Last modified on 9 September 2011, at 22:03

User talk:Assayer

Return to "Assayer" page.
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Assayer!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

Your taggingEdit

Tagging with nsd leads to speedy deletion (with a slightly delayed trigger). Now you tagged for the second time a series of images of Wilhelm Roth. Would not you agree that there are friendlier ways of asking the uploader for proof of permission? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Pieter, is there a 'friendlier' way than the routine outlined by WikimediaCommons? These files are missing evidence of permission, so I used the designated template and personally informed the uploader how to provide the required licenses. Rott's daughter maintains copyright of these files and since her full name and adress can be googled, she can easily be asked for permission. If her permission cannot be provided, I would even insist on speedy deletion rather than infringing her copyright.--Assayer (talk) 19:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
But of course there was permission. As has now been certified by OTRS. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Perfect. So nobody was harmed by my 'unfriendly' tagging!-) --Assayer (talk) 22:03, 9 September 2011 (UTC)