User talk:High Contrast/Archive 6

Archives 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Current

fire truck photo

The fire truck in the photo taken on October 10th 2008 is a Walter not an Oshkosh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.76.68 (talk • contribs)

Of which image are you talking? Feel free to correct that. --High Contrast (talk) 07:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St. Martin in Landshut, Bayern.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good color and detail. --Daniel Case 19:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Screen Shot Source

You have notified me about a threat to delete , presumably because it has no author information. But what should I put for the author? I did not write the software, I merely took the screenshot. I have properly documented the source application; what more should I do? Ldo (talk) 02:54, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Hi can you tell me how this picture to add it to Wikipedia, click --Tzo15 (talk) 15:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, before you want to upload to COMMONS, you must be aware of the licence of this image. You must understand that it is impossible to extract any licence information out of this link. For a first attempt, I'd say that this image cannot be uploaded to Commons. --High Contrast (talk) 15:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Is it possible to be public domain? --Tzo15 (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

It is not possible to choose image licences randomly. When you think you want to use a {{PD-old}}-licence, then you must proof that the copyright has expired: e.g. death date of the photographer + 70 years. --High Contrast (talk) 17:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

It is logical that the author is dead. Then please upload it in Wikimedia. I want to see how it will upload it under what license to be able to orient. --Tzo15 (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

You obviously did not understand. Again: PD-old does can only be used for death date of the photographer + 70 years. An example why it mustn't be possible: the photographer died in 1960; 1960 + 70 years = 2030. PD-old can be used on 1.1.2031. And do not come up with arguments like It is logical that.... It is not of interest what is "logical" for you, it is of interest that you bring evidence for licence information. And for this image you obviously cannot bring any evidence. --High Contrast (talk) 17:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The picture from Helen Helmink is copied from a DVD with images from this character. On other projects, like the English Wikipedia, you see this also. An example is the character Pamela Ewing Barnes from Dallas. The picture on this page is also from a DVD. Are these pictures good for Wikipedia? Because you have give me a reaction on the picture Helen Helmink. What can I do to make it good? Bella Schutter

Source

Hundreds if not thousands of images I uploaded (and in fact, am uploading as I write this, since I just feed another folder to the Commonist) are missing {{Own}}. If there is a bot which could fix that for me, that would be nice, because I most certainly will not waste my time manually adding this template to my uploads (I will try to add it to my future ones, but it is not something that seems to be in a pull-down menu on the Commonist (I'd suggest adding it to the next release)). Please note that all my files should say something like "myself" in the author column, this makes the source quite redundant (I guess I could've filled that line with "myself" as well...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No, "myself" in the author column makes the statement that a photo is taken not superfluous. This is really necessary. For a bot request: please have a look here: Commons:Bots. I am sure that some bot can do that for you. Please try to insert sufficient source information in Commonist uploads. Others get it done, too. BTW: I removed the problem tag of your image and inserted {{own}}. --High Contrast (talk) 21:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I asked here. From now on I'll try to remember to fill in the source field, too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Perfect! In addition you can ask here COM:PUMP as well. I am sure that you get positive results faster at COM:PUMP. --High Contrast (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Chris_Turner_QB.jpg

Please restore this file. Under 'other versions', it was noted as a crop of File:Chris Turner droppping back.jpg, which was certified as being released into the public domain on December 6, 2009. The user must have changed the copyright status on Flickr since, but the original image has already been released into the public domain under a CC attribution 2.0 generic license. Thank you. Strikehold (talk) 02:24, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Strikehold (talk) 02:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: WHAT?

Hello.

If you looked at User talk:Alofok you would notice that I have responded to Alofok and explained to him the reasoning behind the changes that I have made. BTW all the changes correspond with what can found in cs:Škoda 742 article (which is very well referenced and covers its subject very well) thus a user who speaks Czech on a near native level and "works on the same topic" should probably be familiar with what's written there.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 18:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

You understood falsely. Before you create an enormous category tree, here with Skoda automobiles. Here, some other users (without Alofok) that work on this topic are not content with your work based on personal preferences. And perhaps you can understand that such category monsters like Category:Škoda 120 L (1988 - 1989) / Škoda 120 GL (1988 - 1989) / Škoda 130 (1988) / Škoda 135 (1988 - 1989) / Škoda 136 (1988 - 1989) are not a optimal for category names. Please coordinate your category efforts with others. --High Contrast (talk) 14:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

If you are still interested in the matter of Škoda 742 categories then check Category talk:Škoda 742.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 20:51, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

XM2010

You know that I got that from a US military photostream right? How come when I nominate a file that has no source information whatsoever It is speedy kept?. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:25, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Ask User:Jameslwoodward, he closed this issue after 1,5 months. --High Contrast (talk) 15:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Facade of Sant'Eustorgio in Milan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good technical quality, composition and perspective correction are OK.--MrPanyGoff 15:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

File:San_Pedro_JSS_site_California

What is missing that I didn't put in the description section ? Bwmoll3 (talk) 01:20, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

On your talk page, please. --High Contrast (talk) 01:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Images

I think that is going to be okay now.

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_scientists.jpg
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_musicians.jpg

Thanks! --SeikoEn (talk) 12:36, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Matthew rainfall image

Huh? The image source is clearly stated on that page. Look lower. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

answered on your page. Please read tags. Everything you want to know can be found there. --High Contrast (talk) 20:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I read the tag, and still don't understand the problem. Are we not providing full web addresses anymore, for US government sites, as sources? Is the fact it is from noaa.gov not obvious enough? Enlighten me as to the apparent change in policy, and what I can do to resolve the problem. This issue has not come up with my image uploads over the past few years...until now. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

In short: sources like the ones you have stated are insufficient because they point directly to the image (example: http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/tropical/rain/matthew2010filledrainblk.gif). The problem is: with this link it is not obvious that this image is a work of a NOAA employee. NOAA websites do contain images that are not from the NOAA but from any other non-PD-Gov service. I sincerely hope that you understood the difference. Please read again the "problem tag": It is requested that a better source be provided to make determination of the copyright information easier. Please provide a URL to an HTML page that contains this image. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Deletion of File:Foto espadim 2006.jpg

Hi! I am contacting you as you are the admin responsible for deleting the file I list in the subject. I marked this file as a possible copyvio during the early hours of this morning (UK time, about 3am), since I found a duplicate through Tineye. A few hours after the tag, the uploader, User:Victorcarv attached an image note to the photo, stating that he was a Lieutenant in the Sao Paulo Military police who took that photo in 2006, and the site where I found it was using it with his permission. Is it possible to get the file undeleted please, since the suggestion has been made that the uploader should go via OTRS to confirm ownership of the image and creation of it. Thanks for your help! BarkingFish (talk) 22:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Russian-ossetian.jpg

Kannst du vlt uns zumindest sagen wo das Forum ist und wenn du schon rein schreibst, dass es möglicherweise eine PD-Military-Army sein könnte es dann auch in einem Normalen löschantrag löschen lassen.--Sanandros (talk) 23:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Die Zusammenfassung ist nicht von HC geschrieben sondern von dem der den SLA gestellt hat. Das Forum ist http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?140592-Today-s-Pics-Tuesday-August-26th-2008&p=3500104&viewfull=1#post3500104, das Bild ist kein Militärfoto sondern ein Pressefoto wie uns die exif daten verraten. --Martin H. (talk) 00:26, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Mein Handeln ist vertrauenswürdig - glaub mir. --High Contrast (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Check file

Hello again! I have replaced two photos from the file and I think that now everything is OK, two permissions are fine. I would like somebody to erase deletion request to avoid any confusion. Please check the file, thanks! --SeikoEn (talk) 12:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Flickr uploads

You're welcome, but actually we should thank Alterna2 for his great pictures of concerts and uploading them with the cc-by-2.0 license. I'll give that Flickr tool a try! Thanks! Greetings, Kadellar (talk) 15:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. --High Contrast (talk) 21:59, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

File:USS Berkeley (DDG-15) and Soviet Balzam AGI 1988.jpg

Hi, könntest Du mir bitte einen Gefallen tun? Habe obige Datei mit dem falschen Namen hochgeladen (Schnarch!)! Sie muss File:USS Joseph Strauss (DDG-16) and Soviet Balzam AGI 1988.jpg heißen. Es wäre nett, wenn Du das ändern könntest. Danke. Grüße und frohe Feiertage Cobatfor (talk) 12:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Erledigt! Solche Fehlerchen passieren halt mal. Gruß und frohe Feiertage, High Contrast (talk) 13:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Danke!Cobatfor (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Jesus Hates Zombies Cover

You marked the cover to my book as possible copyright infringement violation. But I OWN that image, and all of its usage, so if I post it here, how is that copyright violation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StephenRL (talk • contribs)

You must give evidence that you are the copyright holder of it. Consider: anybody could come to say that. Go to COM:OTRS and find the correct email adress and mail an email to our OTRS-team. In this email you can claim copyright again. That's all. --High Contrast (talk) 14:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

URV?

Öhm, anch der Nachricht bin ich doch leicht irritiert.. Wo siehst du das die URV? Der Eiffeltturm kanns nicht sein, und daß die Hochhäuser drunten fallen vermag ich mir nicht wirklich vorzustellen, fehlende Panoramafreiheit hin oder her. Mehr oder weniger stinknormale Hochhäuser halt.--Sarkana _{frag den ℑ Vampir} 21:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Das lösen wir noch dieses Jahr. Gelöscht habe ich diese Datei nicht; den Löschantrag erhielt die Datei ebenfalls nicht von mir. Der copyvio-tag stammt von mir, aber das geschah nach einer Benachrichtigung an mich. Die Datei kann m.E. wiederhergestellt werden. Entspricht dies der Annahme? --High Contrast (talk) 21:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

LA-Steller konnte ich ja nicht einsehen, nur dem Kreisch-Kasten ^^ auf meiner Disk. Ansonsten, Durchaus. Ja.--Sarkana _{frag den ℑ Vampir} 15:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Christophe Maé (belle pose).jpg

Hello ! I hope you remember me... The image above is from Google Image, the user download it says in the description. I do not understand, can not say anything to him ! Me in my first we immediately made the remark, and, nothing ! I think this picture has nothing to do on commons, no ? Cordially, Cl;nintendods (talk) 16:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done --High Contrast (talk) 20:09, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Your (my !) Flickr uploads

Thank you for your message and your work for Flickreviews, I always use Flinfo for upload (very useful for geolocalisation) and I upload highest sizes ! I just hope for 2011 that flickr users will never use no commercial use licenses again !

It could be great too if there will be a cooperation between Flickr and Commons to prevent people that their files could be used on Wikipedia, they use Flickr because it seems to them that Wikimedia upload system is too complicated or they don't know anything about licensing, but a lot of them are agree to chose cc-by or cc-by-sa licenses (most of files I upload were copyrighted).

Merry Christmas to you !--Glabb (talk) 09:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Good work! Thanky you! Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 09:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

* * * :) * * *

Ich wünsche Dir fröhliche Weihnachtsfeiertage und alles Gute und ganz best im Neuen Jahr!
--George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 14:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Natus Vincere photos

Hello, High Contrast! I would like to ask you about the following notification. The photos have been provided by the editorial staff of NaVi official website by email. Per my request they have also created a separate page on their website, and confirmed that they were the authors and the owners of those photos.

http://navi-gaming.com/content.php?page=wikipedia&l=ru

The text at the top is taken from the standard template on ru.wikipedia.org:

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F:%D0%94%D0%9E%D0%91%D0%A0%D0%9E

Could you please let me know if that's sufficient, or if there is anything else they could do to verify the copyright status?

Looking forward to hearing from you. --D.bratchuk (talk) 13:16, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. If you have a valid permission for these images, then it will be no problem to keep them. The only thing you have to do is to send an email (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) to our OTRS-team. All information can be found here COM:OTRS or here the same content in Russian: Commons:OTRS/ru. Thanks and greets, High Contrast (talk) 14:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, and enjoy the holidays! --D.bratchuk (talk) 15:47, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

:File:Amanda Bynes on the Red Carpet (cropped2).jpg

Thanks for informations. Lahcim nitup (talk) 10:38, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. --High Contrast (talk) 10:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

File:09 RV PCE 2008 Radek Zocek jpg.jpg

Hello,

(sorry for my bad English)

I uploaded the File:09 RV PCE 2008 Radek Zocek jpg.jpg before a few minutes and now there is problem. This photo was taken from the Czech webpage [1] about emergency medical servises in the Czech Republic. In photogallery is text: "Prosím respektujte autorská práva. Pokud není přímo na fotografii uvedeno jinak, můžete fotografie z této galerie libovolně použít pod podmínkou uvedení autora a zdroje (např. v podobě "foto Jan Novák, www.zachrannasluzba.cz")." It means in the English "Please respect copyrights. If the photo is not directly stated otherwise, still images from the gallery free to use provided the author and source (such as "John Doe photo, www.zachrannasluzba.cz)." (Google translate). There is source: [2], yellow text is license. Please, see the originally website. I think this image doesn't infringe copyrights. I wrote name of the author and source too. Thank you.--Midi7 (talk) 12:08, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

That sounds good. Do you have any information about commercial use? --High Contrast (talk) 17:16, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

What information do you want? The website and photos aren't official. Photogallery is public (there are 3 my photos too) and photos are collected from different people, sometimes from foreign countries. I don't know something about commercial use. I uploated to Commons 21 images from this webpage and I think it should be correct - see this.--Midi7 (talk) 19:46, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

If you do not know anything about commercial use, then all of those images must get deleted. Because commercial use is very important for free file usage. And no, your uploads seem to have some severe problems - they are not correct - equal what you think. Interesting are facts. --High Contrast (talk) 19:50, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand this rules. Administrator of webpages allows free use. --Midi7 (talk) 20:02, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Free use is a quite vague statement. "Free use" does not include commercial use or derivative works of these files. If you know the webmaster of this site, ask him if he would agree a free Creative Commons licence. --High Contrast (talk) 22:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

SasemarG.jpg

Hi High Contrast,

This image is not a copyright violation. You can read the policy explanation in the Ministerio de Fomento website.

http://www.fomento.es/MFOM/LANG_CASTELLANO/FOOTER/LEGAL/default.htm

If you don't undestand Spanish language, because even selecting English, the policies are shown in Spanish, you can use the Google translator tool. Yours sincerely.--Dura-Ace (talk) 19:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

There is notthing written about a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license. --High Contrast (talk) 19:05, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

So the problem is the license selection, right? Maybe I've selected the wrong one (CC Attribution 3.0) as there is not specific license for gubernamental agencies or ministeries that are not from the US... Which one is the correct for this kind of file?. Yours sincerely. --Dura-Ace (talk) 19:14, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Of course the problem lies in the licence section! The problem is that this image was not released under a free licence, so that's why this issue is called a copyright violation. This image cannot be kept on Commons. Read COM:L and learn what is understood under free licences and which files are allowed on Commons. --High Contrast (talk) 19:17, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, now I understand. I've changed the photo licence, taking into consideration the licence of another Spanish Goverment photo uploaded to wikimedia [3]. Now, I think that the licence problem should be fixed, right? Kind regards. --Dura-Ace (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

No, the problem is still not fixed. "Presidencia del Gobierno de España"-images have a special public domain permission that does NOT apply the image we discuss about. There is only one way that could keep the image: write an image to this spanish organization and ask for a free release. Nothing other is possible in this way. Read COM:L (exists in spannish, too) and accept that Commons is a free image host. --High Contrast (talk) 19:32, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Your removing of Category:License plates of Hungary.

Hello.

I would like to ask why did you remove instances of Category:License plates of Hungary. Surely you saw that there were clearly visible license plates of Hungary on those pictures.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 15:18, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

The old problem again: just because there is somewhere on the car a license plate of Hungary does not qualify such images for the categrory License plates of Hungary. As you might remember: the main subject on the image should be "categorized". The purpose of Category:License plates of Hungary would get abrogated by using this category for any automobile that is officially registered in Hungary (this applies for other countries, too). Please read COM:CAT for more information. --High Contrast (talk) 16:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

So if I am understanding this correctly you mean that only the pictures cropped to show only the license plate can be placed in that type of category?

