipedia and it became a major article which was split into more very important articles, if you can manage to also convince Gary Ashkenazy (manymore) to donate his images that would be great, but honestly I would avoid using them after these experiences because of how he treated me, even if he would offer me money I would rather eat a dirty shoe 👞, especially after how he treated me. But I care about the readers more than anything and if he chooses to rather work with other people so be it, but I don't want to constantly have to w:en:WP:PROXYING to try to contact people like the British Museum or experts, heck otherwise try to convince the British Museum that they won't get blacklisted over donating their images. I'm just sick 😷 of being treated as a pariah by the people I once respected over a non-sensical accusation of “paid editing”. Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:20, 29 June 2018 (UTC x)

Note that I do not blame anyone other than myself, I overreacted by calling him "Gary Ashkehytler", but he is still upset over the other things too. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:21, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

sometimes, "too much information" about the wikipedia clown car is not helpful. emailing people is a low yield process, better to meet face to face and build some confidence. and some images used in articles to grow click throughs. you could put a request on the GLAM/British Museum page. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Well, I asked Ariel Cetrone, but as we're both banned from that space I don't think that I can ask them and neither can you, let's just hope that if someone else asks them that they're more willing to donate, I actually read through their catalogue and almost all "missing coins" from Wikimedia Commons are there. Cheers. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:47, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Books and stuff

Now that you're online, you still haven't given your opinion on WikiProject Books 📚, it could be a cross-wiki project with Wikisource members helping out too, as I'm way too busy with other projects I haven't been able to work on it, but a Russian uploader of .pdf files (Butko) has already expressed an interest in joining, or should I asked your opinions on the draft when it's more developed? I find it odd how there are so many books in the InternetArchive that aren't "backed up" to Wikimedia Commons, many of which are very useful. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:51, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

not interested in wikibooks, low admin count - looks like wikinews, a failed wiki. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

You misread me, not Wikibooks, WikiProject Books about finding online sources for books and collaborating to import them, isn't Wikibooks like a "write your own cook book"-blog? Well, Wikivoyage is more blog-like, in fact it's a blog, Wikinews is where failed journalists go who's writing isn't even worthy for their auntie's Facebook timeline (anyone reading this from those projects, these are just jokes), however you import books and stuff too for Wikisource and thought that you would know of a few online libraries. Or is that Wikibooks? I honestly never see anything from that website, but this WikiProject is mostly about .pdf and .djvu files 📁. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:27, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

oh, part of structured data? i could give some feedback, but process improvement requires coding. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:10, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

By the way, why haven't you ever tried to become an English Wikisource admin? I think that you're either the most active or second most active person on that project, you're basically "the Fæ of Wikisource". --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

do not need the tools, not a task flow i want to do. and i do not like the practice of many admins, hence "deletion before collaboration". Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:10, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Photos of public domain artworks

Hello, I came across these two photographs of yours while clearing a maintenance category: File:Our Lady of Jerusalem 075200.JPG and File:The Magnolia Blossom 075251.JPG. The problem both files have is that they use the template {{Licensed-PD-Art}} with only one parameter. The public domain status of the artwork is given, but the template also needs the license of the photographic reproduction. Since you added this template after the initial uploads, I presume you wanted to license the photographs separately for jurisdictions where that's possible, so could I ask you to put what license you intended for the photographs? Or you could even remove that template and just stick with {{PD-Art}} if you don't want to make a claim of copyright on the photograph, though perhaps it might be better for re-users to use something like CC0 to cover all the bases (especially with The Magnolia Blossom since the photo includes the frame). Thanks in advance! clpo13_(talk) 19:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

File:The Magnolia Blossom 075251.JPG

Hi there, and sorry for bugging you with adminy details. I've come across this photo because it is missing a personal free licence in the "Licensed-PD" template. While the painting is out of copyright, we also need a licence from you for the entire photograph. Please add a free licence of your choice as a second parameter: {{Licensed-PD |1=... |2=<your licence>}}. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

i generally do not license photos of artworks that are PD. it's like licensing xerox copies. but for this one since you insist. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 18:56, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. The only problem here was the picture frame. Had you zoomed onto the canvas, PD-art would've been sufficient, but we have this policy that 3d frames included in a photograph make it qualify for a copyright of its own. De728631 (talk) 16:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

i was afraid you were going down that impossible task. as per my comments here Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2017/02#The_copyright_issue_with_3D_features_in_photos?, be aware, there is little case law to base your precautions on, and no one cares enough about frame copyright to actually document it. and there are thousands of photos of frames from wiki loves art here (say from the Louvre). and here is a case where it took five years to crop the frame Commons:Deletion requests/File:Leo Gestel dame met sigaret 1911.jpg - so no, sorry do not care about frame copyright, i have far more important tasks to do. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 15:30, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm totally with you when it comes to the frame issue, but why did you use {{Licensed-PD-Art}} in the first place? This template is explicitely for photographs of PD works that get a non-PD licence of their own, so it looked like you did intend to licence your photograph. Next time you may just want to keep the simple{{PD-art}}. De728631 (talk) 15:41, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

File:306-NT-933-A-4.tif

Hi, Could you please provide the source, and give a better name? Thanks, Yann (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

ok, i moved it. as for the source, i would refer you to this discussion [6]. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 22:32, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

A Stalin for you!

	A Stalin for you!
	If anyone can save this image I suppose it's you. Yes, I just figured this would be an innovative way of using wikilove. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Could you please...

