Last modified on 27 August 2014, at 15:32

User talk:Ellin Beltz

Return to "Ellin Beltz" page.

End of summer vacation, if I can get wifi, I'll be here - otherwise - see you in September!

English | Magyar | +/−

If you wrote before but cannot find the conversation, please see the Archives. >>>>>>

Questions about why your image is nominated for deletion?Edit

Licensing tutorial en.svg
You uploaded what to where? Oh mai!
  • Read this first!
  • Then read COM:L
  • Reply on the deletion nomination page
  • Replies left here have no effect on deletion nominations
Can I help you fix it?
Don't worry... Whatever it is, we can handle it!

Archived messagesEdit

For most archived messages, please see the link list below the sleeping cat at upper right hand corner of page. I archive when the message thread has stopped having activity and/or when the conversation is over.

A barnstar for you!Edit

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
The Admin's Barnstar is awarded to an administrator who made a particularly difficult decision or performed a tedious, but needed admin task.

Thank you for your admin actons! :) -- Steinsplitter (talk) 20:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

July 2014Edit

  • If you don't see your discussion and a few days have passed, please see the July 2014 archive, and leave your new message at the bottom of this page!

Copyright violationEdit

I have added DR for 1, 2 & 3 files due to copyright violation, and all DR tags have been removed by uploader without explanation. --AntonTalk 02:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Arctic circle.svgEdit

Hello. You tagged this file as having no source. Looking through the history it looks like the metadata was vandalised a few years ago, removing this info, or else it's in the original work this was derived from. You might want it have a look and restore the data. (I would do this but I'm travelling at the moment and that's a non-trivial thing to do from an iPad). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mike Peel, took the 'no source' tag off and fixed it with the source "CIA Fact Book." Thanks to Fæ, it is solved! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Great, glad it's sorted out. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Your input if you have the timeEdit

Ellin, If you had a moment, I was wondering if you'd care to have a look at a DR to let me know if the opening sources/statements are clear. I would just like to avoid a repeat of the Canadian Space Agency badge, where the central argument/evidence I was (attempting) to get across was lost in the subsequent discussion/noise. If you don't have the time, no worries, I know you're busy! Thanks. trackratte (talk) 04:18, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: File source is not properly indicated: File:Armenian Air Force roundel.svgEdit

Hi, I've added a source, you can add a best one if you need. As per license, the image is my own work. --F l a n k e r (talk) 19:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi F l a n k e r, Tag removed. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, cheers, --F l a n k e r (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

My comments at COM:AN/BEdit

Hey Ellin, don't take my comments at COM:AN/B to be including you, because they don't in the slightest. I just like seeing otherwise unproblematic content being deleted simply because of who created it. This is not something that we generally practice here on Commons, but seems to be the modus operandi of some (but not all) on English Wikipedia. All I ask is that we look at things objectively and not get dragged into hysteria. :) russavia (talk) 14:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi russavia: Thanks for the update and I agree that hysteria is bad, I just don't see it in this case. I've commented over there to not clutter over here with the details! Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictures Bert van LooEdit

Hi Ellen, I noticed you deleted the pictures of Bert van Loo. I can assure you that he personally gave me these pictures, that he took himself, from his own sculptors for use in Wikipedia. I send the written permission he gave me to Could you be so kind to undelete his pictures please? Or please help me to provide you or Wiki with the appropriate means to undelete his pictures. Please help. Thank you Madhu Gopal (talk) 13:54, 16 July 2014 (UTC) Hi Ellen, I understand Bert van Loo needs to sign this right? How does he do that, or is the contract he send me enough (which I send to Could you please help me, I really want his pictures restored asap? Thank you. --Madhu Gopal (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Madhu Gopal: Please visit the OTRS page where this issue can be solved. Once you send permissions to the email address you give, it's the OTRS editors who will be helping you. They are as backed up as the rest of us, please be patient with your requests to them. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:39, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Missing sourcesEdit