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I think I was talking to you repeatedly about such issues. --High Contrast (talk) 21:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Da ich nicht sehen kann,

ob Du das deutschsprachige Forum auf Deiner Beo hast, magst Du hier mal vorbei schauen? Gruß, --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Man sollte nicht erwarten, dass ich 25 Stunden am Tag auf Commons vorbeischaue. Aber ja, natürlich, ich habe das Forum auf meinem Radar. --High Contrast (talk) 21:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Schon 24 Stunden wären zuviel. Schönen Abend noch! --4028mdk09 (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Ebenso. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 22:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Vielleicht kannst du hier mal kommentieren, ob ich richtig liege, und dann ggf. selbst ent-löschen (macht einen besseren Eindruck als wenns ein Unbeteiligter tut). --Túrelio (talk) 15:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Ich werde dort keinen Kommentar abgeben, da dieses "Gespräch" dort nix verloren hat. Wenn sie/er etwas wünscht oder kritisiert, dann an der Stelle, wo er das "Gespräch" angefangen hat. --High Contrast (talk) 19:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

File Green Ukraine

What should I do as the author of this map: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Green_Ukraine_-_Zeleny_Klyn_-_Russian_Federation.jpg? I do not understand this remark: "This file is missing evidence of permission". I made a change now, is it OK now? For other similar examples I have not seen the same warning?! Thanks! --SeikoEn (talk) 17:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

You gave as source the homepage volgota.com/sometrouble/zeleniy-klin which is obviously a copyrighted homepage. Thus you need the permission of the copyright owner. If you are the author of this map, you have to do 2 things: a) always give {{Own}} as source if it is your own work b) you must state where you have the base map from. --High Contrast (talk) 19:02, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know that, thanks for information. I will now make those changes so please check them out when you have time. Thanks!--SeikoEn (talk) 07:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Was the base map published under a free licence? By now, the source information is still insufficient. --High Contrast (talk) 09:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

• Base map: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_map_of_Russia-geoloc.svg ... Do I have something else to correct? --SeikoEn (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Other files

I had previously made several other uploads. The examples below have poor print quality and they don't have the mark of protection or copyright mark. I have scanned those postcards aged over 20 years:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:03_Ukrainian_costume_Bukovyna_region.JPG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:04_Ukrainian_costume_Podillia_region.JPG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukraine_country_atmosphere_Ukrainian_postcard.jpg
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_traditional_child_clothes.JPG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_traditional_Easter_eggs_Pysanky.JPG

Can I do anything to fix any errors? --SeikoEn (talk) 07:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

You state that these postcards are released under a "Free Art License" - this must simply be proven by you. In addition you have to give source and author information. --High Contrast (talk) 09:21, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

• Everything what is presented on these cards I wrote in File Summary. There is no sign of protection or copyright mark. Some cards have authors and I have named them. I do not know how to prove their license in other way. Every information I have is in Summary of every postcard. If in these conditions for them there is no solution then unfortunately I can't do anything else. All known information is in Summary and the active license is a presupposition only. --SeikoEn (talk) 16:54, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

These postcards are nice. I'd wish to have them kept. But whether my opinion nor the opinion of somebody else does count in licence questions. Only facts count. Why do you think a "Free Art License" does apply here? --High Contrast (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I am not expert on this, maybe beacuse they don't have Copyright mark and they are in public use for long time? You have helped me before and I have no doubt in your actions about those files. If they are not suitable for Wikipedia they should be deleted, it is quite clear. I just thought if something can be corrected, I will do it. Thanks one more time for help and patience. :-) --SeikoEn (talk) 09:21, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

• This other map of Green Ukraine is OK, from base map: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_map_of_Russia-geoloc.svg ... Do I have something else to correct?--SeikoEn (talk) 09:26, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done [4] --High Contrast (talk) 10:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks! There is one more disputed file where I made few corrections: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_scientists.jpg ... If anything else is necesarry to edit I will do it? --SeikoEn (talk) 08:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

aproblems with picture upload

Greetings High Contrast! I've got a problem. I recently uploaded a couple of pictures, but soon they deleted them all and told me the file source is not properly indicated. I did'nt want to violate any kind of copyright, I was simply not sure how to upload them correctly. I uploaded them from this side here: http://vnafmamn.com/lamson_719.html I'm pretty sure these photos are free for everyone to use them.

Let's make it together, right?

• Where is it from? Its somebody elses work/
• Scourcefile Sourcefile is clear/
• Source Original scource is the mentioned side above/
• Author That's difficuilt, it was actually the vietnamese Army who madé it, but can I write this?/
• Date of work The article I'am trying to create is about a battle in Vietnam War, the battle occured between 8. February and *25 March 1971, Thats all the information I have./
• Description Description is OK/
• Permission Thats the problem, I don't really know what liscense to take/

This is all I can say, it would be nice if you could answer soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kolya60 (talk • contribs)

Those images cannot be uploaded to Commons because they have not been released under a free licence. Read COM:L for more information about licence questions. You can upload those photos on that local wiki where you want to write an article. Maybe these files fall under "fair use" conditions, that are accepted on some wikis, but not on Commons because we try to create a really free media host. --High Contrast (talk) 21:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Ja ich bins noch mal. Allen Anschein nach kannst du Deutsch reden daher lass ich das Englisch mal sein. Du hast gesagt ich kann die Bilder auf das lokale Wiki laden, wo ich auch meinen Artikel schreibe. Wie geht das? Wenn ich Bild einfügen drücke kommt das hier

• Beschreibung1
  Beschreibung1
• Beschreibung2
  Beschreibung2

Was mache ich als nächstes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kolya60 (talk • contribs)

Damit meinte ich, dass es auf den einzelnen Wikipediaprojekten unterschiedliche Lizenzen akzeptiert werden. Ich vermute, dass du diesen Artikel auf der dt. Wikipedia schreiben willst; da gelten ähnlich strenge Lizenzbedingungen wie auf Commons. Also ein upload ist auch dort nicht möglich. --High Contrast (talk) 22:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Posse_Dilma_2010_4.jpg

Colega, creio que ocorreu engano. A imagem Posse Dilma 2010 4.jpg possui fonte (Agência Brasil) e autor (José Cruz/ABr). Verifique lá. Att. Felipe P (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The source information ("Agência Brasil") is insufficient. You must correct that in order to verify the applied licence. --High Contrast (talk) 22:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Images from Flickr

No problem. I like doing this :) Alakasam (talk) 23:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The big advantage of this tool is that all information will be transferred - even coordinates. So, please use this tool. And control your recent uploads: rotated images if neccessary. --High Contrast (talk) 23:03, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't wanted rotate photos until there were approved. Let me do that job, don't wate your time :) Alakasam (talk) 23:06, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I must tell you this because your work is not good enough. Be glad that somebody takes care of you. --High Contrast (talk) 23:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

The image

I made it, i'm Blackshade! Horatii (talk) 00:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't tell me, state this at the image's info template. --High Contrast (talk) 10:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I put the info in the template. Horatii (talk) 11:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is still not sufficient. Because Commons wants to be a free media host, we must take care of orderly and correctly stated author and licence information. If this image is your own work you must do two thhings now: a) give {{Own}} as source b) relinquish to use "Blackshade" as authorname. Use instead you username only. --High Contrast (talk) 11:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

ok user name only Horatii (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

my foto

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:%D0%9D%D0%B5%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2.jpg

Then, please state {{Own}} as source. --High Contrast (talk) 09:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Jamie Baillie Photo

Hi there,

I'm emailing because some time ago you made an edit to a article about Nova Scotia PC Party Leader Jamie Baillie. In your edit, which i can see by viewing the edit history, the photograph in the article is now obsolete. I have replaced it with the updated one, but yours still remains when I view your edits. I represent Mr. Baillie and am the owner of both photos.

Is it at all possible to delete the photo from your edited page permenantly? I don't want that photo on Wikipedia's server.

Sorry to bother you with something so trivial, but I am new to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milton19 (talk • contribs)

Thanks.

Which images do you mean? Can you give the links, please? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Venera Images

Be advised that I have provided permission links for all of these images. Please read it before submitting the deletion request! NSSDC Gallery Use Policy

"All of the images presented on NSSDC's Photo Gallery are in the public domain. As such, they may be used for any purpose. NSSDC does ask, however, that you acknowledge NASA and the NSSDC as the supplier of the data. In addition, where the source of the image (by project or as a specific person) is credited in the text, you should also acknowledge that, too.

In addition, NASA further requires that NASA images cannot be used to imply endorsement by NASA."

Clearly all of these images come from this source and clearly they are in the public domain. Please remove the deletion request promptly. --Xession (talk) 01:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Clearly all of these images come from the Soviet Union. The NASA cannot put them in the public domain. --High Contrast (talk) 01:07, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Clearly you did not read the NSSDC Gallery Use Policy which does not say that only NASA material is covered. It says all. Please remove the requests. The licenses could be changed to 'Copyrighted, but may be used for any purpose, including commercially.' However, that isn't exactly factual nor does it follow the image use policy of the NSSDC.--Xession (talk) 01:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Clearly you did not understand what the problem is: This notice is not complete - PD-NASA applies only for NASA images, for others not. And clearly you did not read the licence template that is used by you consecutively. Do this, think about it and stop uploading copyright violations. Those DR won't get removed. --High Contrast (talk) 01:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Obviously you do not understand that the policy covers 'everything' at the NSSDC gallery as it states explicitly. PD-NASA does apply only to NASA images and I understand that fully. However, the images are not in violation of copyright and are currently held by the NSSDC for preservation. There is no option at Wikimedia for 'NASA Held' or anything similar. What other licensing option would you recommend? As I stated, 'Copyrighted, but may be used for any purpose, including commercially' is an option. Would this appease you? Lastly, if you are certain that these are in fact violations of copyrighted material, I challenge you to prove this as you are in the affirmative on this debate and under the burden of proof.--Xession (talk) 01:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

You should argue at the deletion debates. High Contrast wrote down his concerns there. --Martin H. (talk) 01:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

 Comment I'd wish to keep those images. Although other DR with the same file was discussed here (for example). Xession, you seem to be dedicated contributer. So, to get final clarification, you could write an email to http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov and ask if this public domain licence applies to the Venera-images, too. Maybe an error occured and non-NASA-files are not included - as they are normally. Tell us the feedback and if it is positive, we'll store that mail here and the images will be kept for all time. I think this is the best way to solve this issue. --High Contrast (talk) 11:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

 Comment I've received a response from Dr. Edwin V. Bell, who is currently the curator of the NSSDC Photo Gallery. Below is a transcript of our interaction:

Transcript between User:Xession (hereby known as Zachary L. Doyle) and Dr. Edwin V. Bell on January 6, 2011

Mr. Doyle --- These images were scanned from data that is currently archived at the NSSDC. All data that is not archived as proprietary data (data for which special conditions exist) at NSSDC is, by definition, in the public domain. These images were obtained by the NSSDC during the Soviet era as a data exchange (such exchanges between different space agencies still occur) with the intent of making the data available to interested parties (science researchers, general public, professional press). These images are not proprietary (i.e., no special conditions were specified when the images were provided to NSSDC). We have tried to carefully avoid putting copyrighted information on our site or to do so only with the permission of the copyright holder and with proper credit. There are some images available from the NSSDC web site (such as in the photo gallery) that are not part of the archived data here or for which copyrights are noted or possible, but these are not, to my knowledge, among them. Ed Bell On 2011-01-06 1:13 PM, Zachary Doyle wrote: Hello Dr. Bell, I have a question regarding the use status of a few images in the NSSDC photo gallery. The Venera images (http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/photo_gallery/photogallery-venus.html#surface) are of course from the USSR and I was unsure if your image use policy, (http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/photo_gallery/photogallery-faq.html#use) which states that all images are in the public domain, in fact covered the use of these images from the USSR as well. This is to settle a dispute (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Venera_9_-_Venera_10_-_venera9-10.jpg) at Wikimedia Commons. Any help is appreciated. Thank you, Zachary L. Doyle -- Dr. Edwin V. Bell, II National Space Science Data Center (NSSDC) Voice: +1-301-286-1187 Mail: Mail Code 690.1 Fax: +1-301-286-1635 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Email: ed.bell@nasa.gov Greenbelt, MD 20771

In accordance to his remarks, the images from Venera including all other images on the NSSDC that are not explicitly labeled as copyrighted works, are within the public domain. Again, I am aware that PD-NASA isn't exactly the most accurate licensing label for these images as they were acquired by Soviet spacecraft. However, there seems to be no other more accurate label as they do come from NASA and are in the public domain as a result. --Xession (talk) 20:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this is definately a valid evidence. And yes, the classic PD-NASA-licence does not work here. I think we choose a PD-author-licence - but these are questions of detail. The DRs are closed. But you must send this Email above to our OTRS-team; basically only a email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (per Commons:OTRS). Thanks for your delightful support. --High Contrast (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Kodi_beach.jpg

Hello, This picture was taken by me(Raghavendra Nayak Muddur). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghavendra Nayak Muddur (talk • contribs)

If so, please state your username (User:Neinsun), so that it is clear that you are the author. --High Contrast (talk) 08:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleted Tatra photos

You deleted old Tatra photos which were from 1930's. The photos had been uploaded there with the information that they are over 70 years old and the author is unknown. Then you stated here that because the copyright holder is unknown, the photo shall be deleted. What?! Of course it is unknown, as the licence says. When the photo is taken by unknown and the original source is not known, obviously, there is no certain evidence about anything. For the same reason all those photos should be deleted from Commons which have been marked with a such licence. I am waiting for your explanation and instructions how to do in the future with photos taken in 1930's. --Gwafton (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

When the photo is taken by unknown and the original source is not known, obviously, there is no certain evidence about anything. Can I disagree with that? Unlikely the photo was first published on the internet >70 years ago, Or? If it was first published on the internet a few years ago the publisher will have a short protection term, so providing the website as the only source and claiming the work as free is an argument that will fail. But obviosuly the work is scanned from somewhere, so the argument "the original source is not know" is based on the laziness to not find out the person who scanned it, by e.g. asking the person who published the scan on the internet. The scanner can of course answer the question where it was scanned from and provide the source. Juding images by the online information or by the information you can see on first sight isnt an argument and fails the legal requirement to make research before concluding something as an "unknown", out of copyright work. The internet represents <1% of the information maybe, especially for old works it is necessary to consult sources that are in contact with the original paper prints. --Martin H. (talk) 18:33, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Even now, it is extremely rare that the name of the photographer gets mentioned in advertising. So unless an old photo is signed, typically {{PD-anon-70}} applies. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Gohe007's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eigenner samenerguss.JPG

Hallo High Contrast, du hast vergessen nach dem Löschen (per DR) auch den zugehörigen DR zu schließen: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eigenner samenerguss.JPG. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 17:34, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

File:F4 Phantom allemand.JPG

Hi, kannst Du die obige Datei vielleicht in "Panavia Tornado ECR JaboG 32 2005" oder so umbenennen, da unser französischer Kollege wohl nicht wusste, was er da fotografiert hat. Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Erledigt. Hier befindet sich nun das Foto: File:Panavia Tornado ECR JaboG 32 2005.JPG. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 08:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Danke!Cobatfor (talk) 11:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Re:Category:T-55AM2 tank in the National Museum of Military History, Bulgaria

Hello.

It was obviously an error on my part I shall change the Category:T-55AM2 tank in the National Museum of Military History, Bulgaria to Category:T-55AM2 tank at the National Museum of Military History, Bulgaria immediately so that the naming system will be consistent.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. Can you please check other this-like categories created by you for the same problem? Thank you in advance, SuperTank17. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

NumanciaF83internal

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Little_Professor&diff=next&oldid=34323249 The source including VIRIN is clearly indicated in the description already. Look a little harder next time before making posts on my wall again. Little Professor (talk) 16:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you are not a very experienced user. Well, the source is indeed not sufficient, try to read COM:L. I have fixed that mistake of you for you. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Dornier_Do_X_-_Modell.JPG

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

Teofilo (talk) 00:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Tahrir Square during Friday of Departure.png

Please check this out. you will see that the author has released the image under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 15:10, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Why do you tell me? This is the first time I see this image. --High Contrast (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

What was the problem with File:M41A Pulse Rifle.jpg?

Go to http://uscmc.wikispaces.com/m41 and scroll down to the very bottom on the page. READ: "Contributions to http://uscmc.wikispaces.com are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 2.0 License.".. That image IS a "Contribution to http://uscmc.wikispaces.com". Therefore, it is licensed under CC SA 2.0. I properly attributed the image when uploading, and put up the same CC SA 2.0. So why deleting? -- Wesha (talk) 20:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Very poor source and no evidence for CC-SA because this does not prove that this file is the own work of those contributers there. ->User_talk:Denniss#File:M41A_Pulse_Rifle.jpg: If you find a positive consensus with User:Denniss, you can contact me in order to restore this file. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:32, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Files uploaded by Julbert1980

Hi High Contrast. You just tagged a lot of files uploaded by Julbert1980 as "missing permission information" (see User talk:Julbert1980). Don't you think that this user and the photographer (Julien Bertrand) are actually the same person? Croquant (talk) 17:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello!
Possibly it is likely but the final proof can just be proceeded by the Julbert1980. I told him to give a statement about this but he did not react. That's strange. --High Contrast (talk) 17:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey High Contrast, I also noticed your marks for deletion, shouldn't be presumed that user good faith? Is there any reason that has led you to suspect he's not the author of those photos?--- Darwin ^Ahoy! 09:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

There are no "marks for deletion", just "no permission"-tags. I can assume good faith but maybe others can't in a few years. As long as Julbert1980 is active it is much more easier to ask him to clarify this situation. You can help in this issue if you want to. --High Contrast (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ehehe The tags say the file will be deleted soon, therefore I called them "marks for deletion", I'm still not that familiar with all the technicities over here.

But I hate to see valuable photos as those of Julbert incurring the risk of deletion for what seems to mee to be a minor formality. What if he confirms to you that he is Julien Bertrand, what will change on the files? Or does he have to send OTRS for everyone? I have some interest in this because I myself considered writing my real name on some of my photos, but I don't want them to be deleted at some point because of that.

Anyway, you said I can help, how can I do it if I don't know the man?--- Darwin ^Ahoy! 16:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Julien Bertrand only has to make clear that that he is "Julbert1980" - that's all. Several possibilities exist: a) to give a short statement on the Userpage or b) to give as author for example Julien Bertrand/Julbert1980. That would be sufficient (for me). If one of those methods have been applied, I will remove those problem tags. An OTRS-permission would be possible but a bit much. By the way, what does "Ehehe" mean? --High Contrast (talk) 17:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll send a message to him in French, then, maybe he has not understood the problem.