.. [7]. Thanks, --Arnd (talk) 20:02, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:A Garden Path SAAM-1983.26 1.jpg

Copyright status: File:A Garden Path SAAM-1983.26 1.jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:A Garden Path SAAM-1983.26 1.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.

Jcb (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Could you clarify something for me

Perhaps you could clarify something; I've been out hiking, taking photos and admittedly I am tired. You said on AN: “for a six month consensus building, tagging all the anti's. we have the passage of time, and a new selling point: you have a user advising GLAMs to use GFDL 1.2/CC-NC as the functional equivalent of a "wikipedia only + NC" license. after all alamy has not stolen a GFDL image yet. (the GLAMs are astonished but do not take it up, because the tactic is too arcane and paradoxical.)”

To me this reads as though it would be harder for the proposal to garner support as alamy is less likely to steel a GDFL image. Again I admit I may be reading this backwards but could you clarify what you said for me? Thank you in advance, -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 00:08, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

sorry about the convoluted compound sentence.

so, try a six months AfC round2 discussion to sound out the anti's and ask if there is anything that would change their vote.

GLAM's typically put NC on everything because they are worried that their content will "go on a t-shirt"

a CC license might well have this happen, after all, aftermarket resellers have abused CC-BY images, i.e. Commons:Village_pump#Using_images_with_CC_license, and [8] (there has been no such abuse with a GFDL yet)

therefore, using a GFDL license, may maintain more control on derivative reuses of content. this should appeal to content creators and institutions with concerns about reuse.

this downstream control of reuse, tends to strike against the "free to use" ethos of the commons. we are now encumbering reuse by GFDL.

we have an ideological conflict between "free to use" and "equivalent free license" Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. That clears that up well. I was reading through the opposition comments this morning and I agree with this one, the “policy would be applied only when the uploader is the copyright holder.” I would think then those GLAM institutions which would still require a GFDL would be satisfied. Do you think that would satisify GLAM institutions while still upholding the ideal that if you are the copyright holder we require it published under a free license?

On a related point, this has had me re-reading the full texts of these license. By my reading of Free Art License/Licence Art Libre (FAL/LAL) “You can make reproductions and distribute this license verbatim (without any changes).” That seems to have the same inherent problems as a GFDL license. Would you say I am wrong? Thank you for your earlier clarifications. That made it quite easy to understand. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

yes, you found how the FAL has a verbatim clause (which is an impediment to reuse irl such as t-shirt). the problem being that license interpretation is full of nuance, beyond simple equivalence. you have many wordings with many readings. i don't know what will satisfy GLAMs; they seem to be alternating between greed and envy. GFDL is an option they have not considered, it is an historically anomaly of the free software movement. the true believers in the sharing scholarship are rare (i.e. w:David Ferriero). Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:19, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I don't have experience working with GLAM institutions unfortunately. As I sit here though I think that if a proposal-however well thought out and mature it may be-is put up saying all licenses for photos other then CC and PD are not free licenses and therefor are is an antithesis to this project the proposal would be shot down as taking a maximalist approach and unacceptable. Even if preexisting uploads are grandfathered and even if photos can still be uploaded with GFDL, FAL, or whatever reaches consensus in the future can still be uploaded as long as the uploader is not the content creator. I still can't think of a way to word such a proposal in a manor that seams reasonable not only in it's merits but also on it's face. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 02:32, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

you should find a local GLAM and try to work with them, it's fun. i would say mark some licenses as historical, superceded, and not to be used. the GFDL and FAL were good for their time, but are not understood by reusers, therefore impairing "free to use". that impairment can be gamed. it is a pragmatic approach which does not sway many ideologues here. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

That's a good idea. There are local institutions I should reach out to. I don't quite know how to approach them at the moment but that is a skill that can be learned. I would think the collections of most institutions can fit into {{PD-Old}} albeit with more accurate templates. I'm unfamiliar with the ability to mark some licenses as historical, superceded, and not to be used. I have to admit with as many licenses as I've reviewed I've never come across that but that is probably because of my unfamiliarity to working with GLAM collections.

It's a shame there were/are users who gamed the system. And i'm sure in 2006 and for a time afterwords those GFDL and FAL had a place but they are back door NC licenses. I wouldn't have an issue with GLAM institutions requiring them but for creations of individual users in 2018 they are long due to be retired. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 03:32, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

well here is some help m:Best practices in building a content partnership with a cultural institution or here [9] they have also moved on to FB. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:49, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

COM:AN

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators noticeboard#Videoplasty. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

*sigh* I usually appreciate and agree with your comments. If only you could be less sarcastic... Regards, Yann (talk) 17:57, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Yann -- when you talk about tone, then you give the game away: it is all about the speech, and not about the conduct. i would be a lot less sarcastic if you would put a lot of space between your conduct and the conduct of INeverCry. cheers. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 20:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

You can say the same thing with different words, that's all. And I don't understand why you bring INC here. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:47, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

because the behavorial negative example is a bright line. you indefinite blocked an editor by the "seat off your pants", a behavior trait of this blocked admin. i sure hope you are not socking to delete files. a standard of practice of "block talk page" only after talk page abuse, would be a good idea, wouldn't you agree? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Image without license

File:David goolrick 7290003.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 23:05, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

File:David goolrick 7290001.jpg

dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ català ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ hrvatski ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ íslenska ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 23:05, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Expiry of GWToolset user group memberships

There is a proposal on the Bureaucrat's noticeboard to automatically expire GWT memberships after one year unless the user requests an extension. Please add your views and suggestions to the discussion. The reasonably informal process for getting access to GWT access will remain as is.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Revi. 15:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Louis Pasteur image source

