Last modified on 23 March 2015, at 13:11

User talk:HJ Mitchell

About the file that was deletedEdit This one particularly. Yes IT IS a movie poster and it is ought to be on a wiki page about the movie: I've marked the correct copyright variant - I am representing the production and I am in charge for publishing all the materials about this project. Tell me please, what can i do for restoring the file? Thanks a lot.

File:P-3K 5Sqn NZ4203 152888 3.jpgEdit

Isle of Man penny 1839.jpgs are found here [1] :-) Cobatfor (talk) 15:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RNZAF answered. Cheers Cobatfor (talk) 17:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Quick OTRS questionEdit

Hi HJ. I have 2 logos, File:Rumble Fighter Europe Logo.gif and File:Rumble Fighter Logo.gif, that look like they may be covered by the OTRS ticket mentioned on this user's page by Adrignola: User:OGPlanet. I'm not an OTRS member, so could you please add this ticket to the 2 logos if it checks out and applies? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 07:54, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure. As far as I can work out, that ticket is valid for all of that user's uploads, so I've tagged those two files. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. INeverCry 17:27, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi again. I have another image from the same user: File:SDGO.jpg which I've temp restored so you could look at it. There's a question of multiple copyright holders, so can you let me know if the ticket on this image is valid to have it on Commons? Thanks. INeverCry 17:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Well the watermark on the image suggests there are multiple copyright holders. The OTRS ticket is from OGPlanet, who are obviously entitled to release their own rights, but it doesn't say anything about the other companies. I think deletion was the right call in that case. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I'll re-delete and close the undel req. INeverCry 17:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Courthouse photosEdit

Thanks for the help on the OTRS question regarding File:Coshocton County Courthouse.jpg. Could you look again at its OTRS (2011092910022206) and the one for File:Jefferson courthouse ohio.jpg (same number) to see if they cover any other images? I've just asked Jameslwoodward to delete several other images that the same user uploaded from the same source, but of course I'll not object to keeping them if the real author released them as well. Nyttend (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

The OTRS ticket explicitly mentions the courthouses in Adams County, Jefferson County, and Coshocton County, and the client seems happy for the images to be used as long as he's given proper attribution. He doesn't explicitly mention any others, but seems happy for any of the images from that book to be used if he's attributed. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the help! I've asked Jim to check the OTRS (I didn't realise that he was also an OTRS member) and restore any of the images for which he believes an adequate permission to exist. Nyttend (talk) 19:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Okay; let me know if I can be of any more help. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Followup on an earlier undelete requestEdit

Hi HJ, I'd appreciate a followup review with fresh eyes on this file, File:Saint Exupery exhibit - Air & Space Museum, Le Bourget, Paris, France (9).JPG, which was deleted unexpectedly yesterday after serving on a prominent article for about 2 years. Curiously it was deleted **completely without notice** only a very short while after an unrelated procedures/content dispute occurred in the same article between myself and an admin (Toddst1), Holy AGF! (to my knowledge I have never had an image deleted previously without some warning period). The reason stated by the CommonsDelinker bot for the deletion of the photo on the article's edit summary when it was removed reads: "it has been deleted from Commons by INeverCry because: Copyright violation: copyright protected cover art."

I believe the photo which I took has several important features which would permit its transfer and use on a Wikipedia under Fair Use provisions:

  • the cover art depicted on two of the works in the photo is relatively low resolution, making the cover art unsuitable for use in any commercial reproductions;
  • the photo of the group of books was taken at an oblique angle, rendering the cover art unsuitable for use in any commercial reproductions;
  • the grouping of four books by the same author, with curator's notations, in a very notable public museum, Musée de l'Air, underlines that the photo depicting the four books is of high educational value (only two of the books have cover art).

When I posted a request to temporarily undelete the photo so it could be moved to a Wikipedia, a Commons admin replied: "Not done Not eligible for fair use. It's just two book covers. That can't be used on the museum's article, as it doesn't meet the NFCC, and is inappropriate for the articles on the books as well, where individual covers as separate images are all that would be accepted. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:07, 29 October 2012". For clarification the photo is not for use in an article about a museum -it was taken *in* a museum.

A followup request I quickly posted went unanswered and the undelete request was closed out last night. My followup read: "Sven: please elaborate. First, what is NFCC, and second the image was being used in two articles, the first article to note some of the works of the author, Saint-Exupery, and the second article to illustrate the multiple languages that The Little Prince was published in, as shown in the photo. Additionally very little of the cover art is actually shown as the photo was taken at a slant, clearly showing the museum's notations next to each book which established their notability in a major institution. Since the books are thus shown in low resolution would they not be acceptable under Fair Use provisions? HarryZilber 03:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)".

Your fresh eyes look at this undelete request would be appreciated. Thanks and best: HarryZilber 14:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an admin here, so I can't see the image. However, it sounds like you might not have a very good case for fair use on enwiki, because it's a requirement that no free image could contribute equally to readers' understanding. The only thing I can suggest is to read en:WP:NFC carefully, and then ping me again if you think the image meets all the criteria there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


Your good work on the Joeff Davis image is much appreciated. I hope you're not traveling near Sandy. 22:37, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome, and no—I'm on the other side of the Atlantic. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Permission questionEdit

Hi HJ. Can you take a look at User talk:XK8ER#Notification about possible deletion and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by XK8ER? Thanks for your time. BTW, I hope to see you as an admin here at some point. Just make sure you go thru your own uploads with a fine-toothed comb if you do put in a request, as the RFAs have been quite strict on this lately. INeverCry 20:20, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

That might be a little outside my remit as an OTRS agent. Since the photos weren't taken by the uploader, and it seems he doesn't know who took them, we'll probably have to get rid of them, which is a shame. If you want a really abstract argument for keeping them, it could be argued (though I'd be surprised if it held much water at DR) that the copyright was transferred when they were gifted to the uploader or that they are works for hire for the subjects (if they asked the photographers to take the shots), but in the latter case, the subjects would need to email OTRS. I'd be happy to expedite a ticket if one came in, but I don't think I'm much use until then.