Hello, Thank you for your email. I don't have much time right now but i will do my best to get it al done. I have lots of photo's on my computer wich i want to opload too but i didn't get time for that too. i am still figuring out how it all works. Greetings Rob Hille User talk:Rob Hille

This relates to the bottom half of [1] where many of Mr. Hille's images need descriptions. They were his earliest images. If any other people who are good with flowers are interested in helping out, that would be great. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

File:1914 Pittsburgh Rebels team photo.jpgEdit

Thought I'd let you know that Hedwig in Washington added the missing source for the picture on May 21, 2014. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Awesome! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Human Heart and Circulatory System.pngEdit

You deleted the Human Heart image. I am the author of the image and allowed National Geographic AND Wikipedia to use it under the wikipedia guidelines. Please undelete. Thanks. Preceeding unsigned by WhatIfWeCould

Hi WhatIfWeCould: Thank you for your note. I'm so sorry about that! I have undeleted the file and left a note on the talk page explaining my error in the deletion. Again, my apologies! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Horvitz photosEdit

Russavia undeleted two of the photos previously deleted through DR out of process so I've started new debates at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Laketahoewhalebeach.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pyramidlakenv.jpg.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I've also listed the cropped versions for deletion on the questionable copyright grounds.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:49, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I've found another sleeper account based on Horvitz's admission that he uploaded a photo for a particular Wikipedia page (and actually edit warred to keep it in use).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Make that two.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:45, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

God, all you have to do is search his name and wikipedia and you get gold.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:57, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

There's a couple of really good references about this including here and here. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:09, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
All I did was throw "david horvitz wikipedia" into Google and it came up with all the photos I found earlier.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Back view of man on beachEdit

Hi Ellin, Was it you that I had the conversation with about the so-called art project with the guy posting images of "back view of man on beach", mostly on California beaches? If so, I found another one today. Invertzoo (talk) 01:26, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Invertzoo: Please feel free to write me about it here, or by email. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I have the info I need now. Invertzoo (talk) 14:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Angelo Brofferio 1867.jpgEdit

Hi, I've seen your messagge and I've replied here. File talk:Angelo Brofferio 1867.jpg :) Raoli ✉ (talk) 16:28, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Now I've found the information required about the image. Thnak you --Raoli ✉ (talk) 16:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Raoli ✉: That's great, thank you so much!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Source = mechanical reproduction of 2D imageEdit

Source information is not only used to write something in a source field. The reason for providing sources is also:

  • Allow users to verify that the description matches the content. Thats important since many of our users dont put any effort in what they upload, sometimes they just grab a file from google imagesearch and the subject they searched was only mentioned on the website they found but isnt shown in the file. See en:Wikipedia:Citing sources#When and why to cite sources, the scope and educational purpose of Wikimedia Commons sources is not different.
  • of legal nature for international users, see COM:ART. For non-US users it indeed is important if the photo was taken by e.g. a British photographer or from a British institution/source.