The image I scanned was not from a book but a single piece of paper. I found this when I looked in the old postcard boxes in a bookshop in Brussels. I often spend some hours mining the miscelanious pile of postcards and other pictures to find something usefull to upload. There where 3 exactly the same pictures in the box. I bougth on of them. There is a clue to the publishing house. On the left side there is the mention: Hélio Aulard, Paris On internet I can find some works of this publishing house: https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/auction-team-breker/catalogue-id-breker10009/lot-7f289e18-9c28-412b-8e33-a6760171bc3f and https://www.abebooks.co.uk/Nus-Acad%C3%A9miques-Nature-na-Helio-Aulard/1289466138/bd I suspect it is fr:Alphonse Aulard a known French historian/publisher who probably reprinted the picture of Louis Pasteur as a collectible for a scrapbook. But this is speculation. Shall I put as source: Publication of Hélio Aulard, Paris?Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:59, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

i do sympathise. but you realize how bad the scholarship is: "i found it at a boot sale"? you should have a place where scholars can find the item, or it is not verifiable. you realize how many newbies get their scans deleted, when they say "scan from book"? they just deleted Madela's diary with more verification. we have multiple prints with multiple provenances. you are now speculating on the book source. why don't you state facts about this item in the description / object history (in photograph template) the reprint publisher matters less than the origin of the photographic print. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:35, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

You clearly mis the whole discussion on Commons:Village pump#Wich Nadar fotografer? where the conclusion is that several of the same images come from the same photografic plate sometime around 1890. The photografer and original source is not in doubt and is PD. [10] By the way: A lot of old images come from postcards and not from academic works. Wich publisher reprinted the image is not really relevant for the licence, (he only added the name and 1822 - 1895) but even there I found it: Hélio Aulard, Paris. Most of other images in Category:Photographs of Louis Pasteur by Nadar are scanned bij historic collections (libraries etc), but private scans of original printed material (postcards etc) are as valuable as official ones.Smiley.toerist (talk) 07:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Don't do it

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Copyright&diff=314089619&oldid=314088612

Your goal has nearly been achieved, this isn't needed anymore. Don't risk your account. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 06:20, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

close the loophole, if you do not want editors to speak of the loophole. or do you want the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to be shown the door like the MacArthur foundation? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:39, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Stop worrying about the loophole. That's about as much as I can say. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:04, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks -- Stapmoshun (talk) 02:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Dr. Heidi Cullen.jpg

File:Dr. Heidi Cullen.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!

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

Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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

Affected:

File:NoMuslimBanEver 250057.jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, B dash (talk) 10:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Nadar

Hi, Do not war edit with me. I provided the evidence on the move summary, as I also mentioned in the talk page. And there never was any one called "Félix Nadar" anyway. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

are you going to collaborate about the various files and sources, or are you going to impose your judgement over and above the New York public library? reliable sources may call Nadar "Félix Nadar" [11], [12]. who are you to assert no one was called that? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 14:31, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

GLAMwiki Toolset

Apparently you're one of the few users 👥 who can use the GLAMwiki Toolset and I actually have a very long import list from the Eoropeana Collections which would probably require months of my time ⌚ to manually import all the images one-by-one tediously adding similar source URL's and adding them to the same maintenance category, but as you can use the GLAMwiki Toolset, how likely would it be for you to import a list of images from Europeana.eu with it? I'd ask Fæ but I don't think 🤔 that he'll help with an import of less than 1000 (a thousand) images, and a lot of the other users with GLAMwiki Toolset privileges are inactive. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:05, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

glamwikitoolset had such promise. i've been using pattypan, gwtoolset permission taken away. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 10:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Does pattypan have the same web 🕸 importing capabilities as the gwtoolset? Specifically for a large scale Europeana.eu import? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 17:43, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

well, i have downloaded and then uploaded 1000s. i hear that a whitelist is necessary for batch import. have not done it. here is the learning patterns m:Learning patterns/Uploading files using Pattypan; m:Learning patterns/Data transfers to Wikimedia Commons: Sharing institutional archives. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 20:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

So it doesn't work on mobile 📱 devices like my phablet (Microsoft Lumia 950 XL)? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:00, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

don't know, i stay on laptop. mobile app it one at a time based. does your tablet have java? pattypan is a java script. or you could ask permission for GWtoolset. Commons:GLAMwiki_Toolset#Instructions -- Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 21:08, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

I think that Microsoft Edge can render Java, anyhow I will follow the instructions once I'll find the time. Thanks for the advice. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:21, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked soon

العربية ∙ বাংলা ∙ čeština ∙ словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ македонски ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ slovenščina ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Commons.

Stop editwarring, removing information, and adding wrong ones. This is the last warning. Yann (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

one day a scholar of French photography will clean up the mess you've made, and it will not be vandalism either. do not lie on my talk page. rather present reliable sources, not your pseudo-intellectual speculation. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:ARBRES.PNG

Copyright status: File:ARBRES.PNG

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:ARBRES.PNG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

File tagging File:ARBRES.PNG

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:ARBRES.PNG. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:ARBRES.PNG]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Ju Ta 17:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States – Back for 2018!

This user participated in Wiki Loves Monuments 2018.

Want to show your participation in Wiki Loves Monuments 2018? Add {{User Wiki Loves Monuments 2018}} to your userpage!

Hello! Last year you contributed to Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in the United States. Thanks to people like you it was a great success, with over 1,400 people contributing over 8,000 photos of cultural and historic sites from all over the country. Hundreds of these photos now help illustrate Wikipedia articles, improving our open knowledge about United States history, culture, and heritage.