I've considered an RfA a couple of times, but I'm not sure what I'd do with the tools other than issues related to OTRS. I might close a few DRs and look at other things that are horribly backlogged, but I couldn't promise it. I'm pretty careful about what I upload, but would you mind having a look to see if there's anything that jumps out at you as potentially suspect? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Those photos will probably have to be deleted as you say. He said he cropped them, and etc, but even if he did upload the images in their original forms with EXIF, they'd still be other people's photos. As for what you might do as an admin, my eye was on Category:Unknown; especially Category:Media missing permission, and you'd also be able to restore images and review undeletion requests. No huge hurry or pressure though. I've had a bit more help in the past week or so with DRs, so things aren't quite as pressing. Fastily is definitely missed though. I doubt there's anything wrong with your uploads. INeverCry 23:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


What's your opinion of becoming an admin here. I will be your nominator--Morning (talk) 15:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

That it might make life a little bit easier. ;) Thanks for the offer—perhaps after Christmas? Life's a bit hectic at the moment.HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

OTRS account QuestionEdit

hello friend! I wonder how do I get an account in OTRS to check tickets??¿. Thanks and greetings!! --Coronades (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Applications are done on Meta—at m:OTRS/Volunteering. Just follow the instructions there, and be sure to state which queues you'd like access to and which languages you can read and write in. Then, assuming there are no problems, an OTRS admin will grant you access (though it can take a few weeks). Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi HJ. I don't edit on Meta much, so I thought I'd ask you a quick question. I noticed that someone there reverted your's and Herby's comments on the volunteer page, and the comment for 99of9. I figure we both should be a pretty clear choice for the OTRS team, but the revert still seems a bit arbitrary to me. Anyways, it's good to see your RFA, which will obviously be successful. Have a good one. INeverCry 17:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed; Ironholds raised it on the OTRS mailing list, so I noticed it when I got online a few minutes ago. I don't see anything to be gained by edit-warring to restore a comment that apparently isn't useful, but I've left my opinion on the talk page, and I notice Herby and a couple of other people have commented there as well. Thanks for your support on my RfA; it's going much better than I expected. Of course, I'll be coming to you for advice when I get stuck, so don't expect it to reduce your workload too much! ;) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
And who do you think I'll be bugging with OTRS questions? Face-wink.svg INeverCry 19:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Question on admin requestEdit

Hi HJ, I've left a follow-up question on your admin request, which you haven't answered for a few days, so I guess you haven't noticed it yet. --99of9 (talk) 01:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. No I hadn't seen it, sorry. I'll get to it later today (UTC) if I possibly can. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


Hello HJ Mitchell, congrats on your successful RfA. I just set the administrator flag for your account. Good luck and thanks for taking the job! --Dschwen (talk) 00:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!Edit

Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Slovenčina | Svenska | +/−

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

HJ Mitchell, congratulations! You now have administrator rights on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and Commons:Deletion requests), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons on There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators: #wikimedia-commons-admin.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

Had to welcome you in style! Congrats! INeverCry 00:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Congrats and good luck! Érico Wouters msg 00:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Good work! --cyrfaw (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you, folks! I'll try to make good use of the tools. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations and good luck! It was about time that you would become a sysop. ;) Note this page made by Jim; it might be of use for you. Trijnsteltalk 21:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I laready know how the buttons work, but Jim's advice on being an admin is useful, so thanks for the link. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
You might also find this useful, if you don't already know about it: User:Captain-tucker/category-tracker. INeverCry 21:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
That is useful. Jaw-dropping when I think about how much work there is, but at least I won't be idle! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to the team. I see that Trijnstel has already done a selling job on my Admins crib sheet -- you may know how the buttons work, but there are a few things, such as DelReqHandler, that are essential to doing the job efficiently that you cannot enable until you're an Admin.
And yes, there is a lot of work to be done -- around 1,700 deletions every day, 75% of which are done by ten people, with INC in the lead with 500 per day. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Jim. I'm not sure I'll make the biggest dent in that statistic, but I'll try to make myself useful. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Question about permission sent to OTRSEdit

Hello HJ Mitchel! Yesterday I sent an email to the address and I attached a PDF file with the permission, then I had to scan it because it came in the form of a letter to my home. My question is this: If users of OTRS granted the permission ticket, they communicate with me? How do I know if the OTRS ticket was given to permission that I sent in PDF format? Thank you! --Coronades (talk) 01:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

The short answer is "be patient". It can take a few weeks for somebody to get to your email, depending on how bad the backlog is. But if you tell me what the subject line of the email was, I can check it arrived. I won't promise to expedite it because that would be unfair, but if I have time, I might. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks. The subject line of the email was "PERMISSION OF THE PRESIDENCY OF COLOMBIA

" and, was sent on January 19, 2013 and the origin email is I hope your answer. Greetings --Coronades (talk) 22:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

    • I've replied through OTRS (ticket number is 2013011910007682), but I'm afraid it's not good news. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Oh god! What happened?

--Coronades (talk) 22:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

    • But permission in its first paragraph reads: "the Chief of the Publications Office of Presidency of the Republic of Colombia granted permission for all material on the official website of the Colombian Presidency, can be used by members of affiliates projects to the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. such as Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons, Wikispecies, Wikinews, Wikiversity between others; without restriction on the amount of material and time of publication".

Then the images can be used both wikipedia as WikiCommons, because both are subsidiaries of Wikimedia Foundation. Also reads: "exclusively for affiliates projects to the Wikimedia Foundation". This refers also to projects of Wikimedia Foundation affiliates as described in the first paragraph such as Wikipedia, WikiCommons, etc.

I do not see the problem friend--Coronades (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that it has to be free not just for Wikimedia projects, but for anyone and everyone. We don't accept content that is only for use by Wikimedia projects, because sharing free content is part of our mission. See COM:L for more detail. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Excuse me friend, now I understand all.

So that's the only problem that you see, the only? no more? Thanks for answering all my questions and comments --Coronades (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's the only problem I see. I see no reason to doubt anything else. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Then again I will write to the presidency and observations expose you told me, perhaps they re-issue a new permit because the Colombian government has been very generous lately with issues of ICTs (Information and Communications Technologies).