"Ehehe" means nothing, it's a small laugh, like "Ahahahah". :) --- Darwin ^Ahoy! 17:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I am sure this problem can be solved easily. --High Contrast (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The user hasn't come since 7 Feb, I don't know how much he's active there, and all his photos may be deleted tomorrow or after tomorrow. Wouldn't it be better to remove the "source missing" tags, since there isn't any reason to doubt that they are his own work as stated?--- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I can undelete these images after Julbert1980 gave a comment about the authorship. --High Contrast (talk) 19:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Lucky you, I have an undeletion request catching mould for almost 2 days. But if you can undelete them in case they are really deleted, I'm less worried.--- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Believe me, I am interested in keeping Julbert1980's photos but I think we must solve this authorship now. If we do not act now, somebody else could recognize this grieviance in 5 years when lots of us aren't active anymore. Can you reach Julbert1980 on fr:wiki or per Email? --High Contrast (talk) 19:37, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I left him a message on wiki-fr, but it seems that he's even less active there than he is on Commons. I'm still a bit puzzled with why we can't just assume that Julbert is Julien Bertrand, it looks somewhat obvious to me, but you certainly have your motives.--- Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:50, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I do not have any personal motives. Maybe you know about the Commons' licensing requirements. --High Contrast (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't mean personal motives, but rather "administrative" motives. I know about the licence requirements, but I think that this one of those cases where good faith should be used.--- Darwin ^Ahoy! 13:12, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Leopard 2 A5 der Bundeswehr.jpg

CC-by-NA is not compatible with our license so check your other uploads. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

You have to learn a lot: read this and this. --High Contrast (talk) 16:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

File:1977_Egyptian_Bread_Riots.png

Can you please explain to BomBom why the picture should not be deleted. I starting to get tired of having to defend almost every picture I upload. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 08:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I will look on it. --High Contrast (talk) 18:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Schöller-Eistransport-LKW,_2010.JPG

File:Schöller-Eistransport-LKW,_2010.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Teofilo (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Nail growth.gif

Hi there. I was wondering if you could take a look at what happened to File:Nail growth.gif. It seems the original uploader included a note purporting to grant permission by the copyright owner, you replaced the note with a CC-BY-SA template, and now the image has been flagged as lacking evidence of permission. Is the original note suitable or do we need to try to get the uploader to get the copyright owner to contact OTRS? It's a great image used on several Wikipedias so I'd hate to lose it. Thanks. Zachlipton (talk) 09:11, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Miserlou should contact COM:OTRS. That's the only solution since User:Miserlou has the original eMail of the copyright holder. --18:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Campeon in Neubiberg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

User:Colombia678

...keeps on uploading pictures from the websites of the Tía supermarket chain claiming that he's the original author, even after your warning. Please see his latest exploits on his talk page or the related deletion discussion. I suggest we delete all of his recently uploaded material since we cannot be sure about it. De728631 (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

User blocked; copyright violations have been deleted. Thanks for your good help! --High Contrast (talk) 18:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Praha-Nové Město, Jindřišská věž.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Oh, Prague, nice! :) The shot is good, but it needs a bit turn left. BTW: At the botom of the tower is one of three pieces of Tatra T6A5 with special type of couple. ;) — Jagro 23:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC) Good quality. --Mbdortmund 22:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

NN

Hi,

You deleted a bunch on pictures on my account that are most certainly not stolen and were taken by me. I would like them restored please.

Kiwibirdman Feb 15, 2010 Kiwibirdman1701 (talk) 00:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

These images were copyright violations and/or had no valid source and author information. Please read COM:L and do not remove problem tags. --High Contrast (talk) 17:08, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hi there,

I'm kind of new here, so if you would like to check the photos I uploaded one more time, now that I've made the changes you asked for, to see that everything is as it should be, that would be much appreciated.

Regards,

Ericphotographer (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Ericphotographer!
Everything is fine: licence, author and source information and of course - certainly very important - your photos are very good. Keep going like this. The only thing that is missing are categories. Anyway, I hope more photographs by you will follow. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 21:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Fassade der Basilica di San Lorenzo, Mailand.jpg

Hello.
Is this picture a composite or is there really a twin couple on the loose, in which case I owe you an apology for the suspicion of the former. Qiqritiq (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

This image was stitched out of 3 other files. --High Contrast (talk) 21:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

"Deutsches Museum"

Hallo!

Ich sehe, dass du mehrere Bilder des Deutschen Museums hochgeladen hast. Finde ich gut. Hast du auch eines des "Würzburg Riesen" und der Windmühle (steht vor dem Museum)? Zobert 22:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo!
Ja, habe ein (ausreichend gutes) Bild. Ich habe es just hochgeladen: File:Ehemaliges Radargerät "Würzburg-Riese", Deutsches Museum.JPG. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 00:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Image permission

Help, the person from whom I obtained the license, turned out not to be their author, sorry :( So can you delete?,this:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:7.11.2010_Tricolor_building_moscow.jpg
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:National_Silesia_Stadium_Marek_Borys.JPG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mercury_City_Tower_by_Jugi.jpg

--Muffi (talk) 23:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

oh! sorry someone delete this now,but thanks--Muffi (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. But I would have helped you as well. Greetings and happy editing, High Contrast (talk) 00:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Please see File:Bjjj.jpg, from a user that you warned at [5]. --UserB (talk) 02:09, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

You did not warn User:Hungryhowies123 after you have tagged File:Bjjj.jpg as copyright violation. Please do not forget to do so. I won't block User:Hungryhowies123 because a) was not warned and b) was his last upload. I proceed like this: 100% transparency in blocking-cases. But thanks anyway for notifying me. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Kairo Protest 2011.jpg

Hallo, High Contrast. Kümmerst du dich bitte noch einmal darum. News.ch hat das Bild von Flickr (siehe Vermerk direkt rechts unter dem Bild), also wohl aus derselben Quelle, wie die gelöschte Datei. Somit wohl keine copy vio. Bitte nachprüfen und ggf. wiederherstellen und die Widereinbindung veranlassen. Danke. --Matthiasb (talk) 07:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Hallo, unter welcher Lizenz wurde es auf flickr veröffentlicht? Die Person, die das Bild hier hochgeladen hat, gab an, dass es sich um "eigenes Werk" handelte, was nicht zutrifft. --High Contrast (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Das kann ich dir nicht sagen, weil ich als Nicht-Admin die Versionsgeschichte nicht einsehen kann und mir insofern nicht bekannt ist, von wo es hochgeladen wurde. --Matthiasb (talk) 13:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Das Löschen ist rechtens; ein Hinweis auf einen flickr-link, der beweisen könnte, dass die Datei unter einen freien Lizenz veröffentlicht wurde existiert nicht. --High Contrast (talk) 16:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ist immer dieselbe Schlamperei. Als ich das Bild damals hochladen wollte, hatte die Software gestreikt, weil es das Bild schon gab. Ich habe mir leider den Link auch nicht gemerkt. Danke dir für deine Mühe. Grüße. --Matthiasb (talk) 15:28, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Falls du die Datei auf flickr noch finden solltest, dann melde dich und ich das Foto ist wieder im Katalog. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Nachtrag: Ich habe auf flickr recherchiert und ich fand das Foto hier. Es handelt sich hierbei um eine recht gut angegebene Dateiwäsche: Der flickr Benutzer "Frame Maker" hat offenbar das Bild von facebook hochgeladen. Er weiß auch, dass der Fotograph Mohammed Abed von AFP/Getty Images ist und er weiß auch, dass er keine Erlaubnis hat das Bild unter einer freien Lizenz zu veröffentlichen. Zumindest hofft er, dass er Fotograph dies aber so will. Nunja, das reicht aber leider nicht. Ohne der Freigabe seitens des Fotografen handelt es sich um Urheberrechtsverletzung. --High Contrast (talk) 15:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Eric Statzer Friends.jpg

Hello, I removed that speedy tag, because it's an userpage image and used in uploader's enwiki userpage. Just letting you know. Cheerio! — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 13:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

That's OK. Thanks for letting me know. --High Contrast (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

File:F-22 Raptor - 070401-F-6701P-049.jpg

Hallo, High Contrast Du hast mir bezüglich der Datei:F-22 Raptor - 070401-F-6701P-049.jpg auf meine Diskussionsseite geschrieben, dass die Quelle unvollständig sei und deshalb der Copyrightstatus nicht überprüft werden kann. Da ich mir eigentlich einbilde, den Link zu der Quelle angegeben zu haben, kann ich das Problem gerade nicht so recht erkennen und bitte deshalb um eine genauere Erläuterung. Mfg -- DeffiSK (talk) 17:29, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Bitte die Info auf deiner Diskussionsseite erneut lesen. Es geht um die Quellenangabe selbst. Du hast als Quelle ledglich den Direktlink auf das Photo auf der Airforce-Seite angegeben. Das reicht leider nicht aus. Die Quellenangabe dient der Nachvollziehbarkeit der verwendeten Lizenz. Da du hierbei eine "PD-Air Force" angibst, musst du auch die Quelle so angeben, dass darauf ersichtlich wird, dass der Fotograf tatsächlich ein Air Force angehöriger ist. Das geht aus dem Direkt-jpg-Link nicht hervor. --High Contrast (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Mit anderen Worten ich müsste den Link so angeben? mfg -- DeffiSK (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ja, das ist ok. Ich weiss um die Problematik, dass es sich hierbei um eine dynamische Galerie handelt, aber nützen tut dieser Link trotzdem. Mach das einfach für deine künftigen Downloads auch so. Ich mache es immer so: Beispiel. Guß, High Contrast (talk) 18:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

npd-tagging

Hi. Working through npd-Category of February 7th I see quite many pictures of the user Julien Bertrand tagged by you (e.g. [6]). So far they all look like private pics (vacation landscapes, car exhibition; all with same camera according to the always existing EXIF) so I wonder about the reason. -- Cecil (talk) 14:15, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, it I agree that these images with proper EXIF information are by "Julien Bertrand". But the uploader is a User called "Julbert1980". So, there is no permission by "Julien Bertrand" that allows "User:Julbert1980" to upload these delightful pics under free licences. With the help of User:Darwinius I tried to clear this issue because one can think "Julien Bertrand" and "User:Julbert1980" is one and the same person. But User:Julbert1980 didn't react on our request - as you can see on his talk page. We tried to contact him on fr:wiki as well but nothing happened. --High Contrast (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Seems, he has not been active in any of the projects since some time before the tried contact. I'll better give it some more days, as I think that both are the same person and I don't want to be the one who has to restore that all again. -- Cecil (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Source provided

Hi! I hope all the media uploads are properly referenced now. Thanks for the support. Jmelendres (talk) 03:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)jmelendres

Hello! Your images are a good contribution to Commons. If they are your own work, you must stated this explicitely and if not, they cannot be uploaded this easily. I assume these photos were taken by you. I have fixed the information template. If you want to upload more photos, you can copy&paste this template into the upload form of the new files. If you have any questions left, please contact me on my talk page. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 07:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

About "marauder love" from Strikers Brothers

Hello High Contrast,i´m Israel Mendoza,now my article has names,surnames and a direct link to our article at wikipedia,if these are not sources enough please let me know to add more information,(please excuse my lamentable english),greetings: Israel Mendoza (strykerbrother)82.213.149.114 20:58, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

OPAFIRE.jpg

Hi High Contrast. You removed: File:OPAFIRE.jpg from the Opafire page. I own all rights to this image, and have attached a permission statement bellow as well as submit said permission statement to Wikimedia Commons. Please tell me what else I need to do to get this image restored?? -- Thanks in advance for your help!

To permissions-commonswikimedia.org

I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of WORK "File:OPAFIRE.jpg"

I agree to publish that work under the free license {{GFDL}}: "Copyleft (Multi-license GFDL, all CC-BY-SA)"

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[ signed: March 11, 2011, Zachary Norman Engelleitner ] Indepthmusic (talk) 23:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I did not delete File:OPAFIRE.jpg. If you want this image getting restored, please contact the admin that deleted the image. Regards and thanks for your support, High Contrast (talk) 09:25, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! O&K Radbagger MH4 PMS.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 10:42, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arnulfpark München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI Taxiarchos228 11:13, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

File:LibyanEE-9.jpg

Hello, the picture was taken from [7], where it is public domain, why did you deleted it here? Ranbar (talk) 09:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello; for several reasons: a) read the deletion reason - the image is a copyright violation that appears onseveral different webpages b) the image on en:wiki is the same copyright violation without any valid licensing information c) as you can somebody else tagged this image on en:wiki as copyright violation. In short: there is no valid evidence for this image being in the public domain. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it was tagged on en-wiki because of this notice. Well, see if I can find a photo of Libyan Army without copyright violation. Ranbar (talk) 16:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

It is quite unlikely that you find sufficient free images on the web about this topic. But sure, you can try it. But please do not upload copyright violations again. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry!

I'm sorry about my comments on AN. I'm just annoyed that what should be a simple discussion about comments like "piss off, freak" etc. turned out to be about Kuiper. Every time Kuiper is mentioned it is unlikely that the discussion will end with something useful. --MGA73 (talk) 11:45, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

It's ok. I share your opinion about topics started by Kuiper on AN but there must be some reason for that. All in all, I wonder which interpretations were allowed through my quite harmless comment. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Request

Please . I want pictures to abdulhussain abdulredha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.150.201.241 (talk • contribs)

Hello! Unfortunately, I could not find images that were released under free licences so that they could get uploaded to Commons. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Laromxl6.jpg deleted

Is this the same picture: http://www.mapn.ro/fotodb/20051109_ar/8_Salva_cu_bateria_de_LAROM ? If so, it can be kept with OTRS permission, but with mapn.ro as source and cc-by-sa-3.0 license.--Mircea87 (talk) 10:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Image is restored. Please add immediately all relevant information (OTRS-ticket, licence, image description). Thanks in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 13:06, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I Cantori delle Cime

Hi. I updated the source for ICantoriDelleCime.jpg, hope now can be approved. Best regards, --Unter62 (talk) 17:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi; sorry, but the source isn't helpful. Because Commons is a free media host, we need a valid (written) permission by the owner of the image. You must send this permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (more infos here: COM:OTRS). Regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:B-2 Spirit supporting operation Odyssey Dawn.jpg

Hallo High Contrast, kannst Du diese LD bitte dichtmachen? Ich habe meinen Antrag zurückgezogen, da das Problem geklärt wurde. Gruß, De728631 (talk) 21:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done Just geschehen. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 21:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Super, prompte Bedienung ;) Vielen Dank. De728631 (talk) 21:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Kungl. slottet från ovan.jpg

Dear High Contrast, You just deleted a perfectly correct licensed image, although I stated this clearly on the image's talk page (which you also deleted). There are thousands of photographs made pre 1969 on Commons with the {{PD-Sweden}} license. I hope that you are not about to delete all these as well? Please revert the deletion, or at least have the courtesy to motivate yourself (here, now that the image's talk page is deleted). Thanks, /Urbourbo (talk) 17:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I folloewed the deletion request. By the way: Why did such intelligent people like you did not remove the incorrect copyvio-tag if it was placed incorrectly? --High Contrast (talk) 18:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

At Swedish Wikipedia, it is common not to delete tags on content you produced yourself, but instead motivate yourself at the talk page. This is also what this particular tag did encourage me to do, and I just followed the link from the tag. But it seems you deleted without reading the talk page?

This is not the first time I've had PD-Sweden-licensed images deleted by admins too busy to understand the license (or too busy to question copyvio-tags). I hope for your understanding for my somewhat low patience level with having to spend time defending images I've uploaded from these actions.

Thanks, /Urbourbo (talk) 18:19, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) One might also wonder why you mistook a painted postcard (which requires a publication prior to 1944 in Sweden) for a photograph. De728631 (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: My comment on painted postcards was a reply to you, Urbourbo. De728631 (talk) 18:27, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

This was news to me, and although I doubt it would be confirmed by Swedish law if tried, at least it was a form of motivation, for which I thank you. /Urbourbo (talk) 18:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

To be exact, {{PD-Sweden}} applies only to photos, so this specific image was totally out of question because we don't know the author. Please have a look at the license text on the PD template, it has several conditions, not a general pre-1969 ruling. De728631 (talk) 18:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Exactly which part of the tag, in your opinion, regulates that the author must be known for a pre-1969 image? I might not be so intelligent, but I cannot find it. I'd also be interested to know the legal background to your absolute ruling that a postcard (created from a, perhaps, painted photograph) would not be applicable for PD-Sweden. /Urbourbo (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The part that says that this entire license is valid for photos only, not for painted images like the one we're discussing here. Paintings are subject to general copyright, i.e. the author's life plus 70. De728631 (talk) 18:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

a/ To me, it is obvious that the postcard was created from a photograph, and not a pure painting. Do I understand you correctly, that you do not believe that it was created from a photograph? If so, how do you arrive at that conclusion?

b/ Possibly, it was originally a black-and-white photograph which was manually colored before going to print. But in this case, we need to prove that the coloring was of significant artistic value to rule out the photo from the pre-69 regulations, which I personally beleive would be legally very difficult, but maybe you have further information on this as well?

c/ Also, the source web page given on the file description page clearly states that the image was a color photography ("färgfotografi" in Swedish), just for your information. Thanks, /Urbourbo (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

As to a/, it was pretty obvious from my point of view since the colours had no shading and on a close look there was a canvas-like structure on the image. And even if a photograph was taken of an original painting it is the source image, the original art, that is copyrighted and overrides any free photo license for derivative works. On that note it might help if you posted the link to your source here. De728631 (talk) 19:40, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

We obviously have two completely different analyses regarding the probable origin of the image. Maybe, then, we should let the source do the final ruling? /Urbourbo (talk) 21:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, you might have a point there. The source page does in fact call it a coloured photograph by an unknown photographer. And on a second thought what looks like structured paper may also be a poor scan and/or upscaling artefacts. I think we can therefore ask High Contrast to undelete the image. Thanks for your patience, Urbourbo. De728631 (talk) 17:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no need to undelete this file: it was reuploaded by User:Urbourbo as File:Kungl. slottet från ovan 2.jpg some days ago. --High Contrast (talk) 14:38, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrong again; that image is a similar but different photograph, from another direction. /Urbourbo (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean with "another direction"? --High Contrast (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I mean that File:Kungl. slottet från ovan.jpg and File:Kungl. slottet från ovan 2.jpg are two different photographs (and, for avoidance of doubt, as you would have seen yourself if you had endeavoured to verify your hypothesis, they were both uploaded before you deleted the first one). /Urbourbo (talk) 18:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

All in all, I have come to the conclusion that a {{PD-Sweden}}-licence applies here. Urbourbo, if you have any questions left, contact the inital copyvio-nominator of the image here if you have any questions left about licences that are accepted on Commons. In addition, you can read COM:L for more information. --High Contrast (talk) 18:31, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Would you please also undelete the talk page? /Urbourbo (talk) 23:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Alaskan Air Command Images

What else do they need ? Bwmoll3 (talk) 22:11, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Same old story: "Elmendorf Air Force Base Welcome Guide" is not enough; give a valid/complete source. --High Contrast (talk) 22:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Western Wall April 2006.jpg

Dear High Contrast, could you please look at File:Western Wall April 2006.jpg? I did not upload it but want to use it in an article, but see a template on the image that says it should not be used until it is reviewed and the template is removed. Thanks! NearTheZoo (talk) 23:05, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I will look over it. But you can use this image in articles on any Wikimedia project. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 23:34, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much! The article in question is in the queue on wikipedia for a DYK hook, so I'm afraid to do anything to jeapordize it -- and the template specifically states that the image should not be used until it is reviewed. (Is there a difference between using in on wikipedia and wikimedia?) On the other hand, if more people will be looking at the article when the DYK hook is printed, I want to use this much better photo! In any event, if you do have time to look, I would be very grateful! NearTheZoo (talk) 23:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done image has been checked. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 00:17, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help -- once again! NearTheZoo (talk) 00:42, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Outside broadcasting van of the Bayerischen Rundfunk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 08:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I Apologize!