I'm pleased to say that we're back this year with Wiki Loves Monuments 2018 in the United States, and I'd like to welcome you to participate once again in the event. Check out our updated event page for more information. The event runs similar to last year with some small but exciting changes: improved state guides, an interactive map, and a larger prize pool! Like last year, you'll be able to upload your photos of any registered historical site in the United States through the end of September (even if the photos were taken before this month).

Once again, thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2017, and we hope to see you again in this year's event! If you'd like to respond to this message directly, please do so on on my talk page. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 11:45, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

It is done

Commons:Village pump/Proposals#No longer allow GFDL for some new uploads.

Just asking, would you mind relicensing your existing uploads? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 13:34, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

well done. i see you have grandfathered older uploads, as the change is effective October 15. given that it is a custom template, a retroactive redo is possible. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:03, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, Slowking4. If you are still wary about uploading hi-res images in the future, please bear in mind about software apps that help reduce scale of images, like InfraView and GIMP. Also, as I suggested months ago, you can re-upload same images but in different licences, smaller size, and different files. --George Ho (talk) 23:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Commons usually prefers having the best image resolution, exceptions exist and although not all media files are of the same quality (as not everyone works with the same equipment), there's no reason to self-sabotage your own work so educators who happen to need to ask money for their project to finance it will have to use interior resolutions of files that could've had a better representation. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

there are plenty of monetary reasons, it is just people here think CC for one resolution CC for all. many photographers are seeking some micro-payment elsewhere, since support for content creators is non-existant from the WMF. i.e. https://www.patreon.com/funcrunch -- Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 10:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I realized that GFDL-only content is no longer permitted, but a GFDL-content can be still be dual-licensed. ...Or maybe I'm wrong. George Ho (talk) 21:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

yes, i think this will work template:GFDL-CC-triple. but the hi resolution NC on flickr, with a patreon, and a low resolution commons pure version, may provide a micro-payment stream. but the dream of more w:Weegees has faded. can't make a living doing photography. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 23:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I've added a 4.0 option to that: {{GFDL-CC-triple-4.0}}. Making a living doing photography is indeed a faded dream now that everyone and their mother is a photographer. Photography used to be hard and a decent camera expensive. Not anymore. I heard a photographer complain once he had been declined to do a job for Above & Beyond. He had made them a more than fair offer, but someone else did it for free. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 10:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

thanks, photography is still hard, the gig economy is cruel, and WMF is burning out photographers by lack of support. but hey, we have an infinite supply of selphies. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

No we don't.. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:54, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

hey that's great, you ca help him out here: Commons:Village_pump#I_need_1000_deleted_selfies,_to_develop_selfie_detection_in_the_Commons_Android_app -- Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:01, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:L'ORCHESTRE.PNG

Copyright status: File:L'ORCHESTRE.PNG

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:L'ORCHESTRE.PNG. 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.

Ju Ta 08:59, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Kelly Doyle 6173528.jpg

File:Kelly Doyle 6173528.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!

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

Kellyjeanne9 (talk) 15:40, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

File:BBC 100 Women of 2016 Edit-a-Thon 085630.jpg

File:BBC 100 Women of 2016 Edit-a-Thon 085630.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!

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

Kellyjeanne9 (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

COM:ANU#Slowking4 again

I mentioned you there. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 05:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

COI

Thank you for your comments and for showing me Carol Highsmith's wiki page. I was not familiar with her story or the Getty lawsuit. I have had qualms about Getty Images from the beginning: how is it possible that Mr. Getty Images was able to "take" every photo around the world in the last 160 years? When you see that a Getty Image cost $499 for standard editorial rights, look at my photos of Wayne Wang, Joe Rosenthal and Gerald Nachman: cost on wikimedia: $0! Since I never considered myself as a "professional" photographer, I have nothing to defend and got a giggle out of someone creating a discussion about me. I've been called worse: someone once thought I was an artist! And regarding Joe Rosenthal--why is it that there are no good photos of him? Everyone knows his images of the flag raisers on Iwo Jima, and he was always surrounded by Pulizer Prize winners. Ok, so there's a couple Getty Images of Joe by Hume Kennerly. I was dismayed to see that David posed Joe holding a gigantic framed print of the flag raising. Joe's cane is on the porch behind him--yes, that was Joe's cross to bear: half of his life was explaining that he didn't set that photo up! News photographers are forbidden to pose a news photo, and he always said, if he did pose the men, he would have made sure their faces were showing. Very hard to identify someone by a few fingers of one hand! Thank you for your comments! --Edmunddantes/Nancy

Just curious, but how does one identify a person by only their fingers? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 10:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

a paradox - the same way they identified people in a photo [13] (and why i don't like posed photos) this File:Joe Rosenthal, 1990.jpg is much better than that [14], or [15]. how do they identify editors by their double secret duck test? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:13, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Concerning the latter I say that someone just randomly said "w:en:WP:BEANS" once without even reading "the policy" and then it became an unwritten policy that the duck 🦆 test may now only be explained off-wiki which kind of defeats the purpose of transparency. I know that the bloke at Iwo Jima was misidentified, it's quite common for both people and things to be misidentified in photographs.

By the way, are all .djvu files of books 📚 in Wikimedia Commons? I wanted to request a bot to organise all new uploads with this file type for a books project but I'm not certain where I can get the statistics on the content of files on Wikimedia Commons by file type. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 12:37, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

better to use Template:Book although the categories are a mess. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:49, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

there is also Category:DjVu files (the help is not very helpful) Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 22:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Why do publishers flop photos?