If they send me an response, immediately I consult it to you. --G. Coronades | Do you have a question? 22:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Your opinionEdit

Hi HJ. Can you take a look at this when you get a chance please? I'm not seeing PD with these images, but I figured it would be best to get a second opinion. Thanks for your time. INeverCry 20:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Always happy to help; replied over there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Much appreciated. The Hampton fellow was somewhat familiar to me because of his "Leap of Faith" (1939) image which I'd seen before. INeverCry 20:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!Edit

A small cup of coffee.JPG Thank you kindly for taking the time to close this issue and restore the PROUTlogo.gif graphic. I have responded to your post on my talk page. Abhidevananda (talk) 23:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Ufo SnakeEdit

Hi! I've checked the contribution of the user and marked for deletion only copyright violating material. Please undelete these files, he is evidently the author in these cases:

Sincerely yours, Mithril (talk) 15:45, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Mithril (talk) 16:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
My bad. If you're happy they're legit, that works for me. Let me know if there are any more. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Eleassar'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 | +/−

EXIF questionEdit

I've got a bit of a stange case to ask you about. Take a look at User talk:INeverCry#Mistake about File:Guillermo Lasso perfil vertical.jpg. This user has uploaded several images with the Xavier Cuesta EXIF. I was thinking of having her mail OTRS, and perhaps get an OTRS ticket to put on this deleted image and the others with that EXIF. Thoughts? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 21:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

OTRS may be useful in this situation, but OTRS isn't a miracle cure. In a situation like this, the purpose of OTRS is to verify the identity of the copyright holder and to verify that they intend to release their work under an acceptable license. The first part is where many permissions tickets fall down. If they have an "official" email address (ie at the same domain as their website if they have one), it's easy enough, but otherwise there's not much we can do on OTRS that can't be done on-wiki. But anyway, en:WP:BEANS would suggest that the more creative ways of verifying people's identities might not be the best topic for a public wiki, so it might be best to have them send an email and I'll see what I can do. Have them put "FAO Harry Mitchell" in the subject line and somebody will (hopefully) assign it to me or I'll dig it out next time I'm online (which will probably be Thursday). Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks HJ, I've told them what needs to be done. I appreciate you're help on this one. INeverCry 18:24, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Harry. Xavier Cuesta, the guy that the metadata says is the owner of the camera, already sends an e-mail (from the e-mail that the camera mention). Have it been received? We talked and the mail should says he gives to Public Domain all the photos that I've uploaded. I hope that is enough, isn't? Guillermo Lasso is presidential candidate for the elections of this weekend in Ecuador and I'm worried that my graphic work don't be useful for Wikipedia accurately in this time. --Mabel Velástegui (talk) 02:08, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
If it's worth, my vote of confidence to the work done by Mabel in Wikipedia and Commons. Also, I believe that is important to solve this obstacle before the elections of 17 february because all editors expects that their contributions scope the wider amount of readers of the encyclopedia in the useful time. --Sageo (talk) 14:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
OK, OTRS gets thousands of emails a day (and I have several hundred of my own to sift through, hence not much time to search OTRS). If an email has been sent that wasn't addressed to me, I need to know the email address it was sent from and/or the subject line (if it's unique enough to be searchable). Mabel, could you post those details here or email them to me (Special:EmailUser/HJ Mitchell or hjmitchell at ymail dot com). I'll try to pick it up over the weekend. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

This is the mail sent:

“From: Xavier Cuesta <xacuesta at yahoo dot com>

To: "" <> Send: Wednesday, february 13, 2013 9:10 A.M. Asunto: Xavier Cuesta-Mabel Velastegui-Public Domain

I'm Xavier Cuesta. I concede to Public Domain ALL the photographs uploaded by Mabel Velastegui to Wikimedia Commons. Please restore the photos she uploaded: Regards.”

--Mabel Velástegui (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Another image was deleted I'm still having problems and I'm not violating copyrights! Make something please. --Mabel Velástegui (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi HJ. There any news about this? --Mabel Velástegui (talk) 18:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
I've got it and I'm happy with it. I've marked the image {{permissionOTRS}}. Just copy and paste the template for any other images and if anybody asks you about it, point them to me. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for helping on this one HJ. It looks like she's got bigger problems though: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Mabel Velástegui. INeverCry 20:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I have too much on my mind elsewhere to look into that in much detail, but I will say I'm happy that all of Mabel's images whose EXIF data credits Xavier Cuesta are legit, assuming they belong to Xavier Cuesta. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:14, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I know what you mean. I'd say we've done everything we could to help. INeverCry 20:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Tibet imagesEdit

I think it's time to delete: Commons:Deletion requests/File:17 March 1959 Communist Red Army troops fire heavy artillery guns in Lhasa Valley.jpg --Futuretrillionaire (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree, but I'm the nominator and I've been discussing the issue at the DR, so it's not my place to make the final decision. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the long discussion, and time lost. I had misinterpreted the fact that there are PD-China files that are under from AP as well as UPI on Commons since a long time. In conclusion, I beleive File:Dalai-mao-oct13-1954.jpg is also concerned (I had indicated it here [2]). I beleive other files may also be concerned. I found this one is from UPI, but I do not have any link about this File:Dalai mao colour1.jpg. If you beleive this is important, I'll look for this. Best regards, and thanks for all the informations. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 20:25, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
No worries. I've deleted the latter of those two because it clearly belongs to UPI. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:41, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I did not find this UPI photo on their web site, I only found indication that it was from UPI on a book by Michel Peissel. I wanted to verify this issue. Some photo are in the same situation (need verification, that have been taged by Futuretrillionaire. Could you restore File:Dalai mao colour1.jpg so that it can be included in the same discussion. Those who uploaded the files should be informed so that they too can discuss.--Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 20:55, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I think some clarification is needed on the issue of copyright, see : Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mao dalai lama-1955.jpg. If you agree with, please restore the photo so as to include it in the discussion (it is the same photo). --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 17:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Linking to it in the DR, as you've done, is sufficient. The content of the image is not important to whether another should be deleted and I can't think of any other reason I would restore what I suspect to be a copyright violation. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Alison Balsom photoEdit