If you dont have any information for the source field please leave it. I refere to File:Queen Henrietta Maria circa 1637 by Van Dyke.jpg. --Martin H. (talk) 04:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Martin H.
I am really sorry but the "source" you provided cannot possibly be the source of the image on Commons. The source you gave leads to image file [2] which is 231x280 pixels. The Commons image is ‎(353 × 456 pixels, file size: 15 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg). In Photoshop, making both images the same size shows that the one you gave cannot be the source of the Commons image as it pixelates dreadfully when made bigger.
Looking here you will see that the Commons image is the largest of all the available ones on the web, it has none the exact same size, and none larger.
Comparing the original upload image here shows a white border not found on the one you suggested as source.
I suggest just finding any old candidate as source on the internet is less correct than recognizing the age of the image puts it in public domain and that it is obviously a faithful reproduction of a 2D image. When I can find the obvious source from museum or collection I add it, otherwise I don't presume to guess. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
[3] is 799 × 659. The number of pixels of the cropped version is the same. The extreme JPEG artefacts at the black clothing are exactly the same. The white frame bottom left is from bad photoshoping/removing the frame. The Commons image is not photographed or scanned off frame. There is more editing, a white spot has been removed/smeared at the Commons image. I absolutely agree with you, so dont assume that I not checked if it realy is the same photo. --Martin H. (talk) 17:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Ellin, you asked me to comment here, so I will, although you may not like it. Martin is entirely correct -- the exact source of an image should be correct because some countries don't follow Bridgeman/WMF policy. In the case of old masters, at a minimum the listed source should be the name of the institution where the painting is housed. Preferably, one would show, as Martin did, the actual page showing the image used to create the Commons image, if it came from the Web, or the source of the paper that was scanned to provide the image (poster, book title, etc.) if it was scanned by the uploader.
As for the case in point, Martin's cite was entirely correct -- Commons policy is to cite the page where the image is located, not the image file itself. This allows others to check description, licensing (which matters in some countries even in the case of PD-Art) and so forth. It is not usual to list both, as you have done in your final version of the page, unless there are many images on the source page, but I see no harm in it. His cite leads both to the thumbnail, which you found and objected to, but also to the full image which, as he says, is probably the source. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • User:Martin H.: Why do you think that it is important to know the source country of a PD-Art photograph? According to Article 5 (2) of the Berne Convention, the outcome of a court ruling may not depend on the source country of the material. You therefore only need to know in which country you are using the material, but not which country it comes from. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    • A reuser from a country that protects reproductions of 2D works will need to ask for permission. Therfore it is important to know where the media file comes from. --Martin H. (talk) 22:43, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Yes, a user of the material needs to know who the rights holder is, so that he can ask for permission. However, knowing the identify of the holder of the rights is not the same thing as knowing the source country of the work or photograph. Why do you think that it is important to know the source country of the work or photograph? --Stefan4 (talk) 13:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
@(Jameslwoodward): It's not a matter of "like" or "dislike"; I want to be sure I'm doing things right here, and I've seen many many images with source = mechanical reproduction. You will recall our discussion about Asian Art, that one ended where it didn't matter where the material came from as long as it was old enough. Being sick all week and confused, I don't want to do anything which isn't right for the project and so asked you for clarity. I have also seen Art listings with Three things on source, the art main page, the actual image copied and a link to their copyright statement for the art. There seem to be many ways to do things here and I do not wish to do them incorrectly. Thank you all for the clarity. Many of the art images say where the painting is housed, is that sufficient for source in those cases? Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
To answer your final question, it is always better to have the actual source of the scan or photo of the art. Then, if you are a user in a country that does not use the Bridgeman approach, you know where to go for permission. Note, too, that there are countries that follow Bridgeman if the image is a scan of the old art, but give a copyright to a photograph taken of the same work. For me, that's silly -- they are both imaging systems that are mostly mechanical, non-creative processes, but no one said that copyright law was logical. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 00:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
So if the uploader didn't provide the source, a larger source doesn't appear on google search or tineye, what are we to do? Some of the images I've been working through date back to 2005, the uploaders are inactive, the images are in use all over the project, we can't just put a DN on those or risk angering everyone from Anteater to Zymurgy. Should they just be left "no source" at all, leaving any possible "reuser from a country that protects...." up the creek without a paddle? Or what? Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Sure they should be left. Some invented placebo source information will not change the situation. The only purpose of such information is to fill up the templates so that the symptoms of a missing source will not longer bother us. Thats manipulation of our own templates, but its not educational usefull work and brings no use for the viewers or users (reusers who need copyright info, viewers who need reliable external information since Commons is a host/aggregator, not a source on its own). --Martin H. (talk) 09:10, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