Why do publishers flop photos? Reverend Jim Jones doesn't look any better on the left or the right. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/22/daniel-flynn-what-san-francisco-travelers-wont-see-at-the-harvey-milk-airport-terminal/ user:Edmunddantes

well - they like images looking into the frame. (same reason we like left side head shot for article thumbnail) some processes mirror the image, like the negative, but it's all in the software now. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 21:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:JAMES HOGE. D. D..PNG

Copyright status: File:JAMES HOGE. D. D..PNG Template:Autotranslate Jcb (talk) 22:04, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you!

I offer some stroopwafels in return. I'm sorry I missed meeting you at WikiConference North America, too. Thank you for the link to Pattypan. I'll be sharing this and all I learned at the conference with fellow staff members at Cleveland Public Library next month. It was both overwhelming and inspiring. Hamaxides (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Nathan hill 5200584.jpg

Template:Idw/layout Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:23, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Grumpy cat

Which grumpy cat photo is in File:Community heath.png? I'm asking because a photo with a woman holding a sign was recently nominated (or already deleted) with (I think) the same photo. If that grumpy cat photo actually has a free license, we'll be able to keep/undelete that. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:11, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

yeah, i think i was being insouciant, after the deletion of this one [16] Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grumpy Cat Berlin.JPG, may take a while to find.

this one was kept File:Grumpy Cat by Gage Skidmore.jpg or File:Cool Cat Barnstar 01p.png Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:15, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

WTF?? That DR refers to a photo that INC had on their user page that supposedly was deleted, that may be it. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:13, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

A post-Flickr Commons

As soon the number of images that could be imported from SmugMug's Flickr will be severely reduced (a fact that you seem well aware of), what other websites could we use "to replace Flickr"? There are simply no tools to import en masse from websites like Europeana.eu like we have Flickr2Commons, is there even another photo-sharing website with licensing akin to Flickr?

I think that what happened to Flickr was inevitable, after Verizon sold Flickr to SmugMug (a company no-one even ever heard of) it was clear that such a small operation could never sustain the size of Flickr. I actually thought that Flickr would've gone bankrupt but they're attempting to make it profitable but I don't think that the service will exist beyond this decade. We've also lost Panoramio and like with Flickr there used to be a whole class and culture of Wikimedia Commons users 👥 who made it their sole goal to import images from the website. Is there even an alternative to Flickr? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)

(talk page stalker) Template:Ping w:Pixabay, Skitterphoto.. But those won't be able to replace Flickr. Actually the next thing seems to be.. Wikimedia Commons. "You are here". Commons could replace part of Flickr, technically. Storage, bandwidth, at least we're somewhere in the same league (which Pixabay is probably not). Flickr even lacks some features that Commons already has or could be created. In terms of licensing, many people just don't give a damn. They want to share the pics they took at the zoo. They don't give a rat's ass about copyright. CC BY-SA? Whatever, fine, just upload my damn pictures so I can show them to my friends! Also the social part is something Commons could do (and to some degree, already does), unlike for example archive.org. And our scope could be interpreted or (if it must) be redefined. So what stands in our way?

Half a dozen of deletionist admins.

Yeah, sounds pretty stupid when I put it like that, doesn't it? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that the Deletionist admins stand at fault here but rather the wider Deletionist culture that both justifies and perpetuates their presence. Social sharing for Wikimedia Commons has been rejected several times because it would put some social networks over others (or would you dare say that the Facebook is more important than VKontakte or MySpace?), I think that we should be actively recruiting photographers and educating them about the project scope especially since Wikimedia Commons is probably the second largest repository of free images after SmugMug's Flickr.

But what are we doing to actively recruit high quality photographers? Maybe we could campaign on Flickr. Maybe we could create a generic "share" button that can work with services the same way users could share photographs from their mobile telephone's internal storage. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:22, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

internet archive tells me they are on it. so an IAuploader for photo collections would be in order. flickr has the lowest barrier to entry uploader, so the beginners will start there. pros will pay up or go to IA. they fact that we have an imagination deficit is not going to change. it is a common leadership failure to try to increase quality by increasing scrap rate (deletion). it is not a professional way of managing a process. but culture change will take a long time. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 19:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

My issue is that almost always when I click on a random photograph from Wikipedia such as File:Small race in Takhtakupir.jpg it turns out to be from Flickr. I think that one of the reasons why Wikimedia Commons won't acquire as much photographers is because one needs to know a lot about copyright © before they can upload their images here, but as this is the goal of Wikimedia Commons this bar will never be lowered. But I don't think that our issue really is with getting as much photographers as possible (although that would be a nice bonus, content-wise), it is with getting as much talented and well-equipped photographers as Flickr. Maybe Wikiconferences could give them awards? After "the fall of Flickr" I think that we might experience a drastic drop in daily uploads after first a huge spike now to save the content from that platform. But Template:Tl files still make up around 40% (forty percent) of images on Wikimedia Commons so we do have a very active culture of photographers. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:43, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Slowking4: Increasing quality by increasing the deletion rate can work.. but only if the material you are deleting is taking up resources (disk space, bandwidth, presentation space) of some kind that are causing a bottleneck for better stuff to come in. To decide what goes on the main page or on top of an article, you scrap the lower quality stuff. But obviously, deletionist admins (and nominators) achieve no such thing. They save no disk space and if bandwidth were an issue, WMF should track which images are abusively hogging bandwidth. Since they don't, I assume they don't care.

Template:Ping social stuff: Commons doesn't need to connect with Facebook. A social platform (or at least some social features) could exist within Commons.