Hi HJ. I don't want to stick my oar in but I really don't think that this guy is a baddie or was trying deliberately to circumvent anything. (I have had some very tangential involvement with trying to help here ... > fail.) He is a newbie and does have a COI about which he is perfectly frank; but having been pulled up on the copyrighted photo of Alison, for which he didn't have clearance, he just went and took his own pic, which seems reasonable. The apparent circumvention attempt may have been caused by his re-using the filename but I honestly think it was a good-faith attempt to comply, and I would hate both EMI Classics and Alison to both be left joining the legions of people who think we're a bit, ah, carp because they tried to do something that seemed reasonable and were thwarted by TeH Evil Rouj AdminZ™ and cabalists. Just my 2p though I do acknowledge that its real value may be very much less. Cheers DBaK (talk) 12:07, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

If he can provide some sort of proof to OTRS that he own either image, I'd be happy to restore it/them. You may be right, but I'm somewhat reluctant to trust that somebody whose first upload didn't belong to them would own the second image they uploaded on the same day of the same subject. But perhaps I'm a little too cynical. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Harry! Tsk! I am shocked. Very very cynical and at your age too. :) I bet you a pint he is OK and it was not deliberately naughty. Mind you at the moment he seems to have gone a bit quiet and the photo is back where it was so who knows ... I am hoping to lose no further sleep over it. Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
You may have a point, but then I see this sort of thing, and I wonder if my cynicism is justified. Let me know when and where for that pint. You sound (type?) like a Brit, so I'm guessing you're in the UK? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Well yes. Clearly you are much older in wikiyears than me, despite my advanced age in the physical world, and have had more wikitime to get cynical. Yes, I am in Londontown, Englandland. The pint is probably best discussed by email. :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 10:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Well, there's a meetup in London (usually in the Penderel's Oak in Holborn) on the second Sunday of every month. The next one is a week tomorrow and the one after is on 14 April. I don't go to all of them because of the expense of train tickets down to London, but I like to go every few months, so if any of those dates work for you, let m know. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Diatrype bullata (wilgenschorsschijfje) De Twigen.JPGEdit

It seems File:Sarcoscypha austriaca (Krulhaarkelkzwam) De Twigen.JPG is from the same set of images and got confirmed. Did you had a look at the OTRS ticket? --McZusatz (talk) 13:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I did. File:Diatrype bullata (wilgenschorsschijfje) De Twigen.JPG was the subject of ticket:2013020110008042, which doesn't specify a license; the client was asked to choose one but hasn't responded. File:Sarcoscypha austriaca (Krulhaarkelkzwam) De Twigen.JPG cites a different ticket (ticket:2013021210003679) from the same client. This one is better in that it uses the template and it was accepted by the OTRS agent, but both tickets originate from a free webmail address and the agent who accepted the second one doesn't appear to have made any attempt to verify that the client was the copyright holder (which is the whole point of OTRS). I'll point them to this thread. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:06, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, i'm the OTRS agent who has handled. I checked several data indicate that it is real.
  • For example, the photo geolocation and the email sender IP are close.
  • The only source located by searchers is commons. Copied from another site?? It is difficult (not impossible)
  • EXIF is complete.
The email account is the usual get with free internet, many people using. Impossible to compare domain without other photo sources.
I am convinced that the authorization is good. (I can also confuse). Greetings, --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 15:41, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Jup, I also think the OTRS tickets are valid. It just seems the author was not familiar with the licensing issue. --McZusatz (talk) 15:51, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough. We're happy that the permission is from the copyright holder. Do they specify which image(s) they're releasing? I can't see it, but something might have been lost in translation. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
The authorization is valid for a single image. HJ Mitchell, if you want I can copy the email in OTRSwiki so that you can read. --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 22:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm happy to take your word for it. Since that ticket is only valid for the one image, it looks like File:Diatrype bullata (wilgenschorsschijfje) De Twigen.JPG will have to stay deleted until we get separate permission. Thanks for your help, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:48, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Slovene Ethnographic MuseumEdit

Hi, regarding File:Slovenia Ethnographic Museum, Ljubljana.jpg, is there a particular reason why you have removed the OTRS template instead of replacing it?[3] --Eleassar (t/p) 22:04, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Mainly because my head hurts, but I've tagged it {{permissionOTRS}} now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks; and for having concluded this case. I hope you will get better. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:WTC John Pickering Man's Struggle 2.JPGEdit

FYI I've just started the above DR that we discussed during your RfA. --99of9 (talk) 22:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I'll see what I can do. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Revission of OTRS TicketEdit

Hello friend! Could you check the OTRS Ticket to the file Manuela Bascón.jpg.

Thank you so much!

Greetings and hugs!

--G. Coronades | Do you have a question? 00:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Question regarding OTRS/commonsEdit

Hey. I read your comment at Jimbo's talk page here, and figured I'll ask you the question I wanted to ask here and not there, since it's kind of off-topic over there. What I'm wondering about is the discrepancy between how much information is required to satisfy an OTRS volunteer, and how little is required in any other case. Personally, I fully agree with you that we need to make absolutely sure we do have the rights for the images we host, of course, and I'm quite happy that the OTRS volunteers take this seriously. But at the same time, everyone can upload most any pictures here on commons, and a simple "own work" or a link to a dubious Flickr account is enough to make sure the image will survive most every deletion request. For example, I just asked a user who uploads various pictures of genitalia about those pictures (see User talk:Bebop7), and all I can do is take his word that he has the rights to those pictures and that those pictured have given their consent. I'm fairly sure that an OTRS ticket would require more than that, but here I am, having to accept that. Or take File:Fellation Tracy and Rick-1.jpg, an image that surely would survive a deletion request, even though the source image has been deleted. Or File:Labret phallic coddling.jpg, which I did nominate for deletion, but quickly got a keep vote from another admin because it has been kept multiple times in the past.