Hi Sir. thank you for mention rules about licenses. I did study Ayatollah article that attention to the picture and dlete page. I guessed that the IP have mistake and so dont care (I usually dont care IPs talk in any wiki projects). but I undrestand I mistake. thank you. I try to go on upload my pictures about buildings structures in Iran. by.Iranian engineer (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello! You do not need to apologize. As I said: I hope more files will come of you. Perhaps you can also upload some photos of vehicles in Iran, Museums in Iran or anything else you find good for Commons. Thank you. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Proposed Coat of arms of Libyan Opposition.svg

Your rationale there is certainly one possible de novo interpretation of Commons policies, but unfortunately it contradicts many previous de facto practices and precedents in the realm of "special or fictional" flags and emblems... AnonMoos (talk) 21:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

03.04.jpg

Hi! You recently deleted File:03.04.jpg based on a copyright notice of a website where it was hosted. It seems the file description (and indeed the description on the website) states that the image is from "the beginning of the 20th century", which would mean that its copyright could very well have expired -- Truskavets is in Ukraine so maybe {{PD-Ukraine}} could apply? My understanding is that a website's copyright notice applies to the content of the website, but not necessarily every image that is hosted on the site. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 21:22, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, if PD-Ukraine applies, then I think we can restore this image. If you agree, please restore this file. I have no problem with it. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 22:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I restored the file and tagged it with {{PD-Ukraine}}. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 23:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the cooperation. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Acts of Love

Hi

If you could tell me why our album cover (Actsoflove.jpg) should be deleted as picture, that would be nice, thank you

(Mhaymoz (talk) 11:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC))

Hi! On Commons, we collect free media files. This album cover is not your own work, it has not been released under a free licence and you obviously not a permission of the copyright holder to release it under a free licence. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Caminhaodelixo.JPG

I don't understand. Was I who took the photo! I've already uploaded the other pictures of my own and I had no issue. Could you help me with this? sorry for bad english.Xico CLJ 20:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello!

You must not apologize for your english language skills. Well, the problem is: the person who took the image is "Francisco da Silva" but the uploader is User:Xico CLJ (you). But the uplaoder - you - do not have the permission of Francisco da Silva that he is allowing you the free use here. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Croatia, Historic Coat of Arms.svg

Please, can you unlock this file? There should be a file with the first white field, cause there's already an identical file with the first red field. There's no point in having two files with the same first field, and both versions of that Coat of Arms were used during the Croatian history.--Starčevićanac (talk) 11:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a certain reason why this file is protected. The coat of arms of the Republic of Croatia from 1990–1991 has used it in this composition. I cannot follow your rational of "an identical file with the first red field" is existing, too. If so, tag the other file as a duplicate of this one. A user has made a request here: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections#Revert and protection. Please ask him as well. --High Contrast (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Monica Maillard.jpg and others

Hello. My english isn't very good. Sorry for that. The image I take from wikipedia, and there says that the license is free. But i dont know which license I have to choose. Here are the links:

• [8]
• [9]
• [10]
• [11]
• [12]

Thank you. --Caronte10 (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! If {{PD-Italy}} is the same as [13], then use this licence {{PD-Italy}}. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:18, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Sliykkkkk.jpg

Hi, obige Datei fand ich in einer Kategorie eines Hubschraubers... Du kennst bestimmt die richtige Verfahrensweise bei den ganzen fehlenden Angaben. Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 11:21, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Danke für den Hinweis. Das Bild hat keine Quelle und wurde als solches gekennzeichnet. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 17:11, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Seoul Landmark Montage

Hi, I have just added the license information for each image. I was editing the license section after uploading the picture. Thanks. Tranquilantus (talk) 08:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, what about File:KTX-II South Korean High-Speed Train.jpg .--High Contrast (talk) 08:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The link for the KTX has been added. It's hosted on Wikipedia, that's why it didn't appear on Wikimedia commons as a link. Thanks again. Tranquilantus (talk) 11:23, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The reason for nominating it to be deleted was that "Licence information for each single image is missing", which is incorrect because every image has a license information. I understand that it cannot deleted once nominated with a valid reason, but you nominated this image for deletion without a valid reason in the first place, so I don't see why you can't revert the image. Thanks again. Tranquilantus (talk) 11:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Cool down. There are valid reasons because this image is a copyright violation. Remove this file from your collage or the hole collage gets deleted. And again: do not remove delete-tags. --High Contrast (talk) 11:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh I see, thank you for pointing that out. I had no idea it was a copyright violating image. I will use another image with a free license. Just give me some time for the editing :) Tranquilantus (talk) 11:46, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

It is very important not to choose agressive words. My task is to help others, not to disturb others in their work here - please keep that in mind. Let me know when you have corrected your collage with another free image. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:49, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I do apologize about being aggressive. I appreciate your work for sorting this out. I have finished editing the picture with a free image, how can I uploaded? Wikimedia says that I can't upload because image is protected. Thanks. Tranquilantus (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The page is now unprotected again. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Finally replaced the image with one of my photographs. Thanks. Tranquilantus (talk) 19:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the deletion request. Yes, using own photographs is always a good solution. By the way: you can find KTX images here (and in the parent subcategories) as well. --High Contrast (talk) 19:49, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Volvo BM A30 dumper.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 18:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for disturbing you, but because you have answered on earlier demand about Croatian coats of arms I am informing you about Disputes noticeboard so that all users are informed.--Rjecina2 (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll have an eye on it. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

User:High Contrast/Templates

The guys who invented English decided the word "hole" needed a "W" in it (whole). That needs to be changed in your template which I'd do except it's protected from editing. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 08:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for letting me know. Typing error: the "w" has obviously fallen in a hole ;) --High Contrast (talk) 10:31, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

two licences etc.

Hallo High Contrast, you edited twice on the page of Use:Slavadoku89 in order to prove some licences, sources etc, see here. The user is a mentee of mine on the German WP. She sent the necessary emails to OTRS already, see her notices on File:Winfried Petzold.jpg and File:UV 005.jpg. After my question on Commons:Forum#Hm, it turned out, that the permission did arrived OTRS yet, but there is a two weeks gap in processing the emails. So please make clear that the files will not be deleted befor the OTRS team will prove it. Thanks, -jkb- (talk) 22:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Die Bilder werden nicht gelöscht - jedenfalls nicht von mir. Wenn es weiterhin diesbzgl. Handlungsbedarf geben sollte, einfach hier eine Nachricht hinterlassen. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

A ja, richtig, warum einfach wenn es kompliziert auch geht :-)... also deutsch: OK, ich habe die Bapperl weggenommen,irgendwann kommt otrs nach, laß uns hoffen. Schöne Feiertage wünscht -jkb- (talk) 22:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Alles klar. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 11:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Temporary restore a file.

Hello. This file was deleted File:Moscow500.JPG http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=delete&page=File:Moscow500.JPG Is it possible to temporary restore file? I want to recreate this file using open source maps layer, and this file contains some unique information (path drawn on it), which can't be restored easily without access to this file. `A5b (talk) 18:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I have restored this file. Please use an open source map as basic map. Google content is not allowed here due to copyright issues. I am sure the new results will be as good as the old one. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Uuuups. I'm too late. It was deleted again with "Replacement seems to have been created: File:Moscow500.png". Moscow500.png is created by me but I still want to compare, is new map easy to read as old one. `A5b (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! The best would be to ask User:Túrelio for undeleting the image. I do not want to play in his work. He is an admin, too. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

File:MarciaYasmine2.jpg and File:Marcia Yasmine.jpg

Marcuz Britez is the autor, no? Because delete? Leandro Rocha (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! You can nominate File:MarciaYasmine2.jpg if you want to. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 06:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Images

Those images weren't mine, i eliminated the template because he asked me why they had speedy deletion, if he is the owner of those pictures, which is Tillor87, even he has the same name on Skyscrapercity, an architecture website formum, and he is very well known there since he is a moderator. Anyway, I told him that he needs to prove to Wikimedia Commons that those are his images by providing a link on Flickr o Panoramio. --Vrysxy (talk) 16:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I know that these files didn't come from you. But you acted wrong by removing the speedy-tags with such poor evidence. And by the way, all of his flickr images were copyrighted and had different Uploaders there. --High Contrast (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

A Whole lot of Images

Hi there, High Contrast. I've began working on changing source info. There are a bunch of images I've seen that have 'Unknown' in the source, so I didn't think source really mattered as long as the image was clearly in the public domain. (like an official Army portrait) It's a lot easier to do that when you're uploading multiple pictures. My apologies for that. There are some images, however, that were sent to me by the U.S. Army Chaplain Museum after I sent an email requesting them. Here's a list:

• [File:Axton 1925 2.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1925 with son.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1926 arlington.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1925.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1921 chaplains.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1921 chaplains2.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1925 with son 2.jpg]
• [File:Axton 1926 tomb of unknown.jpg]
• [File:Arnold induction.jpg]

I think I'm missing one or two files in there, but you get the idea. How should I source those? Rockhead126 (talk) 20:40, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! This is no problem as long as you bring the correct source to each image. Reliable sources that can prove the image's licencing are very important on Commons so that it is traceable where those files come from. I know that lots of files are highly likely in the public domain but nevertheless a source must be given as evidence. Anyway, if you have stated the source information to these files, let me know and I will remove those problem tags on the images. It is very good of you that you are interested in doing Commons-like so that we can keep these images. Thank you for that. Till then. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Copyright violations

User BENJIECI hello High Contrast are you upload several picture please do not block me BENJIECI (talk) 14:28, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello! If you stop uploading copyright violations, you will not get blocked. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJIECI hello High Contrast One question Martin H is Administrator Yes or No BENJIECI (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes. --High Contrast (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJIECI Hi High Contrast One question Bollywood Dreamz is administrator yes or no BENJIECI (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Look here yourself: Commons:Administrators. --High Contrast (talk) 15:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJIECI hi High Contrast Look this image File:Priyanka Chopra.jpg BENJIECI (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

User BENJIECI hi please upload image http://www.celebrity-pictures.ca/Eva_LaRue

These images cannot be uploaded to Commons due to licensing problems. Please read COM:L for more information. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

And said user has now earned a 3 day block for their upload of a Lindsey Lohan pic scraped off the Daily Mail website. Tabercil (talk) 22:55, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

File:David Winn.jpg

Why?? Pinxin (talk) 22:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

This media file does not have sufficient information on its copyright status. --High Contrast (talk) 22:24, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The image is from happytreefriends.wikia.com/wiki/File:David_Winn.jpg, happytreefriends.wikia.com/wiki/File:David_Winn.jpg!!!! >:( Pinxin (talk) 22:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

This file has a) insufficient licence information b) no author information c) no source information. Read COM:L. There, you get all relevant information about licensing information that are required on Commons. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 22:29, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arnulfpark München - Bürogebäude.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good --Jebulon 15:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Scania 124c 420 truck in Austria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI --Jebulon 22:36, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Copyright Propaganda-Aufnahmen

Hi, beim Australian War Memorial fand ich viele Farbaufnahmen von deutschen Truppen aus dem 2. Weltkrieg (z.B. http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/044589, einfach die laufende Nummer erhöhen bis 44602). Da steht zwar "Copyright expired - public domain", aber die Aufnahmen sind ganz sicher deutsche Propagandaufnahmen der Kriegsberichterstatter, die wohl nach Australien "befreit" wurden, oder zumindest Abzüge davon. Wo liegt denn nun das Copyright? Danke und Grüße Cobatfor 15:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Dabei handelt es sich um eine schwierige Angelegenheit, die auch schon oft über Bilder aus dem 2. WK geführt wurde. Auch auf defenseimagery.mil findet man Bilder die unter keinen Umständen von alliierten Militärangehörigen stammen können. Auch bei den Bildern des Bundesarchivs gab es umfangreiche Diskussionen über einzelne Bilder, von denen einige gelöscht wurden, aber andere wiederum erhalten blieben. Ich würde die Bilder hochladen; letztendlich begehst du ja keine Urheberrechtsverletzung, sondern dieses australische Museum. Zumal es ja rein theoretisch sein könnte, dass die Bilder vom Fotografen rechtmäßig erworben wurden. Gruß, High Contrast 16:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
P.S.: Wenn du willst, kannst du die Frage auch ins Forum auf Commons stellen. Vielleich ergab sich mittlerweile eine kosistente Vorgehensweise bei derartigen Bilder. Jedenfalls sind meine Angaben (sicherheitshalber) ohne Gewähr :)

Danke! Ich werde sie wohl hochladen und dann kann jemand meckern, wer will. Herzliche Grüße Cobatfor 16:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Nichts zu danken. Aber: konstruktives "meckern" sei erlaubt. Schließlich haben wir auch gute Argumente, die das Behalten begünstigen. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 20:13, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kässbohrer Pistenbully PB 160D.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 13:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schloss Nymphenburg in München.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments great pic - love it! --Schlaier 08:24, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Numancia F83.jpg

Hola:

¿Me podrias explicar por que quieres borrar la imagen que indico en el título?

Indica claramente la licencia, indico la página de donde está tomada [14], en cuya esquina inferior izquierda, indica sin lugar a dudas que tien licencia creative commons

Además, si te pasas a ver las condiciones para publicar fotos en es sitio, que está aquí, verás que son muy estrictos con la forma de publicarlas (como mucho, sacan 5 a 10 al mes)

Pick here, in down-left corner, is the license
rules for publish photos in this site

"Starting january 2005 this site is subject to a Creative Commons license ( see FAQ section ), this basically implies that all contents of this site can be reused by other people, providing that their work is subject to the same rules governing this site ... and if any material from this site is used to obtain economical benefit, the author has the right to claim his corresponding credits."

un saludo - grettings Takashi kurita (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello! You are right, I have removed the licence tag. I haven't seen the licence tag. Thank you for helping! Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 08:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Croatia, Historic Coat of Arms.svg (again)

Since the consensus about the file Croatia, Historic Coat of Arms.svg wasn't reached in this discussion, or in this one, I'm proposing another solution. Let the disputed file be reverted to the version with the first white square, and then renamed Croatia, Historic Coat of Arms, first white square.svg. Also, we should rename the file Coat of Arms of Croatia (1990).svg (which is an exact copy of the disputed file) to Croatia, Historic Coat of Arms, first red square.svg. In both files, we should leave links to the other file, in the Summary section, for those who might need to use the other file. That way, we could evade future conflicts about any of the files.--Starčevićanac (talk) 07:53, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

OK. The file is not protected anymore. You can edit it. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Hm, I can't find the rename button in the file.--Starčevićanac (talk) 08:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

There is no such button. You must insert: {{rename|newname.jpg}}. --High Contrast (talk) 08:12, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much.--Starčevićanac (talk) 08:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion

Hello - there's a long running discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Osama bin Laden making a video at his compound in Pakistan.jpg. Someone included, as a comment, a link to a very similar deletion discussion that you had closed as "keep."

As the current discussion is long you may want to just jump to the sub-thread for the comment which starts out with "Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:2001-12-13-frame-grab-DoD.jpg" where I added a question for you as this image is similar to the one where you closed the discussion. Marc Kupper (talk) 06:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:16, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Gisele.jpg

---

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot

Re:Moskvich 400-420

Hello High Contrast. Sorry, but the "Google auto-translator" is not allowed me to understand much of what you said [15]. In any case, as already mentioned, I have no problems to one or the other solution. Ciao High Contrast. Scusa, ma il traduttore automatico di Google non mi ha consentito di capire molto di ciò che intendi [16]. In ogni caso, come già detto, io non ho problemi verso l'una o l'altra soluzione. --Ligabo (talk) 13:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry, then communication is not possible. --High Contrast (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salzachturm, Burg Hohenwerfen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 11:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Niceshot

Servus High Contrast,

sag mal täusch ich mich oder hat der Benutzer dieses Bild (File:1228501137.jpg) vom Tiger dort (http://www.flugzeugbilder.de/show.php?id=796399) ebenfalls geklaut. Das er selbst der Urheber sein soll glaub ich nicht so ganz. Die Fotos vom Boxer waren ja auch nicht seine. Also ich hab da meine Zweifel.--Sonaz (talk) 13:58, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Danke für den Hinweis! Dabei handelt es sich eindeutig um Urheberrechtsverletzung. Ich habe vor Wochen bereits versucht diesem Bild der URV zu überführen - nur konnte ich nichts finde. Bild habe ich bereits gelöscht. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 07:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Review

Hi, High Contrast. Can you review the copyright status of this file. Have a great day. --Duke ^{ϡ»» ileti ^^} 15:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done; have a nice day, too. --High Contrast (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks=) --Duke ^{ϡ»» ileti ^^} 15:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Re-review

Hello there,

Can you re-review this file? thanks & have a good day.

Mohamed CJ (talk) 17:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

An evidence is missing that this image was published under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. --High Contrast (talk) 17:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The BCHR website says nothing about that, But the president of BCHR is the one who gave me that permission. I wonder how can I prove that? (Maybe a screen shot form his twitter account confirming it?)

Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

No, please NO screenshots. Look here: COM:OTRS. You must send the written permission of the copyright holder there (email: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). Then somebody looks over it and will check if those images are really published under a free licence. If the OTRS-review result positive, feel free to upload all images that are included in this permission. These files would be great contributions for Wikimedia. --High Contrast (talk) 18:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Alright, done and I hope this won't take long. Sorry for inconvenience; I'm new, but I learn fast. Thanks. Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

You do not have to apologize yourself. You are very welcome here on Commons. Happy editing. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I got a reply:

Dear ,

All images listed on the following page have had the necessary modifications to the file page made: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bahrainrights.org%2F

Thank you for providing this to us, and for your contribution to the Wikimedia Commons.