uncatted cat picEdit

Here's a pretty nice cat pic, but with no categories and perhaps in need of a move to a descriptive name. Your cat expertise is needed. INeverCry 20:43, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi INC: I'm sorry I've never renamed an image. Will be happy to apply category when I have brains back from being sick. I came in only to see my watch list and found someone recategorized ALL the historical plaques in the counties here from where you can see them all together to splitting them up into cities, towns, whatever and totally losing the utility of seeing the plaques together - knowing which ones have already been photographed, or seeing the totality of what is considered historical. EG: now the entire town of Category:Ferndale, California was chucked into historical, when only the historical district is historical. If I had any wits, I'd be at wit's end. The new recatter of course doesn't live here, has no clue about the area and has now rearranged practically the entire county. Some of it makes sense, a lot of it doesn't. And we have new Beach Buem images too. Did you see any of that discussion? Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:22, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear you're still not feeling good. Once you categorize the cat, I should be able to find a French translation of it for a rename. Let me know. In regard to the mass recategorization of places you refer to, I've seen a lot of big problems and disagreements and AN threads in that area. Leaving well-enough alone is about as uncommon as "common" sense... INeverCry 17:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi INC: Chocolate Tabby Cat.jpg perhaps? I cat-egorized it, I'm 99% sure it's a chocolate tabby. I could be 100% with a view of the side/belly. I didn't wikilink it in French, but I put link to Tabby Cat for en-wiki. I am coming to terms with the fact that my health will never fully improve and that each new infection takes a chunk more than the last one. I hope you are feeling better; we are in rather the same place, I am afraid. Chin up and keep petting the kitties. Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Ellin. I renamed the file to File:Chat tigré chocolat.jpg. As for the rest of what you write, I don't feel so bad being in that place, considering the company... INeverCry 07:14, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

a minor point on formerly free Afghan imagesEdit

You initiated Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fareeda Kuchi.jpg. The image was one of over one hundred similar Afghan images I uploaded years ago. In these comments I explain that the image was compliant with policy, at the time I uploaded it, and that the WMF's lawyer explained that WMF projects are free to impose extra restrictions on our images, these Afghan images are still, legally, in the public domain.

One of the administrators who deleted some of those images used very nasty wording in the deletion log, but yours was the most recent nomination -- that is why I left the explanation after your heads-up. Geo Swan (talk) 19:54, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) User:Geo Swan: For what it is worth, the file was not compliant with policy when the file was uploaded, but {{PD-Afghanistan}} contained incorrect information for a period of several years. When the template was created back in 2008, the information in it was already outdated by several months, and this wasn't corrected until March 2012. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I do not agree with this interpretation. As the WMF lawyer made clear, extending this protection to Afghan images is a choice. It required the recognition of the existence of Karzai's decree, and it requires agreement that the decree goes far enough to start considering these images as protected. That is not a foregone conclusion. Geo Swan (talk) 21:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Greetings User:Geo Swan: I hope you're discussing this at the deletion nomination discussion page! I am not personally invested in the image one way or the other, so what the community consensus decides will be fine by me. I hope you did not feel there was any form of judgement or upset with you, merely my confusion about the licensing of the image. Please be sure to comment on the DN as well as here. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


Just pinging you because of the third coming of File:Laketahoewhalebeach.jpg. More details at the DR for it and my user talk.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Bernard Cerquiglini picture on his noticeEdit

Hello Ellin,

You took off Bernard Cerquiglini's picture "Bernard Cerquiglini in Kinshasa" on his notice.

The picture was given by Bernard Cerquiglini himself to me. The author of the picture has given him the rights for free to use it.

So could you put it back or tell me what to do ?

Thanking you in advance,

Best regards,


Hi Lausanne: I hope you see this message as you forgot to login and/or give your user name for reply. The string of ownership of the image you describe and how to handle the licensing is a question best taken to the Village Pump for help from the community. With best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:30, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Why did your remove Theo Uittenbogaard's pictureEdit

Hello Ellin,

You took off Theo Uittenbogaards's picture <> on his notice.

The picture was taken and given by friend and colleague Peter Brusse himself to me. The author of the picture has given him the rights for free to use it.

So could you put it back or tell me what to do ?

Thanking you in advance,

Best regards,


Hi Theo10: The string of ownership of the image you describe and how to handle the licensing is a question best taken to the Village Pump for help from the community. With best wishes, Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Ellin Beltz. You have new messages at Auntof6's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−