My point is: Would any of these images survive as an OTRS ticket, given the current sourcing? And if not, why do we keep these images around? I'm honestly puzzled by the way commons handles these issues, and I'm hoping I might find some insight here. --Conti| 22:16, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll give you a short answer on the general principle first an come back to your specific examples later if that's okay. We like to trust that claims of "own work" are genuine, but it's not a suicide pact. If there's a suspicion that it wasn't created by the uploader, it's not undeletable. It is difficult to tell sometimes, but you can check a user's uploads for inconsistencies. Images grabbed from elsewhere will often be of inconsistent (low) resolution, they might be of varying quality, and the EXIF metadata will likely be inconsistent or missing altogether. You can also use tools like TinEye, which will tell you if the image appears elsewhere on the Web. Essentially, it's close to impossible to conclusively prove a claim of own work, but it's often possible to conclusively disprove it or to show it to be improbable. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply. I'll hold off replying for now until you finish your reply, since I'm rather curious about those specific cases (and the countless similar cases that we do have). --Conti| 19:59, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
OK, I've looked into those two specific images. Assuming they had a compatible license at their sources (and they were released by the copyright holder), there's no problem with their copyright status. They are problematic in other ways (personality rights for a start), but those issues and copyright are not mutually exclusive: ie one can be fine while the other (very) problematic. OTRS should pursue "permission" in a personality rights sense as well as a copyright sense, especially for private or sexually explicit images. I call it healthy cynicism—we don't just take somebody's word for it, but we do a little digging or we ask questions. But alas, I have enough problems trying to get OTRS agents to do the most basic due diligence on copyright issues (if I had a penny for every time an OTRS ticket from a Gmail address was accepted without any attempt to check that the client is who they say they are, I'd be a rich man), let alone anything that's more difficult to prove. If you have a little time to spare, we could use your help. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Well, I'm glad to hear that OTRS isn't perfect, either. ;) But (as an outsider), all in all, I don't see any real problems with OTRS. OTRS on Commons works just as intended, as far as I can see. What doesn't work is everything else. My point was that OTRS has strict rules on copyright/personality rights questions, as it should, while Commons' rules about copyright/personality rights can be gamed without any effort at all. If that were the only issue, we mere users could play whack-a-mole with those that upload questionable content with even more questionable sourcing, but when users, admins and bureaucrats vote to keep such images in deletion requests (as some did in my examples above), then I honestly don't know what else to do. So, in short: Shouldn't Commons operate on the principle of "If an uploaded file has obviously no chance of ever surviving OTRS, it should be deleted."?
And thank you for responding and the offer to help out with OTRS myself. I thought about it previously, but a) I would not dare to touch anything copyright related, and I remain in awe that you guys do! And b) I rather work on raising Commons' low/nonexisting standards on personality rights for now, as futile as it seems to be at times. --Conti| 17:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!Edit

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg Why these photos and this category [4] are necessary to the project? HJ Mitchell - who is such? Vanity young man? Tatesic (talk) 14:47, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Don't ask me. I didn't take any of them. I didn't even create the category. It's flattering that people think I'm interesting enough to upload photos of me, though I'm really not that photogenic (I look drunk or tired or surprised in most of them!). But thanks for the tea. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Within your power to remove excess photos from the project. No need to turn the project into a personal playground for the publication of photos of the self. No need to thank me for tea. You can help me in saving of the photo which are really necessary to the project?: [5] --Tatesic (talk) 16:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
@ Tatesic:But I think this category (and other categories like this) and photos is/are very helpful and necessary! Some people (like me) love pictures of Wikimedia foundation persons. It was my question: "Who are foundation's persons?" I have another Phantasm about these persons! They are famous people in the world because they have special work on the world! --MehdiTalk 18:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I'm not that interesting, and I don't work for the Foundation (I volunteer for Wikimedia UK sometimes, which is where most of the photos have come from). :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey man, You are interesting! Because people like u, make a knowledge for other people in the world! You are Wikimedia volunteer and You spend your time in this way! but other guys (Your age) spend their time in nightclubs and other places for do nothing! It is our (me and my other friend in fa.wp) wishes! opening Wikimedia foundation office in Iran, But we have lots of limitation from Iranian government and diplomatic system, So we can't do it! You are especial but u don't know! you have lots of freedom but you don't know! :( --MehdiTalk 20:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Mehdi, аll is well. I'm leaving the project. I wanted to help the project, but it's my fault. Me for many years, i am doing research, i have a lot of material on the artists of France. I'm an expert. Need to study the legislation of various countries. No need to compare the publication in the 19th century and DVD[6], this is - stupid.I spent a lot of time to download images of paintings, which were published in the 19th century [7], [8]. And these images have been published by the National Library of France, and other websites. Why was to hurry with removal of files? No need to flatter the administrator. The flattery - isn't worthy men.--Tatesic (talk) 18:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
@Tatesic:Hi man, This project need to users like You and your specialty. You have a discrepancies with some users and you can resolving these discrepancies. It's not hard. You need a humility and Patience. Take it easy. You think I'm a flatter but I had not any friendship with this user and I have no idea about his personality and etc. But we can't say anything about other users and We can't make personal attacks anywhere. at the end:<<Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. (Eleanor Roosevelt)>> With respect:--MehdiTalk 20:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Mehdi,"we seldom attribute common sense except to those who agree with us..." (La Rochefoucauld). With respect. --Tatesic (talk) 21:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
That's very true, actually. But Mehdi's right that we need editors like you. It's just that we have to be very careful to make sure that the files we host are actually in the public domain (or freely licensed), and that can sometimes get a bit tricky, but it's nothing personal. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I will work. I hope for the help and understanding of administration.--Tatesic (talk) 21:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


Why was the Killbot.jpg photo deleted? The appropriate permissions were submitted AND approved by OTRS MONTHS ago. The permissions came from an authorized releasing agent, Prospect Park Management, Killbot's management. I am also an authorized releasing agent for Killbot, JDevil, and Korn per their management firm, Prospect Park and the artists themselves. Nbcwd (talk) 19:32, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpgEdit

Why was J Devil (Jonathan Davis).jpg deleted? Again, I am the authorized releasing agent for JDevil per artist management. Authorization to release the photos was submitted and approved months ago. Nbcwd (talk) 19:34, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Mass deletion of images by Black houkEdit

I see you just took a large sweep through his mostly dubious uploads. But please undelete the following files that were valid PD images from the US military and had been tagged as such by me:

Thank you. De728631 (talk) 22:27, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

PS: There's File:T-72 Iraqi Army 001 forum.jpg too. De728631 (talk) 22:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I looked at a sample and they were all copyvios, but I've restored those two three. Sorry about that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:33, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks again. De728631 (talk) 22:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
I had a quick can of your deleted edits and I couldn't see any more, but if there are more, just let me know. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:35, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Jamie Parker Henry V 2012.pngEdit

Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at Gunnex'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 | +/−

OTRS permissionEdit

Many days ago, Fundación Ecuador Libre/Fundación del Barrio had send by mail to OTRS the permissions to use in Commons the photos I uploaded. In Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Mabel Velástegui is the list of the images requested for undeletion. Please check in the inbox of OTRS. --Mabel Velástegui (talk) 20:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom is ready to go!Edit

Hi. Please visit the updated WLM page, at Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom. You may want to move your name to an appropriate category. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Die City Preachers 1970.jpgEdit

Thank you for your information.
I wrote the following mail to as you wrote to me:
"File:Die City Preachers 1970.jpg Permission
Herewith I declare that I have the right to publish the File:Die City Preachers 1970.jpg ( ) international on wikipedia under
Creative Common Licence
(CC -
without any restrictions of time and worldwide.
If you need any further informations please note me!"
I hope I have find the right words in English as it is needed in this case. I'm still new on Wikipedia and not absolute sure in all the rules. If you are missing anything in this permission email please let me know so I'll make hopefully no mistakes anymore in future in cases of copyrights! --MichiOne (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

OTRS NoticeboardEdit

Hi, Please checking this section. It's related to you. (ticket:2013022310004559 and Deletion log ). --MehdiTalk 06:44, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks looks like Trijnstel's handled it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Help with excessive DRsEdit

Hi, as you have warned User:Eleassar already, I am asking for your support also in the following cases: User_talk:INeverCry#File:Rajko_Koro.C5.A1ec.jpg --Hladnikm (talk) 12:20, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


Hi, I don't really know the policies on Commons, but I thought I'd let you know I find a bit harsh to delete with no prior discussion nor delinking a picture as heavily used as Shreveskyline.JPG... Lucasbfr (talk) 08:18, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree it's unfortunate, but we can't keep images in violation of copyright just because they're widely used. This one belonged (by the uploader's admission) to a third party, and we have nothing to suggest he even asked them for permission. Given that the user had uploaded multiple copyright violations (including several obviously fraudulent claims of "own work"), one of which caused a complaint to OTRS, there was no way it could have stayed on Commons. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:18, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Woolworths and West Midlands categorisation removal(??)Edit


I moved some images you had categorised in Category:Woolworths Group UK stores prior to 2008 administration into Category:Woolworths Group in England; the former was only for photos taken prior to the company going into administration (i.e. to keep separate the few that were taken *before* the glut of closed and closing-down shop images).

I have to admit to wondering why some images were moved out of Category:West Midlands at the same time though, when they *do* appear to be relevant to the West Midlands. I was going to restore the category, but thought I'd check why this was done first. (I notice you're involved with OTRS, so I'd assume you know a reasonable amount about Commons).

I appreciate that putting it in a more specific category would be preferable, but in the absence of that (and there's certainly no obligation upon you to do it), I'd assume it'd make sense to leave it in place.

All the best, Ubcule (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I remember that one confused me. I'm just clearing out Category:West Midlands (it had something 8,000 images in it at one point and it's still at around 4,000, which is only slightly less ridiculous), so put them in whatever category you think best. Except that one! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:55, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't have the time (or inclination!) to check 4000 images... and yes, I *had* intended putting them back in the "West Midlands" category!
My point was that while the onus isn't on you to improve the existing categories with something more specific, I'd have expected the existing ones to be left in place. An insufficiently specific categorisation is better than none, IMHO.
I appreciate there must be a point where a category is so broad (e.g. Category:Places) that it's only of any use as a parent to subcategories, and having images in that category itself is effectively worse than it *not* being categorised (i.e. it adds to clutter but is so broad as to be useless as a categorisation in itself).
Are you suggesting that images in the "West Midlands" category are in this position?
Cheers, Ubcule (talk) 18:35, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I would say a category wit >4k images in it is in exactly that position—it's so large as to be useless. I don't really care where the images of Woolworths go, whether they go in a better Woolworths-related category or categories for the individual towns or somewhere else, as long as they don't go back into Category:West Midlands, because I'm trying to get that as close to empty as possible (and it's taking months). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:43, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
No problem. All the best, Ubcule (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

AS 50 & AWM 338 Images DeletedEdit

Hey, I need to understand what exactly the problem is with these images? The owner gave me the right to freely make them available, I submitted the written permissions, went through the correct procedures and yet still they were deleted, what exactly is going on? thanks in advance 11:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Avril LavigneEdit

Hi HJ, hope you're well. Since you're both OTRS and an admin, I was wondering if I could request that you take a look at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Avril_Lavigne? The email should explain everything and then the deletion request should be zapped. With hope, everything is in order. Thanks! – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 17:44, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

WLM in the UKEdit

Hi Harry, I expect you will have seen my note to the WLM-UK 2013 mailing list suggesting a telephone call sometime soon to discuss progress and ongoing priorities. Are you available one evening next week? MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:02, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Michael, I can't think of anywhere else I need to be so I should be able to make it. I'll keep an eye on the list for an exact date. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

File:St Laurence's Church, Long Eaton, from Market Place (2&3).jpgEdit

Hello, looking at new records kept on Wikipedia, I saw your two photographs. I have assembled. Here is the result. I hope this is satisfactory. Cordially. (Translation by computer).