About the deletionist culture, you are half right. Take a look at the US. Once Trump was elected, all the racists and misogynists who usually keep quiet and don't even vote suddenly crawled out of their cave. Suddenly they feel they have a voice. They amplify each other. And recently I see at least one deletionist admin actively attacking neutral and inclusionist admins. I see non-deletionist regulars dropping like flies and I'm growing increasingly worried about a good admin who hasn't shown a sign of life in 3 weeks and isn't responding to my mails. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:02, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

in my experience, i have never seem scrap rate work. rather, need to increase quality by quality circles - scaleably sorting, triaging and improving license quality. randomly deleting, as others randomly upload random license quality items, will not improve quality. and there is no scarcity of storage. deletion does not remove it merely makes them invisible to editors but not admins. and yeah, the non-leaders fight first those who are a threat to their misrule. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:07, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately the scrapping culture you described isn't even limited to Wikimedia Commons, it seems to be the de facto dominant culture in Wikipedia's as well where often the deletion of content is valued higher than adding it or even just splitting it. I add articles from the Dutch-language Wikipedia to my watchlist all the time and the only "non-vandalistic" changes I ever see are established editors removing large pieces of text with only the edit summary "trim", adding information requires a lot of research and attribution while removing information is as easy as the click of a button. The Dutch Wikipedia today is basically just a collection of often sourceless articles (because any attribution is “spam”) that would almost all be considered “stubs” in the English-language Wikipedia, I remember there being a large discussion in w:nl:Wikipedia:De Kroeg started by a user last year that looked at a page about a soap opera character that was “too long” and trying to discuss with other editors how to trim this article down because they found everything to be too relevant to each other so they had to cut over half of the article down in order to “trim it properly”, Wikimedians tend to be minimalistic because content destruction is easier than content creation. At Wikimedia Commons copyright © violations are an easy category of files that should be excluded but “out of scope” is very hard to define and some admins delete anything they come across as “out of scope” or “spam” including works donated by universities. Some people tend to think that by deleting anything which is of a lesser quality that the project will become more attractive for “higher quality content creators” but I would argue that we should create category trees for high quality images that makes those more easy to discover rather than just delete the unique and useful files of lesser quality.

What happened to Flickr is this exact same mentality, they want to get rid of mostly low quality images and are shooting themselves in the foot while doing so, it's a shame that perhaps (unless the Internet Archive steps in) almost all non-Creative Commons files will be lost forever. I personally just don't see what the benefit of Deletionism is, you don't improve the quality of a painting by Rembrandt by burning a van Gogh, or a Da Vinci by burning a Picasso (or vice versa in either cases). But unfortunately there seems to be a large user class that believes that “less is more” but here at Wikimedia projects that basically means “less education is (somehow) more education”. A part of the problem is that many content creators don't speak up, they view creating educational content as a fun hobby but know that debating those that want to delete the content will suck the fun right out of it, comparatively those that love deleting content and excluding people have a lot of fun proposing those things so they’re the ones having fun.

Why doesn't anyone ever advertise Wikimedia Commons? I know that the Wikimedia Foundation doesn't care but its photographers should try to recruit new people. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:08, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ping Get rid of the deletionist culture and deletionist admins first. Then advertise. I'm working on something fun (and you know my sense of humor, so I'm gonna piss off some people). - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 02:04, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Raoul dufy la plage et lestacade de trouville.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Wcam ([[User talk:Wcam|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion

You should visit UDR more often.

It's fun. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 03:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

can't throw me in that briar patch. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:15, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

There's actually not a whole lot of people responding there. Requests can be declined simply because nobody supported them. I've made quite some requests lately. I think it's the only way to make wrong deletions visible. Which is needed to ever be able to hold anyone accountable. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 03:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

thanks for trying, but not much accountability and people have given up engaging with the summary process. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Just curious, but if a file 📁 gets deleted as "an unfree file" and then gets re-uploaded by another (unbeknowing) user who provides all the proof of copyright, would this file be eligible for speedy deletion because it was previously deleted and then be appealed at the undeletion requests or would the onus lie of the nominator? I've seen quite a number of images of banknotes that were deleted over 5 (five) years ago that are in the public domain now but have refrained from doing so as these images would then be re-uploads. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Which bank notes? I don't mind starting another undeletion request but I would need more info in order to do that. Abzeronow ([[User talk:Abzeronow|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:31, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Reply These were uploaded here, I can't remember by whom but at the time it wasn't 50 (fifty) years since they were published (Vietnamese money needs to have been published at least 50 (fifty) years ago before they enter the public domain), however I can't remember the file names or who uploaded them (I came across this over a year ago and haven't bothered to write it down anywhere), but honestly I would prefer to upload these myself as I would be able to immediately add them to Wikipedia's. Anyhow if you can find them I'd be happy to see an undeletion of those files. Probably files like these should be listed at a "Category:Files to undelete in 20XX" maintenance category (which do exist, but aren't nearly used as much as they should be). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I can't seem to find anything based on searching "dong 1964" in Deletion Requests. If Vietnamese currency becomes PD 50 years after publication, then you're probably safe to upload. Abzeronow ([[User talk:Abzeronow|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ping I'll search for them. If I can't find them either, reupload would be fine. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ping Commons:Deletion requests/Banknotes of Vietnam2 probably. You or Template:U can start a UDR so an admin can check the dates on the file pages. You can also ask about the date on File:5.000 đồng mặt sau.jpg and File:5.000 đồng mặt trước.jpg (from Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Banknotes of Vietnam). - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 21:28, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Started an UDR on the two 1966 banknotes I found in that first mass DR. Abzeronow ([[User talk:Abzeronow|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ping how did you know that for example File:500 đồng mặt sau.jpg isn't also older than 1968? Because if you know, I haven't found the DR Donald Trung was referencing and I could search a bit more. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:37, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

yeah, hard to find deleted items, since they do not archive very well. not much interest in reviewing deletion process. they rely on the memory of inclusionists (pretty ad hoc) i would search here [17] with some keywords or if you remember uploader account look at xtools which includes deleted files [18]. if you cannot find them, then upload new image, with better license. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 00:52, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