Sincerely,

However, the file I'm talking about is still deleted and is not considered to be part of that URL.(Copyright violation: http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/371). Now it's clear that this file is within the website which gave to permission for all the pictures to be used. (and in the message it included that it's giving the right to all media within the website). I need help here. Mohamed CJ (talk) 16:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

cf98 - cover

Hello. Please do not delete these files:

File: CF98-demo-cover.jpg File: CF98-ennjoy-cover.jpg File: CF98-tiny-cover.jpg File: CF98-nic.jpg File: CF98-in.jpg

They are covers the band, which I am a member. I am also the creator of them and I have full rights to dispose.

Thank you Xtubedriverx (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Your "missing permission" tags are being discussed at Commons:Village_pump#why_was_file_deleted_.28and_no_notice.29.3F and at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Julbert1980_photos. NVO (talk) 14:23, 27 May 2011 (UTC) I have not deleted thos files. --High Contrast (talk) 15:14, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Sounding rocket images

Hi High Contrast,

I have responded to your requests for appropriate information regarding:

1. File:Sounding Rocket Era 1.jpg,
2. File:Sm 5501 Image NASM-9A06870~A.jpg,
3. File:Centaure.jpeg,
4. File:RAE Skylark.jpg, and
5. File:Pn_5498_Image_V-2-prep---june-1946.jpg,

on their respective entry points. Let me know if I can be of further assistance. Regarding number 5 above, I have presented arguments on its 'Discussion' page that support the image's PUBLIC DOMAIN status. Unless something else need be done, I will delete all but the message about number five. Marshallsumter (talk) 23:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

In any cases you can use a {{Cc-zero}} licence because you are not the photographer of these images. The "source"-information is important to give evidence to show that one image has really been published under a certain licence. --High Contrast (talk) 07:41, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem

Copied from previous talk page:

"Hello there, Can you re-review this file? thanks & have a good day. Mohamed CJ (talk) 17:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

An evidence is missing that this image was published under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. --High Contrast (talk) 17:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The BCHR website says nothing about that, But the president of BCHR is the one who gave me that permission. I wonder how can I prove that? (Maybe a screen shot form his twitter account confirming it?) Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

No, please NO screenshots. Look here: COM:OTRS. You must send the written permission of the copyright holder there (email: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). Then somebody looks over it and will check if those images are really published under a free licence. If the OTRS-review result positive, feel free to upload all images that are included in this permission. These files would be great contributions for Wikimedia. --High Contrast (talk) 18:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Alright, done and I hope this won't take long. Sorry for inconvenience; I'm new, but I learn fast. Thanks. Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

You do not have to apologize yourself. You are very welcome here on Commons. Happy editing. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I got a reply: Dear , All images listed on the following page have had the necessary modifications to the file page made: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bahrainrights.org%2F Thank you for providing this to us, and for your contribution to the Wikimedia Commons. Sincerely, However, the file I'm talking about is still deleted and is not considered to be part of that URL.(Copyright violation: http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/371). Now it's clear that this file is within the website which gave to permission for all the pictures to be used. (and in the message it included that it's giving the right to all media within the website). I need help here. Mohamed CJ (talk) 16:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)"

I would appreciate if you can provide any help or give any suggestions, if you can't then just tell me and I will stop checking your talk page/annoying you. Thanks Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Have you sent the permission to OTRS? Did you have a positive response? By the way: it is possible that some images are not covered by your permission. For more questions you must consult COM:OTRS. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

album covers

Hi! I'm owner and author of this album covers. They are free and any one can use them so why they are non-stop deleted ? Xtubedriverx (talk) 07:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Primarily it's because a lot of people claim to own the copyright to album covers from Metallica and other mass-market bands, which is, let's face it, highly unlikely. I would suggest you send an email to our OTRS team explaining you are the copyright holder and that you agree to publish them under a free licence which includes the right to distibute, make derivatives and use them for commercial work, all without having to contact you. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Löwenbrauerei Passau beer truck.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 09:54, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rechtschreibprüfung beendet.png

Hi. You only deleted one of the images nominated in this DR. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Deleted the other one as well. --High Contrast (talk) 09:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Basilika St. Bonifaz in München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality even with the focus being on the urn in front instead of the building :) --Saffron Blaze 18:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vista San Jose Costa Rica 7.JPG

Please take care about rest of files mentioned in request. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I have looked over them and I think it is better to start individual DR because the initial rational does not fit 100% to all other files by this user - in my opinion. --High Contrast (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Reg file being put under "Deletion requests"

Hi,

I am Raghavendra from India. I have been selected as a Campus Ambassador for the India Education Program of Wikipedia.

We have been asked to make a userprofile page of ourselves, with a picture of ourselves so that students whom we go to can relate to us better.

Which is why i have posted the picture. Is there a better place to post such pictures? Am a newbie to wiki editing as such, and hence i am not really aware. Kindly let me know

Thanks Raghavendra — Preceding unsigned comment added by U.raghavendra (talk • contribs)

OK, I will remove the deletion request; please upload only ONE version of sour images in the highest resolution that is possible. If you have any questions left, please ask me or consult our "village pump". Regards and happy editing. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Bienenmuseum Moorrege 08.jpg, File:Caledoniaoperahouse1.jpg

Hallo High Contrast, hast du bei den beiden mit delete geschlossenen DRs, File:Bienenmuseum Moorrege 08.jpg, File:Caledoniaoperahouse1.jpg, eventuell vergessen, die Dateien auch tatsächlich zu löschen? --Túrelio (talk) 13:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Da muss es irgendeinen technischen Defekt gegeben haben. Ich kann es mir einfach nicht erklären. --High Contrast (talk) 16:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

File:IBN 3.JPG

I don't quite understand your motivation behind this edit. The file is a B/W scan of a page from the book "История на българския народ" (Serbian: Историjа бугарскога народа, English: History of the Bulgarian people) by the Serbian historian Милан Савич (Serbian: Милан Савић, English: Milan Savic) who died in 1930. The book was published in 1878. What's wrong about it, the copyrights have already expired... →Spiritia 10:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Hm, that must have had happened accidently. Since you are an expert with these files you can add proper categories. --High Contrast (talk) 10:32, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Neue Pinakothek, entrance.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 16:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

File:USS-Wisconsin-BB-64.jpg

Dear Admin High Contrast,

I gave the online source for this photo and it seems to come from the US Navy's web site. Maybe you can pass it or remove the flickr fail marks? I don't know. Please look at the url source I noted. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for your efforts. I have deleted the image because it is a duplicate of an existing image. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

• I did not know that but thank you for the update. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:43, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Airport2006.jpg DNK

Почему удалено фото аэропорта Днепропетроск, хотя была запись и была подпись?

Описание English: Dnipropetrovsk Airport Русский: Аэропорт Днепропетровск октябрь 2006 Источник собственная работа Автор Corvy, Igor Latyshev

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Pistenraupe Kässbohrer PistenBully 300.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good--Lmbuga 22:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Non existing licence template PD-ITALIA-FILM

Hello, I just attepted transfer the File:Altrimenti ci- arrabbiamo Spencer.jpg from Italian Wikipedia via Commonshelper and I did not notice any error. Could you help with localistion of it:Template:PD-Italia-film? Is it acceptable on Commons? There are many useful files on Italian Wiki, see it:Categoria:Screenshot film PD-Italia. Sincerely --Gumruch (talk) 21:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Well, I don't know if such template is existing here, but these images seem to be reasonable. But you should post you comment here (in Italian) or here (in English). There will be surely an expert from it:wiki who knows more about this. Thanks for your support. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The Crown of Scotland

Sorry, I thought the CC attribution on the Flickr image was sufficient to upload to Commons. I guess it isn't judging by your tag. My apologies. Endrick Shellycoat (talk) 21:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem; just use this tool in future: it checks automatically if the licence on flickr is suitable to Commons and it created all important information automatically, so that you just have to copy&paste. Thanks for your support. --High Contrast (talk) 22:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Reisebus - MAN Lion's Coach in München.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Harrison49 22:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Trilobitenpflaster, Paläontologisches Museum München.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

Image with no source

You have recently added a "no source" template to my file "1970 Chevrolet Camaro RS of Bob Middleton.jpg". The file seems to have the relevant information in place even though it does not display it. What do I need to do please? GTHO (talk) 08:07, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

HellO! The source information was lost due to a "}}" to much. I have fixed the template and removed the "no source"-tag. Thanks for notifying! Keep up the good work. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:High-rises_in_Uzbekistan

Category discussion notification

Category:High-rises_in_Uzbekistan has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

84.61.178.142 15:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rettungshubschrauber Eurocopter BK-117 B2.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Up to QI for me. --Ximonic 20:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

RE:Your Flickr uploads

You're welcome and thanks for the hints (: Jonathas Davi (talk) 20:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Happy editing. Feel free to use this tool excessively. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Sharof_Rashidov_Street,_Tashkent.jpg

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

84.61.137.197 08:13, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

need help

File:Lyudmila Alexeyeva 2009-08-31 1.jpg
Excuse me, restore, please, the mistakenly deleted record: {{flickrreview|High Contrast|2009-11-02}} --Ivan Simochkin (talk) 22:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done --High Contrast (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Glans Stimulation.png

Since you closed the above deletion request as a keep, what is your answer to my question? That is clearly an identifiable person in a private location, so we require an assertion or other evidence of subject consent. --99of9 (talk) 13:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

You are right in this case but is there any official policy for that - besides COM:PEOPLE? COM:PEOPLE is a bit too vague in order to apply in this issue and what "recent WMF resolutions" are is unclear, too. --High Contrast (talk) 14:45, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I presumed you knew about the resolution. It is quite clear, and COM:PEOPLE was recently made stronger because of it, so we now require some kind of evidence. --99of9 (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Interesting thing with enormous effects on lots of images on Commons. According to this, File:Glans Stimulation.png must get deleted. Nevertheless, I'd rather see this resolution be fully integrated in COM:PEOPLE. What is your opinion on this? --High Contrast (talk) 09:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree it's not integrated enough with COM:PEOPLE yet, but it is already clear enough for this image (since the Flickr account is gone, we have no realistic hope of ever getting evidence). Do you want to amend your closure, or do you want me to renominate? Regarding further integration into the policy, I am keen to participate, but don't have time to drive it just yet (and a clarification question I asked one of the board members has not been fully answered yet). --99of9 (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'd suggest first to modify COM:PEOPLE and then simply restart the DR. --High Contrast (talk) 15:47, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Turnhalle in Waldkirchen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Exposure is a bit at the upper limit with some overexposed spots on the main subject, but still OK for me. What bothers me more is that contrast is rather low on the building, so that the picture looks bleached. Did you perform some post processing to bring up the shadows at the cost of contrast on the bright main region? --Johannes Robalotoff 16:31, 16 June 2011 (UTC) Hi! Thanks for your annotations. I tested several "contrast levels" but most of them caused a too strong darkening of other parts in the image. I found this one as the best version. --High Contrast 16:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC) A bit on the light side, but I tend to like dark images, so... --Rama 06:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tram 27 Richtung Schwanseestr. in München.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good -- George Chernilevsky 08:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Die Magdalenenkapelle in Waldkirchen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Saffron Blaze 12:01, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

File talk:John Earman and Jesús Mosterín in Pennsylvania in 1997).tif

This request is addressed to the person in charge of deleting and undeleting photos.

I read in an email I received from you the following: "The deletion and move log for this page are provided here for convenience: 15:54, 15 May 2011 Matanya (talk | contribs) deleted "File:John Earman and Jesús Mosterín in Pennsylvania in 1997).tif" ‎ ( Media missing permission as of 27 April 2011) (global usage; delinker log)." I also read something about a lack of categorization and of authorization that I did not understood. The photo was provided by myself. I authorized its use. I do not see that the photo has any problem. Can anyone tell me in simple language what the problem is and what, if anything, I am expected to do? In any case, please, undelete the photo and keep it available in Wikipedia Commons. Schnufflus (talk) 19:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

What's the problem???

Don't you see the license? Original author released it under CC:BY, all I did was moving it from from ru:wikipedia to commons. -- Wesha (talk) 02:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

[17]!!! --High Contrast (talk) 06:42, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Flagging US patent images as "source needed"?

Why are you flagging images from US patent applications as "source needed"? Is it not sufficient to give the patent ID and credit the USPTO as the source? In what way would additional verbiage give us more information? Txinviolet (talk) 18:13, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Of which image are you talking? More information can be found here: COM:L. --High Contrast (talk) 18:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

In general source information is here to verify the applied licence of any file. --High Contrast (talk) 18:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

You flagged File:Singer.Patent00326821.Page001.jpg and File:USPatent9041.Wilson.RotaryHook.figures1to6.jpg as "needs source", even though I specified "USPTO" in the source field and uploaded them as such (back when the uploader page had "Original work of the US federal government" as one of the options for non-copyrighted images). Plus, the images were obviously taken from US patent applications, which automatically places them in the public domain. This has created a big headache for me because I didn't see the "needs source" flag until the files were both deleted.Txinviolet (talk) 14:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Then give clear evidence. "USPTO" is insufficent as well. --High Contrast (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Westlicher Karwendel.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Will support if you can crop out the blue patch from the lower right corner. --Jovianeye 00:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)  Done --High Contrast 15:07, 1 July 2011 (UTC) Good now. --Jovianeye 02:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Summit cross of the "Saukarkopf".JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Mbdortmund 01:47, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Samsaya image

Hi,

i'm working on behalf of Sampda Sharma developing her new web sites. Recently she asked me if I could change her image on Wikipedia.

You have deleted the press photo I uploaded, due to copyright violation. What is violated? The image rights belongs to Samsaya`s label "3 millimeter".

Please let me know how we can upload this photo without having it auto deleted again.

Cheers

Bendik Brenne Konstant AS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bendikrb (talk • contribs)

Hello! Please go to COM:OTRS. Then send the email to the emailadress that can be found there and tell the volunteers there that you are the copyright holder. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ehr.jpg

You're completely right. I was just deleting this user article on pl-wiki, which was CV as well and saw his other uploaded file deleeted for the same, so that's why I kind of shortened our procedures ;) Masur (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

As I said: I support your decision but others may see a problem with it. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Spangdahlem Air Base aerial view 1989.JPEG

Hi, ich hatte mal dieses Foto hochgeladen. Jemand hat mal reingeschrieben, dass das gar nicht Spangdahlem ist. Ich habe recherchiert und es ist tatsächlich Sembach (bei Kaiserslautern). Kannst Du die Datei in File:Sembach Air Base aerial view 1989.JPEG umbenennen? Ich habe das Bild in en:wikipedia durch File:Spangdahlem Air Base main gate in 1998.JPEG ersetzt. Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 11:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Gesagt, getan. Ich habe noch zusätzlich das Bild auf es und auf hr ausgetauscht. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 13:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Danke, ich mache zwar immer "log me in globally", aber auf z.B. jp:wiki ging das Austauschen nicht, wobei ich allerdings nicht lesen konnte, was da geschrieben stand (...). Danke. Übrigens stolperte ich hierüber: File:Hubschrauber-1 2010-by-RaBoe-08.jpg. Ich denke, Ra Boe hat es mit seinem Lizenzbaustein etwas übertrieben, da der doch sowieso übersetzt wird. Dafür wäre eine Bildbeschreibung nett... Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 13:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Wahrlich recht viel Lizenzgequassel, aber da kann man nichts machen. Manche Leute meinen wohl, dass sich die Verleger dieser Welt um deren Bilder reißen. Anders kann ich mir diese überschwängliche Hinweiserei nicht erklären. --High Contrast (talk) 13:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! East side of the Neue Pinakothek.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Bit unsharp, but otherwise very good. --H005 11:15, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:CRUZADO2.JPEG

Please take care about second file. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I know. The Wiki-software failed. I decided to try it later again. But thanks anyway. --High Contrast (talk) 15:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Ízisz Szentély rekonstrukció Szhely 2.JPG and others

Hello! I hope the picture helps to improve the use of:-) It's OK?! Pan Peter12 (talk) 06:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for your efforts! But just proceed like [ http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3A%C3%8Dzisz_Szent%C3%A9ly_rekonstrukci%C3%B3_Szhely_2.JPG&action=historysubmit&diff=56533515&oldid=56532910 this]. Thanks! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

you recently suppressed an picture I uploaded, thinking about a copyright violation, but it is not. I'm a professional photographer who truly took this picture and put it on wikimedia, so that it could be added to the biography of Blanche GArdin, as she asked me.

How could we fix that problem ?

thanks

Copyright Permissions

Hello,

Some of my photos were recently marked as violations of copyrights. I have contacted the company and they should have sent the permissions by now. Could you please check this and take the appropriate actions to un-delete the photos. Thanks a lot! Czx78 (talk) 15:40, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello!

• for permissions of files, have a look here: COM:OTRS
• for image undeletion, have a look here: COM:UNDEL, or give me the exact links of files you think you have a valid permission of.