Bonjour, en regardant les nouveaux fichiers versés sur Wikipédia, j'ai vu vos deux photographies. Je les ai assemblées. Voici le résultat. J'espère que cela vous conviendra.Cordialement.François de Dijon (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC),_Long_Eaton,_from_Market_Place_%282%263%29.jpg

Thank you very much! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?
At your service. Cordially.François de Dijon (talk) 17:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Udon Thani Station.JPGEdit

Hi Harry. I took this photo myself and uploaded it less than 10 days ago on 7:09, 23 August 2013‎ . How is that someone else has moved the filename and is claiming to have uploaded it and as his/her own work? Regards, Chris. Kudpung (talk) 07:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

There may be a connection here. Kudpung (talk) 08:03, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Resolved. Kudpung (talk) 21:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Removing Images from WLM 2013Edit


I've seen you have removed the WLM tag from some of my pictures:

Braunton (Devon, UK), Black Horse Inn -- 2013 -- 1.jpg Barnstaple (Devon, UK), Pannier Market -- 2013 -- 5.jpg Barnstaple (Devon, UK), Pannier Market -- 2013 -- 1.jpg Barnstaple (Devon, UK), Clock Tower -- 2013 -- 2.jpg

You've remarked this wit hthe comment "grade I and II only". I've had a look at . All buildings are grade I oder II . Please check this. In the description of the picture you can found a link to the web site with the grade level. Thank you! --XRay talk 12:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

That's it! I haven't seen that there is a difference between grade II and grade II*. You're right, the 4 images have only grade II. --XRay talk 14:07, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, yes, there are three different grades—Grade I (one), Grade II* (two-star), and Grade II (two), of which only the Grade I and Grade II* are eligible this year. There are hundreds of thousands of Grade II listed buildings, so we decided to stick with the two higher grades for our first year. But thanks for uploading the photos—I used to live near Barnstaple, so it's nice to see some quality photos of the area. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:50, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


Thx for the deletion. Since I work for the club, under which copyright am i supposed to upload it, without being deleted?

Old image licenseEdit

Hi there. I have a possibly abstruse question about an image's copyright status, and you've been very helpful in the past. Can you please stop by File:Detroit, Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor Interurban car on the bridge over the Michigan Central Railroad just east of Michigan Center (near Jackson)..jpg? I've raised a question on the talk page. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 12:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, if your statement that the company had been merged into other companies by c.1910 is accurate (I'd have no idea—not my area of expertise!), you're almost certainly right. There's not much harm in the license as it is—it's still compatible with Commons—but if you felt like doing a bit of detective work, you could ask the Flickr for more information and change the license if they tell you it was taken pre-1923. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright violationEdit

Hi Harry, was not clear to me why you deleted this file of Irmã Dulce Pontes article ("not a work of Agência Brasil").
PauloMSimoes, 20 october 2013 00h58 (UTC)

Tanks, Harry, Gunnex informed me what was wrong ("divulgation image").

User:PauloMSimoes, 20 october 2013 10h30 (UTC)

Copyright violationEdit

Hi HJ Mitchell,

It's not clear to me why you deleted this image:

I have followed the guidelines and email Commons from a company email with the provided template email (filled out). Please let me know what I need to do to have the image approved.


It's a screenshot, so you would have to get the owner to release the software itself under a free license. If you tell me the email address you used to send the permission to OTRS, I can have a look for it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello HJ Mitchell - PicturesEdit

Hello HJ Mitchell,

i uploaded some picture few days ago. For example "Scheusal.jpg" and you deleted it (18:58, 19. Okt. 2013) with the reason "Copyright violation". But that is false. I have the permissions of the owner to upload these pictures. Can you undelete it please?

thanks and greetings from GER Ragecore666 (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Ragecore666, what was the account you used to upload the files (it wasn't this one, because this was your first edit as Ragecore666)? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of PD satellite imagesEdit

Can you please explain why you accepted File:Westbrook station USGS aerial 2008.JPG and File:Revere to Lynn Blue Line Extension.jpg for speedy deletion? Both were US Government satellite images available as historical layers on Google Earth (not copyrighted Google/Keyhole imagery) and thus public domain; they were in no way copyright violations. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, what does "historical layers" mean in this context. I don't really know what to do for the best here—I'm not sure how you can tell what's from the USGS and what's proprietary in Google Earth. I deleted those two along with several other images from Google Earth that were clearly copyrighted; had I realised they weren't just part of that group, I probably would have left them for another admin to decide. My best advice, and it's nothing personal, is to go to COM:UD and explain it there; hopefully the regulars there will be able to resolve it (and by all means link to this post if you want to how that you came here first). Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:21, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Why were my uploaded pictures deletedEdit

The pictures I uploaded are my own and I own the copyright!

Tom_Felton_with_David_Bass_(daveyboyz).jpg David_Bass_presenter_of_ITV_at_the_Movies_(UK).jpg Dubstep_Santa_2.jpg

العربية | Català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Eesti | English | Español | 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 HJ Mitchell,
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

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

العربية | Català | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Eesti | Français | Magyar | Nederlands | Polski | Svenska | ไทย | +/−

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey!

Dear HJ Mitchell,

Thank you for taking part in the Wiki Loves Monuments participants' survey. Your answers will help us improve the organization of future photo contests!

In case you haven't filled in the questionnaire yet, you can still do so during the next 7 days.

And by the way: the winning pictures of this year's international contest have been announced. Enjoy!

Kind regards,
the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Wiki Loves Monuments logo

ticket:2013123010005294 / File:Simon-Fraissler-Portrait.jpgEdit

Hi Harry, could you please have another look at this ticket? The sender of the permissions assured that the photographer gave him all rights on this file after I aksed him to clearify this. Thanks! --ireas :talk: 13:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. The sender just sent the template in, but didn't specify how he owned the rights to the image (he just stated that he did). Another OTRS agent has since independently reached the same conclusion and sent a reply to that effect (the email's in German, so I didn't reply because I'm relying on Google Translate). I'll keep an eye on the ticket, and I'll happily undelete the image once we have the information we need. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
I am referring to that second mail (30.12.2013 13:10) where S. F. says: die fotografin hat mir sämtliche verwrtungsrechte übertragen which means the photographer gave all reuse rights to me. --ireas :talk: 13:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, perosonally I'd want something more than the subject's word (like an email from the photographer), but I'll leave it to the discretion of the agent handling the ticket. I've put an internal note on the ticket to that effect and offering to undelete the image once the agent handling it is happy. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The handling OTRS agent was me. ;) As far as I know, we accept permissions like these (at least regarding the German Wikipedia) if they are plausible (example: File:B. B. & The Blues Shacks 2013.jpeg). This mail seems plausible to me. --ireas :talk: 22:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Oh, sorry - I didn't realise! If you're happy, I'll undelete it then. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?

Manchester CenotaphEdit

All gone!