I search "all public logs" before I do an undelete request. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File:20+xu+m%E1%BA%B7t+sau.jpg "Vietnamese 20 Xu (Cent)banknote back issued in 1966" was once under the description field. Abzeronow ([[User talk:Abzeronow|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 01:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

very good. i see there is Commons:Deletion requests/Banknotes of Vietnam and Commons:Deletion requests/Banknotes of Vietnam2. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ping how could I have forgotten about that? Too bad that trick usually doesn't work anymore nowadays. "Uploaded with UploadWizard" - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 16:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Christine-koubek 5200655.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

File:LE REMORQUEUR AU PONT DE CHATOU.PNG

Template:Autotranslate Coldcreation ([[User talk:Coldcreation|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:39, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:La Seine à Chatou .jpg

Template:Autotranslate Coldcreation ([[User talk:Coldcreation|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Advertising for Donald Duck (Anders And) on the tram in Copenhagen 1960.jpg

Template:Autotranslate — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 08:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Extended uploader

You should maybe request extended uploader.. I'm actually surprised you don't have it. The license review on the file above wasn't right. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 08:53, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Warning

Kindly cease and desist from adding Template:T2, instead add Template:T2 as you are not a License Reviewer. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 08:57, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Or apply for extended uploader so you can upload from Flickr with UploadWizard. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 09:05, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

there appears to be a conflict between License Reviewer, and extended uploader permissions. i don't think i did that, for this example File:Beach in San Remo 1949.jpg, i just used the upload wizard, and the upload wizard inserted the flickrreview license. no field to modify the license. FlickreviewR 2 did the review. upload wizard is very opaque on license grab, i rarely use it, but for this example, it found the duplicates. very opaque error message, with no link to show what uploader was trying to do. maybe you should file a bug. i see your abuse filter is also opaque, where you have a log, but minimal discussion. Commons talk:Abuse filter/Error reporting Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 14:41, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

No, when you uploaded File:Beach in San Remo 1949.jpg it was tagged "License review by non-image-reviewers, Flickr". Jeff G. inserted Template:Tl by hand and after that FlickreviewR 2 gave the review. With extended uploader, you can use UploadWizard directly to upload from Flickr. I don't know how you did what you did, you behave like an extended uploader I think, but you're not. Maybe your GWToolset somehow enables the flickr buttons. This may well be a bug. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:15, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

replicated the error with one example at right. apparently, when i use the upload from flickr using wizard, it bounces from a filter, then wait a few minutes, try again, and it goes through as reviewed. since when was flickr upload restricted to reviewers? where was that discussion? i have ignored upload wizard since it is so owned by WMF, but this is broken. i was uploading from flickr before the extended uploaders was created. maybe you should disable the upload from flickr button, i have no idea how to do that. i use flickr2commons normally, i will return to that. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 15:49, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

You should not even see the "Share images from Flickr" button. You don't have to be a license reviewer to get it, only an extended uploader. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 10:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

This is a bug, this should fix it. Please clear your cache and try again. --Steinsplitter ([[User talk:Steinsplitter|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:09, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

nope. the upload wizard still gives error message, "You do not have the permission to review images, this edit was therefore disabled." nothing about extended uploader, and great how the beta testing restricting this tool has been going on for a year. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 16:22, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ping I actually am an extended uploader, never used UL to upload from Flickr but decided to give it a try. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Sigh, looks like the old "hack" no longer works. Imho this should be fixed in the UploadWizard itself, it is trackd here: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T100062 but nobody is working on it... --Steinsplitter ([[User talk:Steinsplitter|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

sorry, i strayed onto upload wizard. the indifferent maintenance is disappointing. i will go back to the editor maintained tools. no need to ask for permissions here when i have OAuth. Flickr2Commons seems to be working well. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:52, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Nobody is maintaining Flickr2Commons. Beware of uploading duplicates. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:11, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

the unmaintained flickr2commons works better than unmaintained Wizard, but use Wizard for duplicate detection, when flickr2commons bounces in non-discript way. (i hear, if you show Magnus some love, you get sporadic maintenance) Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 14:17, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Désirs SAAM-1974.45 1.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Ras67 ([[User talk:Ras67|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:06, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Explain why you revert my changes

This change is the first of 7 similar reverts of changes I made recently. I disagree. As a minimum, a comment to clarify why you are doing that is expected. Can you please explain what you find incorrect in such changes? -- Laddo ([[User talk:Laddo|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 11:57, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

see also Commons:Village_pump#Gender. do not introduce gender categorys without first a broad consensus. i will rollback all such changes to my watchlist. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Noted. I agree. Would be worth having a banner on such categories. Laddo ([[User talk:Laddo|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Hermann-becker-biedermeierpaar.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mutter Erde ([[User talk:Mutter Erde|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:15, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