Thanks in advance, High Contrast (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The files that were deleted, which I now have permissions for are:

File:Rough Cut.jpg  ; File:Vac2.jpg  ; File:Spreader2.jpg  ; File:Sprayer.jpg

Thank you for your help! Czx78 (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Well, re-upload those files and do what is written here. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Slavneft

Hello,
Thanks for your message. I'm still trying to understand how the whole licensing thing works, to be honest.
These are logos, and apparently the rights on commons are more restrictive than in WP:Main. Hence, I'll upload it there with the "non-free logo" license.
Could you please then delete these two files (File:MegionNefteGaz.gif and File:Slavneft logo.png) from Commons, please?
Thanks once again for your help,
Regards,
--Tharlas (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for your response. Yes, I can delete those files. Feel free to upload other images, maybe some that are your own work. Vor licencing questions, you can read this. Thanks for your support. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Yad Hashmona

I have no clue why you deleted a photo I personally took of the Yad Hashoma guesthouse. There is no copyright violation involved - and I do believe you have an obligation to make some kind of inquiry or let me know in advance before you delete material that was properly uploaded and licensed. --Gilabrand (talk) 13:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I think you mix up something right now. As you can see, no contributions have been deleted by me. What is "Yad Hashoma"? I hope I can help; regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:59, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if there has been some mistake, but I got notification via e-mail that you deleted my photo from Commons and now it is gone from the page. See here: [[18]] Yad HaShmona is a Finnish village in Israel.--Gilabrand (talk) 14:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I see: The problem is that the same file appeared on the web, here: http://q.bstatic.com/images/hotel/max300/145/1451614.jpg .--High Contrast (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I took it. Someone must have copied it without attribution...--Gilabrand (talk) 15:17, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have an image version of much higher resolution? --High Contrast (talk) 19:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes. But I uploaded a smaller version for that very reason: People who use my photos without attribution...--Gilabrand (talk) 19:52, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you to just re-upload this image on COMMONS in the highest resolution you have. Your rationale for uploading small images is no proper method to avoid image use without attribution. --High Contrast (talk) 19:55, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyright Permissions (2)

Copyright Permission for All images found on http://www.Bahrainrights.org was already sent and approved.

It is annoying for me when I have to contact them every time so that they have to contact you, when they have already given copyright permission for all images found on their website.

Please investigate this issue for me.

(I will contact them again anyway..)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Women_protesting_in_solidarity_with_Abdulhadi_Alkhawaja.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Al-Watan_governmental_newspaper_Terrorism_in_Bahrain.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maryam_Alkhwaja_demanding_to_stop_torture_in_Bahrain.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MaryamAlkhwaja_holding_Bahrain_flag.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maryam_Alkhawaja_in_U.S._-_Islamic_World_Forum.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_of_Bahrain_Centre_for_Human_Rights.gif
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Irish_fact-finding_delegation_at_Rajab%27s_home.jpg

As for this file:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:People_welcoming_Ayat_Al-Ghermezi_nearby_her_house_in_Sadad.jpg

The copyright permission was sent, please change it to pending.

Sorry for bothering you. Mohamed CJ (talk) 08:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

By the way, you might want to take more than 20 seconds before setting files who have already had their permissions sent to speedy deletion Mohamed CJ (talk) 09:01, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I went to check some of the pictures which were already approved, this is what it says:

This one was marked as copyright violation by you personally:

Summary

DescriptionHigh Contrast/Archive 6	English: Beating marks on the back of Nabeel Rajab after police attacked a peaceful protest on 15 July 2005.
Date	15 July 2005
Source	http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/371
Author	Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Permission (Reusing this file)	{{PermissionOTRS}}

Another example:

Summary

DescriptionHigh Contrast/Archive 6	English: Nabeel Rajab kissing the head of the father of martyr Ali Mushaima during his visit on 6 July 2011
Date	6 July 2011
Source	Fatima Isa
Author	Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Permission (Reusing this file)	{{PermissionOTRS}}

Mohamed CJ (talk) 09:24, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Update

Copyright permission for these pictures was sent:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Women_protesting_in_solidarity_with_Abdulhadi_Alkhawaja.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Al-Watan_governmental_newspaper_Terrorism_in_Bahrain.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maryam_Alkhwaja_demanding_to_stop_torture_in_Bahrain.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MaryamAlkhwaja_holding_Bahrain_flag.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maryam_Alkhawaja_in_U.S._-_Islamic_World_Forum.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_of_Bahrain_Centre_for_Human_Rights.gif
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Irish_fact-finding_delegation_at_Rajab%27s_home.jpg

However, two of them were deleted moments ago:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:MaryamAlkhwaja_holding_Bahrain_flag.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Al-Watan_governmental_newspaper_Terrorism_in_Bahrain.jpg

Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

You must work more carefully. When you upload images of which you have valid OTRS-permission then insert those permissions correctly. Do that for all files, please. Those files you do not have permissions, get deleted. --High Contrast (talk) 12:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I am hesitant to create a site-wide template for any image from the site given that two of the above images were not restored, as one had an AFP watermark and the other was taken from someone's Facebook page. I am getting worried that I am being deceived. There are now quite a few images that I OTRS-approved based on the origin email address of the permissions statement but actual locations on their website were not provided. Additionally most are not full resolution and lack EXIF data. – Adrignola talk 15:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, Adrignola. It is good to have a member of the OTRS team in this issue. Can you check the OTRS-permission of User:Mohamed CJ? And if there are some that cannot be reached by this permission, please nominate those files for deletion. User:Mohamed CJ states that he has a permission for all his uploads. --High Contrast (talk) 16:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Even if I did apply the OTRS emails I have received to everything from bahrainrights.org, I found quite a few uploads in May from http://twitter.com/#!/NABEELRAJAB, with no permission shown to be received from Nabeel Rajab. I marked them as not having permission. – Adrignola talk 20:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

File:990703m5696s0020vr.jpg

I found 2 sources for this photo but cannot verify if it is a genuine US Marine photo. Also the uploader gave a link to a forum which gave some extra information--including a reference number--on this picture which stated that it is a US Marine photo. I placed this link in the image talk page and it looks promising. I don't have access to irfan to verify it though...but maybe you do. If not, oh well! I won't lose any sleep over it. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:52, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Per COM:L We need primary sources for such images. Gladly, I was able to find a primary and reliable source for this file ([19]). Regards and thanks for your help! --High Contrast (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

• I didn't know where to look for such a picture. But luckily you found the original source. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:52, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. As I said above, I find it very good of you that you helped in this issue. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 19:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Immagine caricata: Barrè chord index finger barrè indice.jpg

Ciao, ho visto il tuo messaggio, ma non ho capito cosa devo aggiungere, mi sembra che ci sia già tutto: l'ho trasportata dalla wikipedia inglese e l'ho indicato mettendo anche il nome di quello che l'ha creata, la data e tutto il resto. Poi ho visto che mi avevi scritto anche per l'altra immagine: Corde chitarra classica.jpg che mi dite che non è categorizzata, ma io l'ho messa in "chitarra". Scusa ma non capisco bene cosa dovrei fare. Grazie. --Elenaf (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Response to your message

Well thank you very much for telling me about my uploads that violate your rights, Clearly i want to tell you that why you want to block my account, Photos which have been uploaded are most of them are my own work, i have designed or either i have taken myself, if i have written the author myself, then what is the problem. Except one file that is MBIIS which is my school;s photo which i have uploaded with the permission, please let me know how to add sources to that photo, I will be happy. --Ahmadfaisalsidiqi (talk) 18:14, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Your "problematic" files have been discussed here. I wonder why did not state any comment there? --High Contrast (talk) 18:23, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Foguera-i-gent-al-cim.jpg

Please take care about rest of user uploads. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Special:Nuke failed again obviously. I do not know where the error lies. Perhaps you can help? --High Contrast (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Book covers

Hey ciao my name is Paolo and I work for Berghahn Books. I just uploaded our book covers for making our wiki pages. how should I do not to meet speedy deleting criteria? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berghahn Journals (talk • contribs)

Ok, then we just need some evidence so that nobody can doubt this. You must send an Email to our OTRS-team: the Emailadress is permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Thanks. --High Contrast (talk) 21:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Files marked for deletion

Hi, in case you are responsible for marking these files for deletion

Museum_for_the_Macedonian_Struggle_collection_items_1.jpg, Museum_for_the_Macedonian_Struggle_collection_items_2.jpg, Museum_for_the_Macedonian_Struggle_collection_items_3.jpg, Museum_for_the_Macedonian_Struggle_collection_items_4.jpg, Museum_for_the_Macedonian_Struggle_collection_items_5.jpg, Lambros_Koromilas_Office.jpg

please note that I recently added them with permission from the Museum of the Macedonian struggle in Thessaloniki, Greece, which owns their copyrights. I note the museum as their owner as well as the name of the photographer who produced them for the museum and has no rights to them any longer.

Please let me know how they can be made safe. Regards, patrinos

Hi Patrinos! Then we just need some evidence so that nobody can doubt this permission. You must send an Email to our OTRS-team: the Emailadress is permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Thanks. --High Contrast (talk) 21:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

File:LULZTROLL.JPG

Hallo, ich sehe, du bist gerade aktiv. Ich glaube, dieses brandneue Bild kann man getrost als Vandalismus/persönlichen Angriff löschen. De728631 (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Gegen wen richtet sich diese Datei? --High Contrast (talk) 15:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Gegen einen Dennis. Das ist übrigens auch ein Derivat einer Originaldatei, dieses Gesicht gibt es überall im Internet, aber es kommt wohl von Deviant Art [20]. Copyvio. De728631 (talk) 15:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Weil es eine Urheberrechtsverletzung ist, ist dieses Bild gelöscht worden. --High Contrast (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Danke. De728631 (talk) 15:58, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

what?

High Contrast, as to personal attacks (re above), see this and related warnings by User:Denniss. De728631 (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

re:File:Kawasaki-zxr400-L4-schwarz-lila.jpg

Ich habe shon geschriebt an Januar 2008 "Source=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Kawasaki-zxr400-L4-schwarz-lila.jpg |Author=de:Benutzer:Cover", was soll ich noch machen? --Pil56 (talk) 17:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

"Source=http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Kawasaki-zxr400-L4-schwarz-lila.jpg" ist hierbei eine unzureichende Quellenangabe. Hier muss stehen, ob es sich um das eigene Werk von de:Benutzer:Cover handelt. Trifft dies zu? --High Contrast (talk) 17:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Symplyoslogo5.png deleted

Dear High Contrast, You deleted Symplyoslogo5.png , which is a file I created and I licenced under a Creative Commons BY-SA : please see the bottom-right of the page : "Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License." on [21] because I am MOrdinateur ( see my about.me profile)! I also left a message for you on the page of my creation . [22] Hope you'll re-create the page of the logo of SymplyOS : I cannot violate my OWN copyright! I used this image in the french article SymplyOS, presenting MY software, available at symplyos.tk, and now, the article doesn't have even the logo of the software : SymplyOS on fr.wikipedia.org Regards, M.Ordinateur (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0!"-licenses are not allowed on Commons, please have a look here (you can read it in the first two lines). Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, this is a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike and not an Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike : "Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License." (Please look at the bottom-right of this page). Regards, M.Ordinateur (talk) 11:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

So you have chabged the Creative Commons licence. Do you know that Creative Commons licences are irrevocable? Once you chosen a licence this applies for all time to this file. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

About "Musura Bay, Black Sea.jpg"

Hi ! Mitica-Misha is one of my students. Our sources are navy maps of the area (Romanian & Ukrainian). The ICJ delimitations confirm the Ukrainian-Romanian border Treaty of 1997, and the new ukrainian delimitation can be photographied (and I done) from the Sulina's dyke lighthouse because the ukrainian border-guards put beacons, without any romanian reaction (Romania have few boats and few gas, and prefer to conteste on the diplomatic side). --Spiridon Ion Cepleanu (talk) 08:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

We discuss copyright issues and political events: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Musura Bay, Black Sea.jpg. --High Contrast (talk) 08:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Mitica-Misha is one of my students. Our sources from the background, it's "Nasa World Wind", uploaded from [23], and re-draw with Photoshop (Mitica-Misha knows that), --Spiridon Ion Cepleanu (talk) 08:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clarification. You mustn't paste your comments on several places. Please keep the discussion on the DR. Do not paste my comments of discussions elsewhere without asking me and do not paste contributions of discussions in file pages. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

US Government images?

Can you tell if these 4 images are from US Federal institutions? I suspect only the first is certainly US but the resolution is poor. Not quite sure about the other three.

• File:Gasconade2.jpg
• File:Major General Regua.jpg
• File:FEWS Eastern Africa July-September projection.png
• File:Gen-perkins.jpg

Its a pity flickr review seems to go haywire and marks all these images sometimes. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The upper two ones are ok. But the other files are problematic. DR? --High Contrast (talk) 15:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

• I'll DR the last one. But US AID is not part of the US Government? (third picture) Is that true. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Of course US AID is a US governmental institution but the source does not load on my system. Can you check it? Cheers, High Contrast (talk) 20:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: You're right. This USAID website says USAID established FEWS (or Famine Early Warning system) in the 1980's (ie. they have a relationship) but not who owns FEWS or runs it today. FEWS may be a private organisation today which cooperates with USAID. So, I guess the map may or may not be PD. Thanks for your comments. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

File:182d Airlift Wing - C-130 Hercules photos

These photos were provided by email via the 182d Airlift Wing Public Affairs office. I indicated that in the description; and provided the email address of whom sent them in the description field.

If that is not enough information to satisfy your zeal; I can forward you the email with the attached photos Bwmoll3 (talk) 15:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Do not send me this mail to but to our OTRS-team. Insert in those photos {{OTRS-pending}} in the "permission-line". --High Contrast (talk) 15:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

About the copyright of image "Abschied_01"

Hello, you marked the image (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abschied_01.jpg) as copyright violation. Yesterday I got allowed by the Realschule Zur Windmühle in Ennigerloh to use that picture on Wikipedia. Picture source: http://rs-ennigerloh.de/2010-07/was-fuer-ein-tag-der-13-juli-2010.html

For more information about the copyright please read the new file description of the file on Wikimedia Commons.

Thank You. Tackyou (talk) 10:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Bitte die schriftliche Erlaubnis per Email an unser "Erlaubnis"-Bearbeitungsteam senden; die Emailadresse und weitere Infos dazu kannst du dort finden. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 15:00, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for that. Couldn't help it... was kinda funny to see the image of hitler pop up on the article(s) for a couple of minutes. Won't happen again. ;) Polozooza (talk) 10:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

This is vandalism and you should know this. --High Contrast (talk) 10:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I do. Won't happen again though. Polozooza (talk) 10:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Your no-source tags

This is just harassing contributors. Uploader gave source site and NASA image number. If you want more, please add it yourself. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Ooops, too bad, that must have had happened accidently. Thank you for help! --High Contrast (talk) 13:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

photos from the MAKS show

Hello!

I see that the Commons-media collection has some images fom the various MAKS-airshows on zhukivsky airfield near moscow hosted. I once saw a homepage that delivers some free photos from different years this airshow took action.

And no, I do not think of flickr, Zooomr or picasa.

Licences were:

• CC-zero
• CC-by
• CC-by-sa

I hope you konw of which homepage I am talking. One example is the Klub-missile systems. I canno t find right now the photo.

THANK YOU for your help!!

Hello! I think you are talking of this site. The license is CC:BY-SA. If you upload some files from this site, please watch out for those files that are already on Common. Thank you in advance and happy editing. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Egyptian Radio and Television Union 2.gif

"Error creating thumbnail: Invalid thumbnail parameters or PNG file with more than 12.5 million pixels". Can you please help fix this error? thanks in advance -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 06:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Also I have the same problem with File:Be with the Revolution.gif -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 08:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know this is a remporary software issue. Those files are really on Commons, they cannot be displayed as thumbnails - that's all. So, don't worry. --High Contrast (talk) 12:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The problem has not been solved yet -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 23:12, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

This is actually a problem; just a technical "disability" of the wiki software. You may consult our forum if you want to know more about this. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 23:15, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

RIAN archive 594300 Sanitary post at Leningrad's Narva Gates

I don't know how to go about changing filenames. Maybe you do.

In English "Sanitary" implies a washroom or toilet. In English this should be translated "First Aid Post" not a "Sanitary post". There is no equivalent to the term "First Aid" in other languages. Can you fix it? Amandajm (talk) 00:35, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Which image exactly? Please give me the complete link. --High Contrast (talk) 09:04, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Ilizia bus terminal in Sarajevo (1996).JPEG

---

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

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 09:54, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Hi. Just right now I see two images marked has copyright infrigment by you. Right, but you are an admin, don't you? :) So I have a doubt: why don't you delete direct by yourself? Please forgive me, just curiosity:D --Trixt (talk) 12:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! In certain issues (not for all files) I want other Admins to delete them so that another Admin may countercheck may action. --High Contrast (talk) 12:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, ok, I understand ;) Thank you!--Trixt (talk) 12:22, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• I wish more administrators followed this practice. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 19:19, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Northport Stacks.JPG

That's funny, I thought the image File:Northport Stacks.JPG came with a description when I uploaded it from Wikipedia. I see that it didn't so I'll add one. ----DanTD (talk) 14:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for adding a description. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Flickr

Hi, ich habe File:Blohm & Voss BV-142.jpg hochgeladen. 1. Kann man Flickr-Dateien beim Import auch andere Namen geben? Und 2. ist bei dem Bild die Lizenz korrekt? (die Auswahl ist beim Importtool sehr beschränkt) Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 18:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Ja, flickr-Dateien kann man schon andere Dateinamen geben. Lizenztechnische ist die Datei etwas problematisch; ich kann mich erinnern, dass es eine Nachfrage auf dem englischsprachigen Forum diesbezgl. gab. Anscheinend wurde bewusst auf einen Automatismus für "Keine Urheberrechtsbeschränkungen bekannt"-Dateien verzichtet, da dies oft nicht zutrifft. Wie es mit der von dir verwendeten Lizenz aussieht, kann ich nicht genau sagen, aber ich wäre skeptisch. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Na, die Aussage des San Diego Museums dazu ist ja salomonisch: [24]. Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 21:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

...im Prinzip gestehen die Herrschaften, dass sie keinen Ahnung haben, unter welcher Lizenz die Bilder zu veröffentlichen sind. Gemäß dem Motto "Mach dich selber schlau" ("It is your responsibility to determine and satisfy copyright and other use restrictions before copying, transmitting, or making other use of protected items."). Naja. --High Contrast (talk) 21:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Andererseits könnte man hierbei "The Museum's images that are part of The Commons are marked "no known copyright restrictions," indicating that the Museum is unaware of any current copyright restrictions on the works so designated, either because the term of copyright may have expired without being renewed or because no evidence has been found that copyright restrictions apply." auf die Idee kommen, dass sie zumindest recherchiert haben. Ich finde es übrigens merkwürdig, dass die die alle veröffentlichen (als Amis), denn, wenn ich Rechte einklagen wollte, würde ich mich an das Museum wenden, da die die ja frei zugänglich machen mit "no known copyright restrictions". D.h. sie verstoßen gegebenenfalls genauso gegen das Urheberrecht. Man kann dann nur darauf vertrauen, dass sich keiner beschwert... Cobatfor (talk) 06:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Stimmt! Über ie von dir zitierte Passage bin ich auch gestolpert und auch auf die Hoffnung "wird schon keiner was sagen" ist in gewisser Weise kurious, da wir auf Commons vage Verdachtsmomente heranziehen, um Bilder zu löschen. --High Contrast (talk) 08:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Birken-Kätzschen Löschung?