... is on the move, see File:Manchester Cenotaph 2014-1.jpg & File:Manchester Cenotaph 2014-2.jpg. I'll try to get some pictures with my proper camera some time... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Cheers Mike. Let me know how the move progresses if you can. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I stopped by it yesterday and took photos with my proper camera - see File:Manchester Cenotaph 2014-3.jpg through File:Manchester Cenotaph 2014-10.jpg. I think they've taken the top off it now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
It's all gone now! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Imágenes Colón de Santa FeEdit

Dado que eres activo también aquí, te escribiré en castellano. Puedes explicarme porque has borrado las imágenes del estadio de Colón de Santa Fe??? Ciertamente estoy cansado de la prepotencia de muchos aquí en Wikipedia en Español (ya de por sí ello es una prepotencia, dado que el idioma se llama Castellano y no Español.) En los artículos en inglés vemos miles de imágenes, en los nuestros, que culturalmente no poseemos la cultura del copyright y trade-mark, dado que la cultura es de todos, sufrimos constantes ataques. Los equipos europeos en su mayoría tienen registrados sus escudos, y son utilizados de todas formas, aquí, en Argentina los equipos dejan a libre disponibilidad la utilización de sus insignias, sin embargo aquí en Wikipedia no se los puede siquiera nos permiten a los hablantes en castellanos subir imágenes de los estadios.-- 00:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for the help with this one. If it's not too much trouble, the other socks/images here are User:Xtro3, User:KevinTredder, User:Goout&shootamovie, User:NicoleGreenJo, User:AmericandudehereinUK, User:Logansrun1976, User:Marybleedingpoppings, User:Zoolander2, and User:MarkyMarker. As I said, he's been busy. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

  • And User:Joey Pain just now. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 19:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Bloody hell! He's nothing if not persistent! All this time he's spent promoting himself, he'll have no time left to run his business! (@NawlinWiki) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Undeletion of File:Steffen Kverneland Amputerte klassikere II.jpgEdit

I messed up, there was two different files and I copy-pasted two similar ones. My bad. The File:Steffen Kverneland Amputerte klassikere II.jpg should also be undeleted. Thanks! Jeblad (talk) 23:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

No worries. Done. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Aim: To avoid changing original siteEdit

Greetings Harry -- I am editing a current site in my sandbox. I check my progress by using Show preview. My question: If I use Save page, does it change the original site? Am I right in thinking that so doing it will only be saved as a part of my sandbox site, and from where I might then forward it for review, after which if accepted, it then replaces the original? 'Would appreciate a heads-up email when you post reply. Thanks much. Pat Kelso (talk) 08:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Pat.

If you're editing in your sandbox, pressing "save page" will only save your changes to your sandbox. When you're ready, you can edit the 'live' page that you want to change, and clicking save there will save your changes to the page itself. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

You found my price. Very much obliged for your input. I'm working in my Sandbox on Graphical projection, subhead #2.2 Perspective projection. Its not hard to find something that needs editing in the Graphics Projection discipline. Pat Kelso (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Harry, I am editing in my sandbox on Graphical projection, section #2.2 Perspective projection. There are six other types of projection preceding. In my section there are a number of instances which call for footnotes. My question: if some of these called-for footnotes appear in the previous sections, do I repeat them in my section? In practice, I imagine there will be a number of people researching my section only so will not be aware of the previous footnotes. ‘Appreciate your email heads-up. Thanks. Pat Kelso (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


Why did you block him? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 23:27, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi Harry--do you mind deleting File:Birdsong, Mary (2006).jpg? It's the old filename (incorrect name) but it still redirects to the (wrong) photo. Apparently that redirect causes the file to show up externally under the wrong name. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:19, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure, done. Sorry it took me a few days; I've been busy elsewhere. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:T.C.B. Miller MBE nameplate on 43048.JPGEdit

Hi, I don't suppose you could add a geocode and/or location category for this image could you? -mattbuck (Talk) 08:21, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Matt, I took it at the open day at Etches Park a couple of weekends ago. Not sure what category would be best as the depot doesn't have one (I'm tempted to create one once I've got the rest of my photos up. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Duplicate ImageEdit

Hello, I was wondering if you could delete one of these two images as they are duplicates of each other Image 1, Image 2. If I am missing out on some procedure let me know. - SantiLak (talk) 03:14, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure they're exact enough (one has been modified) and they're both in use, so I'd rather lave it to people who deal with that sort of thing more often. Perhaps tag one of them with {{duplicate}} or nominate one for deletion if you think it's necessary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


Greetings HJ, I can't edit ENWP but I wanted to drop you a quick note about your decision to unban and overturn the topic ban on MarkBernstein. I could say more about this and how disappointed I am over your decision to let this long term gamergate troll and drama user back, but I know it doesn't matter. What that action did do, was show me (finally I guess) that editors like me who want the project to succeed and have devoted countless hours and who have done hundreds of thousands of edits to it, are not as desired as editors like Mark who do nothing bu contribute drama. So I wanted to congratulate you that after everything, this action showed me once and for all that Wikipedia is not a useful place for me to contribute and spend my time. Kumioko/Reguyla (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I see Mark was immediately reblocked for personal attacks. I can't say I am surprised. Reguyla (talk) 20:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Vagina ultra01.JPGEdit

Please refrain from unjustifyable image deletions like this one, there's no one identifyable so no consent is required. Please file a DR if you see this different. Thank you. --Denniss (talk) 23:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Ah yes, that's why I don't spend much time here. Because hey, let's spread some more photos of vaginas; who cares about pesky little things like whether the model consented to the publication or whether she's even old enough to consent. Honestly? It doesn't worry you at all that somebody who has done nothing but upload pictures of their own cock (because we all know Commons needs more photos of cocks) suddenly uploads a photo of a vagina, and you're not the least bit worried? You don't think it might be a good idea to check that the model is okay with that? Or do you think Commons is so desperate for photos of vaginas that we should waive basic. Human. Decency? @Denniss:. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
File a DR, raise your concerns. Do not delete them on your own gusto, especially if they are in use (you did damage the project by deleting in-use images, even ignoring at least one DR resulting as keep). And no, I'm not a fan of these images either as I frequently delete newly uploaded bad quality genital images I stumble upon. Let me repeat - there's no consent required if nobody is identifyable.--Denniss (talk) 13:11, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "HJ Mitchell".