UploadWizard breakage

I fixed the AbuseFilter that was preventing authorized users from using UploadWizard to import from Flickr. I'm amazed it was broken for 2 years and no one bothered to fix it! Kaldari ([[User talk:Kaldari|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:35, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Kaldari - thanks! (i'm not surprised.) Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Jean-Pierre Cassigneul La promenade.JPG

Template:Autotranslate whym ([[User talk:Whym|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 01:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:William Osler - S. Seymour Thomas 0029-0337-f01.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Abzeronow ([[User talk:Abzeronow|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:21, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:William Osler - S. Seymour Thomas 0029-0337-f01.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:32, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

user:Jcb, you realise this is already a DR? do you want me to convert it to a second concurrent DR? Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

No license since makes sure that the file will be deleted if there is still no license template after 7 days. This is independent from the regular DR. Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:37, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

ok, i will convert to a second DR and we can have a discussion. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:40, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Do not remove no license since unless you add a license. Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:42, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

do not tag a file "no license" when a DR is underway. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

You are mistaken. The absence of a license template is a demanding reason for deletion after 7 days regardless any ongoing DR. Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:51, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

you are mistaken, just act in the summary way as you always do. your pretensions at deletion theater are a lie. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:54, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Jcb ([[User talk:Jcb|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Essay

You probably don't want to link Commons:How Alamy is stealing your images (or link an old version). I was going to update it, but after three of my essays have been censored, what's the point. Also, Alamy and Getty are not entirely the same thing it would appear - although there are probably relations of some sort. But they're not the same. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:13, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

i link to it, because their pattern of behavior tends to cast doubt on their license claims, just as much as a flickr wash account. they can censor the essays but they cannot change the facts; i wish they would stop the "because getty". do not care about the corporate shell games, the mentality is the same, they want to "own it all". i wonder if the PRP people are willing dupes of getty, or working for getty? in the end it may not matter. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 15:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Unblock

Just curious, have you ever been unblocked on a Wikimedia project? and if so, how did you do it? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 06:19, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas 🎄

Hope 🤞🏻 that you're enjoying the holidays. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Spilt Milk 2008 NYR 01984 0103.jpg

Template:Autotranslate clpo13_(talk) 17:17, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

see that wasn't so hard. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 23:13, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Blanking user pages

Hello 👋🏻 Slowking4,

You seem to know a lot about the history of Wikimedia "communities" so I would like to ask you, when did the blanking of user pages (Mobile 📱) became a thing? And was it ever discussed with the community on any wiki before it became the de facto rule? Because I really can't find any policy or guideline that specifies that this should happen other than an essay claiming that it's not gravedancing (which it is). I just don't see any practical reason for it, especially if a user on Wikimedia Commons explain how they should be attributed on their user page. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:57, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

In fact the only reference I could find by searching it myself is this Wikipediocracy article. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:58, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

yeah, it is an admin practice grown out of ownership issues with user pages. the procedure calls for tagging, w:WP:SOCKTAG but among blocking admins is really blanking. they privilege their own anti-sock mission over any AGF for a sock or how it may appear to outsiders. no such vindictiveness for w:User:BetacommandBot and [19]]. so it goes. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 12:01, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I doubt it

If Common's admins want to delete them they will. BTW, did you see [20] and did you see the WSJ pick it up. I'da thunk he'd have resigned by now, but what do I know? Smallbones ([[User talk:Smallbones|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

yes, i saw your attempt at pulitzer. don't think you can right the ship of state single-handed. resume padding is penny ante here now. it is hump week here, and i guess it will be interims for the duration, and furloughed feds. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:00, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

You mean the pullet surprise?

Smallbones ([[User talk:Smallbones|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

well, maybe with a song... but not greatest...beware the rhino stampede. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 02:34, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Addressing the gender gap

Hello 👋🏻 Slowking4,

After finding this article (Internet Archive / Translation) about a user who called his Wikipedia block "the murder of his person" and how he noted about how quickly articles about female artists he wrote were being nominated for deletion I wonder if there are solid plans to try to address the content gender gap on Wikimedia projects, I was trying to collect more data on this, is it possible to check how many articles about male human beings have an image versus how many articles of female human beings have an article? I thought about using Wikidata as a metric, but from my experience those who create instances on Wikidata rarely add images and all edits tend to be done by bots who import data from Wikipedia's but not Wikimedia Commons, would an overlap in categories suffice for such a research? Are there official numbers by the Wikimedia Foundation available? I know that you're one of the leading users addressing the content gender gap and you often photograph notable women so maybe you'd be more aware of the numbers. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:47, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

a better translation, I think 🤔. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

At the Dutch-language Wikipedia events advocating the creation of articles on "WikiWomen".
At the Dutch-language Wikipedia events advocating the creation of articles on "WikiWomen".

I also noticed that there are a lot of events on various language versions of Wikipedia dedicated to "making the women in red blue" but I don't know if there is a photo challenge for photographing art created by females here on Wikimedia Commons. Are there any metrics for measuring how much art on Wikimedia Commons is created by female humans (excluding Wikimedia users, of course)? Do you think that a proposal for such a PhotoChallenge would be successful here on Wikimedia Commons. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:45, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

yes, i have been active helping Rosiestep at women in red, others at art+feminism and at WikiWomen's Collaborative. i have been known to upload images, and take pictures of notable women. they currently, just ask people to change licenses. logistics to do an upload drive or contest have not been done. % women biographies are queried at wikidata, w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Metrics/Wikidata

yes, notability is hard to establish for applied arts like jewelry; feminism is opposed as a POV; the bias against women is entrenched, as proven in the w:Talk:Donna_Strickland case. we have a core group of english editors moving the culture, but it is hard slogging. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)