Hallo,

fehlt der Name des Urhebers(meiner) immer noch? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Birken-Kätzschen.jpg

--Blackerking (talk) 19:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Jetzt ist alles ok. Danke für deine Hilfe! --High Contrast (talk) 19:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:F-8A NASA 1973 EC73-3468.jpg

Hi, vielleicht kannst Du da mal reinschauen. Ich habe dem User gepostet, dass man da "duplicate" benutzt, aber vielleicht kannst Du auch kurz die Sache lösen. Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 08:16, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Ein Duplikat ist die Datei File:F-8A NASA 1973 EC73-3468.jpg nicht mehr, nachdem sie zugeschnitten wurde. Ich hätte diesbzgl. eine pragmatische Meinung, aber diese führt in solchen DR-Fällen immer wieder zu überflüssig langen Diskussionen. Vorerst könnte man beide behalten. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Adamovich plate

I'm not familiar with the conventions here. I've added some discussion to Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Lenin_Red_Star_Adamovich_Bild_35.jpg, but I'm not sure that that's where it belongs. Where does it belong? Thanks, --Macrakis (talk) 20:23, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

If you want this image restored, please write your concerns here: COM:UNDEL. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:26, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

US Government photos

Do you confirm that these are US Government photos below? Better an Admin with more experience in this situation than myself I have to say:

• File:US Air Force C-130H Hercules.jpg
• File:CDS Natynczyk 08.jpg
• File:US Army UH-60 Black Hawk.jpg
• File:Canadian Rangers Inuvik Patrol 2.jpg
• File:Canadian Rangers Inuvik Patrol.jpg

The second photos is of a top Canadian commander. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: I passed the 5 photos. I hope they are OK for Commons. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:31, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Leoboudv! Are you sure that all of these files are in the public domain due to a US governmental work? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 00:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: You never said anything but this is the basic source website for all the photos. Is this not a US Government webpage? Or should I revert my pass? I asked for your input because you are the more experienced Admin here. At first glance, it looks like a US Government run site...but only you know if this interpretation is right or wrong. Please respond. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:07, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that I cannot be available on Commons for 25 hours per day. Well, I see a problem with some of those images above. Please consider: Just because some image appears on a US .mil-site, does not make it automatically a public domain image. An image must be the work of the United States Federal Government, for example a US service member took a photo with a camera.
To the images:

• File:US Army UH-60 Black Hawk.jpg OK
• File:CDS Natynczyk 08.jpg OK
• File:US Air Force C-130H Hercules.jpg OK
• File:Canadian Rangers Inuvik Patrol 2.jpg: Photo by Wendy Gilmour -> is she an employee of the USA; if no, we have to reconsider, if this file must be deleted
• File:Canadian Rangers Inuvik Patrol.jpg: Photo by Wendy Gilmour -> is she an employee of the USA; if no, we have to reconsider, if this file must be deleted

As a conclusion: I see only a problem with the two Wendy Gilmour images. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

• OK, I'll revert my pass on those 2 pictures. Maybe its better to let someone else file a DR like you? I never uploaded them --Leoboudv (talk) 18:43, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem, Leoboudv. A DR would be appreciated. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 22:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

• I filed the 2 DRs you requested and asked that the community decide. They may have more experience than me here. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:43, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! -Land Rover Defender station wagon.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 07:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Wenatchee Mountains

Hi High Contrast;

Many understand the Wenatchee Mountains to refer to "the area between the Wenatchee and Yakima rivers and Stevens Pass", and not as you have described them.[25] Category:Wenatchee Mountains has an interlanguage link to the aforementioned article. Best wishes, --Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:14, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I received two Email of two people that told me that this category is heavily filled with images that do not show the mountains in the park itself. If there would have been a description in this category I would not have had made any edits there. --High Contrast (talk) 15:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree that a description would not hurt, although an interlanguage link should suffice. The uppercase "Mountains" should be a clue that this is the proper name of a specific region. I'm not sure I understand why images of biota should not be included in a regional category. That said, perhaps images of biota could be better categorized in Category:Nature of the Wenatchee Mountains, in analogy to Category:Nature of Yosemite National Park. Do you think that would be satisfactory? Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 22:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

That's a good. I'd appreciate a Category:Nature of the Wenatchee Mountains. If you want some support by me doing this, just let me know. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 22:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done, I think. Thank you for the offer of assistance. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The result looks good. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Rachelsee.jpg

Hello Rcbutcher! n How did it happen that you added these categories to this file? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like I made a big mistake there, sorry, I don't know what I was thinking about, need to pay more attention ! regards, Rod. Rcbutcher (talk) 17:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Geräteträger Lanz Alldog.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 17:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Military people of Poland

Wieso sabotieren Sie meine Arbeit ? Wiesen sie die Namen der special forces Soldaten ?. Ich bemühe mich diese Kategorie alphabetisch zu ordnen und das was nicht dazu gehört woanders zu kategorisieren. Annonyme Photos (wo die Personen nicht namentlich genannt sind sollten in der Kategorie "Military of Poland" untergebracht werden. Wen jeder hier Photos von namentlich unbekannten und anonymen Personen platzieren würde dann kriegen wier hier totalen Chaos und prosit Mahlzeit. Wenn ich hier die Ordung bringe dann machen Sie es bitte nicht wieder kaputt. 80.171.48.106 14:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich "sabotiere" "deine Arbeit nicht". Nimm Abstand, mir derartiges zu unterstellen! "wo die Personen nicht namentlich genannt sind sollten in der Kategorie "Military of Poland" untergebracht werden": das stimmt nicht, das ist deine eigene Regelung, die auf keinem Commons-Kategorisierungsprinzip ruht. Ich habe die Bilder nun in eine speziellere Kategorie verschoben, in der sie verbleiben sollen. --High Contrast (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich habe Sie höflich mit SIE angeschrieben. Ich fördere Sie hiermit sofort auf Abstand zu gehen und mir den üblichen Respekt zu gewähren. Ich wünsche AUSDRÜCKLICH von Ihnen nicht gedutzt zu werden!!!. 80.171.48.106 14:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Ich dutze jeden auf Commons - das ist hier gängige Praxis unter Kollegen. Wegen dir mache ich hier keine Ausnahme, zumal dein Verständnis Höflichkeit gemäß deiner obigen vorwurfsvollen Polemik etwas bizarr ist. --High Contrast (talk) 14:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

In diesem Fall werde ich mich an jemandem Andern wenden, der diese Sache in Ordnung bringt. Es interessiert mich übrigens nicht daß Sie sich die Freiheiten nehmen alle zu Dutzen ich habe Ihnen von Anfang an deutlich gemacht daß ICH ES NICHT WÜNSCHE. Damit es klar ist es geht jetzt nicht mehr um die Veränderungen die Sie vorgenommen haben ES GEHT JETZT AUSCHLIEßLICH DARUM WIE SIE ALS ADMINISTRATOR MIT ANDEREN UMGEHEN. 80.171.48.106 15:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Mein Umgang ist dem Verhalten anderer angepasst. Das ist dir sicherlich klar. --High Contrast (talk) 15:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Nein! Das ist überhaupt nicht klar. Man kann zwar immer anderer Meinung sein aber nicht seine Freiheiten (die jetzt in die Frechheiten übergehen) durchzusetzen. Sie hatten Ihre Möglichkeit aus der Sache rauszukommen gehabt, hartknäckig haben haben Sie jedoch Eskalation und Konfrontation gewählt in dem Sie mich weiter dutzen. Hiermit beende ich diese Disskussion in der Hoffnung dass auf Commons die Meisten wissen WAS HÖFLICHER UMGANG MIT ANDEREN MENSCHEN bedeutet. 80.171.48.106 15:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

...zu denen du ganz offensichtlich nicht gehörst. Ein Ende dieser überflüssigen "Diskussion" begrüße ich sehr - ist es doch wahrlich reine Zeitverschwendung. Ich bin hier, um konstruktive Beiträge zu leisten - wie du offenbar auch. Also, noch einmal, lass dich nicht von deinen Bearbeitungsvorhaben auf Commons abhalten. Arrivederci, High Contrast (talk) 15:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

This Image

Do you think that this image can be moved to Commons? September 11 is coming. I checked the source and the global security website says its a 'US Government photo' which I noted in an edit to this photo. Any views? I did not put the 'move to commons' tag to it. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Well, if it is an US governmental photo, then it should be no problem. Did you find a different source, an official US governmental site, like FBI or the Dod, that can verify this licencing statement on www.globalsecurity.org? --High Contrast (talk) 08:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

• No. I don't know where global security got this image but the reference is given: "U.S. Department of Defense publication. 'The Nature of the Enemy.' Vol. 1, No. 3, Oct. 24, 2006." I just noted what they say. So, I should I or should I not move it then to Commons? (I added that publication reference to the picture) Its your call.
• Note: Ramzi was arrested in September 2002-- a year after the 9/11 attacks in Pakistan--and deported to the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. So the image could be taken by US authorities. --Leoboudv (talk) 20:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I know that it could be taken by US authorities, but could be is unfortunately not enought evidence. Nevertheless, "U.S. Department of Defense publication. 'The Nature of the Enemy.' Vol. 1, No. 3, Oct. 24, 2006." is a valid source. That sounds really good - do you find this US Dod publication on the internet? As I said above, if you have a valid source, feel free to transfer this file. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:25, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Request

Hello. Please, delete this file. Thank you in advance. --Butqa (talk) 05:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! There seem to be problems with the freedom of panorama with this image. Anyway, please support Commons by uploading new images from Georgia. If any help is neede, just ask me. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 10:28, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Why you can't delete this picture? --Butqa (talk) 16:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but deletion request have a runtime of 7 days minimum. --High Contrast (talk) 16:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Questionable uploads from "UED77"

Hi. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. The problem was that one of the the upload guides in Portuguese included my username and the name Cesáreo Fraile Izquierdo (which is someone else's), and some uploaders copy-pasted that verbatim into the file descriptions. I have since replaced most references to my name, but the problem isn't completely solved. I will work with other translators of help pages to make sure this cannot happen again. —UED77 (talk) 10:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thank you for your help! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:27, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Kolkotta Streets 10.jpg

Hey, I just missed the own template while uploading using commonist. Added to those images where source was missing. Thanks for notifying.--Rameshng (talk) 12:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Such things simply happen. Thanks for inserting the {{own}}-template. I have removed this no-source-tag on File:Kolkotta Streets 10.jpg. Thanks for your help and happy editing! Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 12:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Image copyright warning

Hello, I'm writing you regarding the warning the on image file located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Museum_for_the_Macedonian_Struggle_collection_items_5.jpg. I've added the required source information, as well as contact info of the owner, however the waning persists. Please let me know what I must do to rectify the situation. Regards, Patrinos (talk) 09:56, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Sorry, but this is not enough. Are you the photographer of these images? If yes, insert {{own}} as source. If you have taken those images from the website of this museum, please go to COM:OTRS (our "permissions-check-team"). Then send the email to the emailadress that can be found there and tell the volunteers there that you have the permission to release these photos here under this licence. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. The images ('Museum for the Macedonian Struggle collection items 1.jpg' to 'Museum for the Macedonian Struggle collection items 5.jpg') were made available to me by the Foundation of the Museum for the Macedonian Struggle for the express purpose of publishing them on wikipedia. However, I did not obtain them from their website. They were commissioned to photographer Pavlos Makridis as work for hire and the foundation has full ownership and copyrights. Would it be sufficient for the foundation to send the OTRS team a message to this effect?

Patrinos (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I do not doubt your words. Send this to OTRS and this must work. It would be great if it works because these photos are a good addition for Commons. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:06, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Shinya Aoki at Evolve MMA in Singapore.jpg

The owner of Evolve MMA has sent an email to: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to confirm he gives permission for this pic to be released and I have updated the information to reflect this. Thanks for your assistance. --Sadoka74 (talk) 09:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks for your support. --High Contrast (talk) 10:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Zentraler Omnibusbahnhof in Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI, in spite of a little distorsion at left (buildings in background are leaning)--Jebulon 09:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Are you kidding me?

This is the second admin I've had to go to to stop deleting images by User:Natuzzi mandus that I've been tagging with OTRS permissions from Unilever. You guys are causing me a great deal of grief and work. – Adrignola talk 14:54, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Then restore those files you think to have valid OTRS-permissions. --High Contrast (talk) 14:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

La foto es mia, pero es que no sé como se hace para cambiar los permisos.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panoramic view over Bodenmais, 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good pano stitch! Nice details. --A.Ceta 09:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

German Tanks

Hallo, schade, dass Du mit Deiner Löschung über eine Stunde meiner Arbeit zunichte gemacht hast .... Die bisherige Kategorie "Musée des Blindes" umfasst weit über 200 Bilder. Wie ich die wikipedia-Praxis verstanden habe, ist eine derartige Häufung unerwünscht. Außerdem war die Seite sehr unübersichtlich. Natürlich könnte man deiner Anregung folgen und zu jedem Fahrzeugtyp eine eigene Kategorie bilden. Dies hätte aber zur Folge, dass nicht wenige Kategorien nur ein einziges Bild enthalten würden (was doch wiederum in wikip. nicht erwünscht ist). Deshalb erschien und erscheint mir eine Gliederung nach Nationalitäten sinnvoll. --Matthias Holländer (talk) 16:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Achtung. Deine Arbeit wurde überhaupt nicht zu Grunde gemacht. Deine Uploads wurden lediglich verschoben. Deine Bilder sind gut und sehr erwünscht auf Commons (hier kannst du alle deine Bild-Uploads sehen). Die Kategorisierungspraxis auf Commons ist anders strukturiert, als du dir das momentan vorstellst. Dass Kategorien auf Commons gerne einmal mehr als 200 Bilder beeinhalten ist normal. Bei den Museenkategorie gibt es noch keine einheitlich Praxis. Es gibt diverse Ansätze, aber eine breite Durchsetzung oder ein Konsens existiert noch nicht. Lade deine Bilder einfach weiter hoch und lege sie in Category:Musée des Blindés ab, wo sich all deine anderen Bilder ebenfalls befinden. Ich schaue später noch einmal über deine Uploads und kategorisiere sie richtig. Gruß und viel Spaß beim weiteren Hochladen. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 16:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Pomnik MO SB ORMO Brzozow.JPG

I am the author. Is this any problem? - Karol91 (talk) 14:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

You are the author of this image? The author is not Karol91 but "Ladislav Sasák" and this file does obviously come from http://www.saloon.pl/. And as long as there is no permission by "Ladislav Sasák" who has confirmed that this image is by him, this file has a problem with Commons. --High Contrast (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Mount Sahand.jpg

Hi,
I'm not so familiar with the policies; as a guide for me please tell the exact reason of deletion. would it be kept in some way? --YusuF 21:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Files that are released under a "Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works" cannot be uploaded to Commons. More information can be found here: COM:L (section "Well-known licenses"). Regards, High Contrast (talk) 21:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks! --YusuF 10:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Prelucrare 3D pentru Colun, Sibiu.jpg

Source: SRTM data provided by NASA and processed free 3DEM, free software. Text information on the map are taken from wikimapia.Asybaris01 (talk) 08:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't tell, add it as source to all of your relevant uploads (fyi). --High Contrast (talk) 08:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

well, but will require some time because there are quite a lot. Please, I'm stressed because each tells me that's not the right license. I thought if I specified the NASA license is sufficient. Who knows how to make such images know as the source is free.Asybaris01 (talk) 08:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

You as the uploader must prove that all stuff you present here is free enought for Commons. And yes, there many different possibilities for getting free satellite images. Please fix your uploads with the correct sources instead of uploading new files with stating those incorrect source information. You have the time to fix all other uploads by you with the same problems. But please begin to do so. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I think I have done. I made ​​230 contributions today. Please see what I did and if I missed something please tell me. Regards, Asybaris01 (talk) 17:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you. --High Contrast (talk) 08:43, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

OTRS

Hi High Contrast. Thanks for your OTRS adding but I don't know how i can email it to OTRS System. How and What I must send to them? Please explain. Shabakh (talk) 07:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Please have a look here: COM:OTRS. All relevant information can be found on that page. I cannot explain it better than it is there. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks! I send it to OTRS. I'm waiting for it's code. Shabakh (talk) 11:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ÖBB 2143.21 der Staudenbahn in Vilshofen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality.--Ankara 10:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Re:Dapa19

Yes, I am David Papalini, recorded on Commons and Wikipedia in Italian as "Dapa19". --Dapa19 (talk) 20:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Can you give that information on your Commons user page, too? --High Contrast (talk) 20:40, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Удаление изображений

Здравствуйте! Вы пометили мои файла для удаления. File:ЮИ Максюта в 1937г.jpg File:Россия Америка-500r.tif File:Максюта-1980.jpg File:Skugarev im.jpg KartaNedelin.tif File:Неделин 01.11.99г 3.JPG File:Sokolov 0000413.jpg File:Танкер проекта Р-164 "Узола.jpg File:Вездеход "Узола".jpg File:Река Узола Малые Мосты.jpلعربية File:Подробная карта Ковернинского района.jpg File:Адмирал Ю.И.Максюта.jpeg File:Мостик через Узолу в деревне Большие Круты.jpg File:0File0011.jpg File:Znak-1.jpg File:Marshal Krylov.jpg File:000 IMG 5907.jpg File:Дом в деревне Марково.jpg File:Zgoda.jpeg File:Река Узола в половодье.jpgا File:Крылов на рейде.jpg File:МаксютаЮИ.jpeg File:Взрыв Генерала Ванденберга.jpg File:Проект 1130.jpg File:2 Спасск-Чукотка-Сахалин.jpg File:Записка о завтрашнем полёте Гагарина.jpeg File:Крылов аверс.jpg File:Чукотка -1.jpg File:Белый пароход.JPG Я постарался исправить авторство и лицензии, вроде бы разобрался с этим. Файлы принадлежат мне и ссылаются на мой же сайт toge.ru. Прошу убрать статус на удаление. mr. Анатолий (talk) 18:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

привет! Вы взяли фотографии? --High Contrast (talk) 18:31, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Привет! Не понял, в каком смысле "взял"? mr. Анатолий (talk) 10:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Если вы фотограф, то, пожалуйста, используйте этот шаблон: {{own}} => Commons:Добавление ваших собственных работ. --High Contrast (talk) 10:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Понял, спасибо! mr. Анатолий (talk) 10:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

не проблема. --High Contrast (talk) 10:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Всё-таки удалили все мои файлы. Я же поправил все указанные ошибки: автор я, ссылка на меня, общая лицензия. Как я могу приостанавливать удаление? Или подобные решения не оспариваются? Статья без иллюстраций - не статья, а загружать их снова и ждать, когда удалят - не хочется. Поясните, пожалуйста. mr. Анатолий (talk) 13:13, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello! The new files have been treated by User:Denniss, not by me. Please ask him which problems he has with your images. --High Contrast (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Requesting undeletion of a template

Would you mind undeleting {{Dablink}}? Contrary to the statements made by the nominator in its DR, which you closed, this template is heavily used — it appears in 440 different categories by my count, as well as other pages. Nyttend (talk) 00:12, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

y the way, please leave a note at my talk page when you reply here; I'll probably forget to come back if you don't. Nyttend (talk) 00:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

You will remember my talk page ;) Well, I was aware of the fact that this template is used on several categories but nobody took part in this deletion discussion. So, on Commons such DR get regularly closed after 7 days. I, personally, can think of undeletion but this would be a bit unfair for others who disagree in an undeletion. I would prefer a ordinary request at COM:UNDEL, so that others can post their opinions as well. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 00:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

File:MordaqChay.jpg & File:Sahad mountaintop.jpg

Are there higher resolution images of these 2 photos on this panoramio account? I saw you upload a higher resolution image from this account....which I passed. I thank you in advance for anything which you can do. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

• Also this has the wrong source:
• File:Palace of Sapieha (Ruzhany).jpg

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Everything done. Sorry for the wrong source of my upload: that must have been a copy&paste error. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Thank You. Image marked now. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks! --High Contrast (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Ahemmm....

Did you realise that the category you demolished was called "Airliners of Air New Zealand", NOT "Airliners of New Zealand"? At the very least, you could have reinstated the "Air New Zealand" categories. As it is, you simply removed valid categorising data. Please be careful with such moves, and check whether your removals did the same to the files of other uploaders. Regards, Ingolfson (talk) 12:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The "Airliners of" was never a valid category system; As a careful User I have watched this pseudo-"category-tree" for several months/years: It was set up by User:Joshbaumgartner (not active on Commons since June 2008) that was not completed and is redundant to existing and better linked categories. User:Joshbaumgartner started this project and stopped prematurely because he suddenly agnised that it is much work. So, which categories should be reinstalled again? --High Contrast (talk) 16:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Der Passauer Dom vom "Fünferlsteg" aus gesehen.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Cayambe 15:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Please explain

Please explain me why Category:Airliners of France are legitime, and Category:Airliners of Romania (did you delete it) not? Thanks. --Turbojet (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Turbojet! Category:Airliners of France is not legitimate. This cat will be deleted as the other connated categories of this type. This cat is, as the other ones, redundant to existing ones. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. Please give me a link towards a discussion showing that this is the opinion of the community, not yours. I want to understand why a certain kind of category is good and another not. Possible to discuss there. --Turbojet (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

This certain category tree was unfinished and was an attempt by one user to copy a category tree from the English Wikipedia to Commons. He stopped after some 20 edits and he left behind the remains of this inconsistent category tree. Inconsistent because there was a similiar, but differently named category tree already on Commons ("Category:Civil aircraft"). Due to this redundancy it was deleted as an uncontroversial cleaning. --High Contrast (talk) 11:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

"Civil aircraft" is not the same as "airliner". Agricultural aircraft are also civilian, but not airliners. Category:Airliners is legitimate? If yes, Category:Rombac should to be linked to this kind of aircraft. --Turbojet (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I know what civil aircraft and airliners are. The problem was differently. Is Rombac an type of aircraft or is it a manufacturer? --High Contrast (talk) 14:26, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

"Rombac" is the short name (complete ro:ROMBAC 1-11) of the aircraft, like en:BAC One-Eleven and en:Boeing 747. The manufacturer was Întreprinderea de Avioane București (The Aircraft Factory of Bucharest), branch of en:Industria Aeronautică Română. The ro:wp category is ro:Categorie:Avioane de pasageri = en:Category:Airliners. --Turbojet (talk) 15:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

So, it is an aircraft/airliner model; then place it in Category:Airliners. --High Contrast (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope that in future you will not act as you think. --Turbojet (talk) 15:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I never did. --High Contrast (talk) 15:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Really! What about saying "this category name/structure is good and the other is bad"? I asked the link to the community decision. You do not gave me, so i consider it is your own opinion. Why not ask you to undelete Category:Aircraft of Romania, also other categories deleted by you? --Turbojet (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Redundant categories get deleted on Commons, do you think this is not appropriate? You never asked to undelete anything nor did you act construcitvely to improve the Airliners category. So why do you now start to get harshly? --High Contrast (talk) 16:20, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, as far as I have time, probably in 2016, when I retire. If I still find something after you delete it. --Turbojet (talk) 16:36, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour

Bonjour, J’ai bien noté que ces photos ont été supprimées par vos soins :

28 August 2011  (Deletion log); 22:24 . . High Contrast (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Art floral.jpg" (Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jean boye.jpg)  (Deletion log); 22:24 . . High Contrast (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Pic languedocien.jpg" (Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jean boye.jpg)  (Deletion log); 22:24 . . High Contrast (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Les figues offertes.jpg" (Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jean boye.jpg)  (Deletion log); 22:24 . . High Contrast (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Signature de Jean Boyé.gif" (Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jean boye.jpg)  (Deletion log); 22:24 . . High Contrast (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Jean Boyé.jpg" (Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jean boye.jpg)  (Deletion log); 22:23 . . High Contrast (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Jean boye.jpg" (Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jean boye.jpg)

J’ai bien compris le sens de votre démarche qui vise à éviter que Wikimédia Commosns comporte des images dont les droits ne seraient pas disponibles. Toutefois, en l’espèce, ce n’est pas le cas puisque je suis l’auteur de ces photos. Je dispose des originaux que je peux adresser par mail pour attester de ce fait. Je suis donc totalement de bonne foi et uniquement motivé par le désir de faire progresser le réseau même si je reconnais bien volontiers ne pas être encore très habile dans le fonctionnement de Wikimedia Commons. Mais je ne demande qu’à m’améliorer. Bien cordialement, Jean-François --Jeffboyevanneroy (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Those DRs were closed after 7 days. You did not state any comments during this time at the DRs you are mentioning above. If you want an image to get restored, please consult COM:UNDEL. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dumpster in Jordan.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality -- George Chernilevsky 20:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed move of Category:Aerial pictures of 2011 Wacken Open Air

Hi High Contrast,

in my opinion there's no need to wait, just go ahead and move it. When I created the cat, I somehow didn't realise that "photographs" is the term usually used for that. Greetings, --El Grafo (talk) 20:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Das wird der Bot machen müssen. Nur leider ist dieser derzeit "down". Beauftrag habe ich ihn bereits, wann er es macht weiß ich nicht, aber irgendwann passiert die Verschiebung. Viel zu oft dauert sowas auf Commons gerne einmal mehrere Wochen oder auch Monate. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 00:53, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Moin, ich habe das jetzt einfach per Cat-A-Lot gemacht. Links außerhalb von Commons dürfte es außer zwei Diskussionsseiten auf de-wiki eigentlich noch keine geben, die passe ich dann bei Gelegenheit selbst an. Grüße, --El Grafo (talk) 09:16, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Ich danke dir. Obschon diese schnöden Aufgaben zum Arbeitsbereich unseres Bot-Knechtes gehören. Sollte also nicht deine Arbeitszeit belasten. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 09:18, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Beirut - Achrafieh - Chartouni Mansion.jpg

Feel free to upload the slightly higher resolution photo over the existing picture...if you wish (or think its worth it). My computer is a bit slow handling upload wizard right now. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:41, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello! What's with the flickrreview-bot? This bot is constructed to do upload higher versions, even if the review was done by another trusted user. I guess this bot is recently down like any other. Nevertheless, I uploaded the higher resoluted version. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 09:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thank You. Sometimes the flickrbot doesn't mark obvious cases like this and moves it to human review for reasons unknown. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Spain (1977-1981).svg

You have deleted the flag File:Flag of Spain (1977-1981).svg, but you haven't checked all usage links first. We have used thie file on pl:wiki in article pl:Oscar dla najlepszego filmu nieanglojęzycznego. Is there a better relacement image for this purpose? Mulat (talk) 12:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

It is not a Commons admin's task to find replacements for deleted files. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, it was deleted because "As we have a better one, this one should be deleted". Probably this "better" picture is still somewhere in your browser history. Moreover Commons:Duplicate#Duplicates: "After deleting the duplicate, redirect the deleted filename unless it is misleading or a very recent upload. (This avoids breaking links from external reusers of images.)" Bulwersator (talk) 21:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC) PS "This page is considered an official policy on Wikimedia Commons." - therefore "It is not a Commons admin's task to find replacements for deleted files" is in the best case misleading Bulwersator (talk) 21:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Flag of Spain 1977 1981.svg. NVO (talk) 04:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

help

Please see Martin has deleted this and this and File:Prelucrare 3D pentru Sandulita si Magureni, Calarasi.jpg and more files. Say, I violated copyright. I think this is caused by wikimapia where I just take information that fill the map. Please help me.Asybaris01 (talk) 15:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello!
It seems that "Wikimapia" brought Martin to delete this file. But that's no problem at all because images on Commons that were deleted are not gone but just invisible for non-admins; that means those files are still there. The next to do is, to explain Martin where these images came from. Explain that the base map is from NASA World Wind and that only the text information is from Wikimapia (as far as I understood this issue). Important is that you contact Martin directly on his talk page. The Restoration of these files should be done by the User who deleted them, so please contact Martin. I am quite sure that these files can come back. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:57, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Dablink

Template:Dablink, which you deleted on 20 August 2011, is currently used by something like 400 pages on Wikimedia Commons. Can you please either restore the template, or modify those 400 pages, or propose how else this error can be rectified? -- Dr Greg  talk  21:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

This issue was discussed here: Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Dablink. Within one week, no other user had any argments against the nominator's rationale. Why didn't you bring up your thoughts about this template in the regualar DR-time? There is nothing wrong that this file was deleted. I will not restore it just because you ask me on my talk page - that would be against the rules. Consult COM:UNDEL, if you want to. --High Contrast (talk) 08:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

TIF graph

I am the creator of the TIF graph you removed under some false claim of copyright violation.

Who or where did you get the idea there was some copyright violation?

Graphman2 Now I can't find it to put it back up. Can you undo whatever you did and put my graph back up?

Of which file are you talking exactly? --High Contrast (talk) 08:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Unimog U20.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

best in scope --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:37, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

These images

Will someone delete any of these failed panoramio images if they have been failed for more than 1 week? I had to revert my panoramio pass on 17 images and so this category is a bit full now. The images initially failed review in 2010. Then I saw the copyright give broad permission to the uploader to upload the images to wikipedia--so I passed them since Lupo said that a permission was OK for pre-2009 uploaded images--but now I see (from the image talkpages) that the typed permission has disappeared from the panoramio link. But anyway the permission for pre-2009 images was only for wikipedia...which is a restriction as I noted when I filed a DR here...and as Admin Lupo told me in the DR link I gave. But I can't really file 17 DRs when the images were initially failed in 2010 by other Admins or trusted users. It wouldn't make sense. I just revoked my panoramio pass. Just curious, if you can delete them. That's all. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello!
Is there a consensus for deleting all files in this category? Others may see this problematic if files get deleted without a DR. What do you think? --High Contrast (talk) 12:31, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Well these images were originally failed by Electron or ZooFari in mid-2010...until I passed them. I now reverted my pass based on Lupo's comments. But its your decision. I understand what you are saying. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Ipkf.jpg

Sir how it violates copyright.It comes from Srilanka Airforce website which is not a private militia. It is a government military organization. sridhar1000(talk)

I tagged it, you used a completely wrong licence tag. And now, it seems to be correct, you can remove the copyvio-tag. Please add a better file description, "Ipkf" is insufficient. Thank you in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

File:C-130-Peoria-Illinois ANG.jpg

What documentation do you require? I will forward you the email from base the public affairs office (noted in the image) which suppllied the photo if that is what you need. Bwmoll3 (talk) 13:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

As always: the Commons principles requires "valid sources" that can verify that any image is really published under the licence that is used for any image (COM:L). Bwmoll3, we had this discussion for several times.
What you gave as source for File:C-130-Peoria-Illinois ANG.jpg is "Illinois Air National Guard 182d AW PA office". This is insufficient to show that this certain file is in the public domain. For example this file: here you have sufficient source information of an USAF-image: you see the "gallery" where this image can be found with the correct byline that this image was taken by an USAF-employee. In addition, the direct link on the file is also given. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

So, in other words, you are saying that an image provided by an Official United States Air Force officer, emailing from an official United States Air Force email address in line with his official duties as a public affairs officer making government information available to the general public is "insufficient" as a "valid source", because it is not posted on a government website? I have even offered to forward to you his email FROM the af.mil address Bwmoll3 (talk) 15:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Evidence is missing. Anybody could say I have received an email of the president of the United States. --High Contrast (talk) 15:18, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

However, not anyone would offer to forward you the email, which I have now twice Bwmoll3 (talk) 15:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you know COM:OTRS? --High Contrast (talk) 15:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm not familiar with all the nuances of commons. I'm just a simple author trying to illustrate an article I've written for the benefit of the general public. If, in your zeal to delete the image while it's under review, that's your prerogative, and once it's passed it's review there I'll just simply re-post it. Bwmoll3 (talk) 15:33, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I hate deleting images. I only want reliable source information. --High Contrast (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

And no, you are not "just a simple author" - you are the same author like anybody else here on Commons. There is no group of "simple" authors. --High Contrast (talk) 15:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Dornier Seastar D-ICKS.jpg

You tagged File:Dornier Seastar D-ICKS.jpg as no source. While it currently has source = author and the author field blank, it was originally uploaded [26] with the uploader as author. The uploader (who does not appear to active on commons) appears to have removed his username [27] in 2009 - is the statement of authorship that the photograph was originally uploaded sufficient to keep this photo?Nigel Ish (talk) 16:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks for support. I tried to open the file's history but it didn't load. Neverthless, I have removed the "no source"-tag and I restored the original source informaion that which is definately sufficient. --High Contrast (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Chevrolet Colorado (Arabia)

Will do shortly —Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

And when will you write this description? --High Contrast (talk) 18:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Later today, cheers—Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 21:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

This description is written in a few minutes. --High Contrast (talk) 21:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

(...been busy!) DONE —Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 04:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Well done! Perfect! Thank you. --High Contrast (talk) 10:22, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

About "JGSDF OH-6D Northern Ladybird.jpg"

Dear High Contrast!First of all,thanks for your advice.I finished editing the file in accordance with your advice.Please check the latest version of the file.Thank you.--402SQC-1 (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. --High Contrast (talk) 18:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I finished editing another files.Thank you for your cooperation!--402SQC-1 (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! But please state your Username as author of the file: look: [28]. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:52, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I finished editing that file.Thank you!--402SQC-1 (talk) 17:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Magazin

Warum soll hier das Magazin raus? Im Text steht, dass eine sich dafür bereit macht das Magazin auf zu fangen.--Sanandros (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Weil wir auf Commons das kategorisieren, was auf dem Bild zu sehen ist und nicht irgendwelche Textinformationion. Auf Wikipedia kannst du Texte kategorisieren. --High Contrast (talk) 09:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Qasr Kharana in Jordan.jpg

Hi,

This is to notify you that I have nominated your picture as "Featured Picture Candidate" today.

I hope you will enjoy this nomination.

Please forgive if I made a mistake by nominating it.

I wish a good luck to this very nice picture I find wonderful.--Jebulon (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Jebulon!
Thank you for the nomination! Let's see if others like it, too. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:59, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

File:... PRC 60th anniversery.jpg

File:... PRC 60th anniversery.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

TheGrappler (talk) 20:35, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:Eduard-dietl.jpg

Hello, there is a little cleaning to do in the uploads of this user, as the DR pointed that those colorized nazis were copyvios. Could you take a look at it, please ? --Lilyu (talk) 20:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi! You mean these files to be deleted:

Regards, High Contrast (talk) 20:53, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Ernst Ritter.jpg

File:Ernst von Weizsäcker.jpg

File:SS Otto Ohlendorf.jpg

File:Ferdinand Heim.jpg

File:Erich Hoepner.jpg

File:Wherfriedricholbricht19.jpg

File:Greim, Robert Ritter von - Generalfeldmarschall.jpg

File:Paulvonhase.jpg

File:Wehrvonbockcopy1.jpg

sources of the copyvios is the wehrmacht-awards.com forum. The DR showed that the file was a copyvio and that the own work claim was a lie, proofs were provided that other colorized nazis were copyvios with fake own work claims, the uplaoder had a previous history of uplaoding copyvios with false own work claims, and he was finally blocked for that. We can't trust the own work claims of this user, and i think it's pretty clear that he didn't colorised those old black and white photos and don't have the skill to do it.--Lilyu (talk) 21:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, I agree with you but most of the upper files were not listed in the DR? I can delete it but other users may see this as controversal because those files haven't been discussed with other community fellows. --High Contrast (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

*sigh* bureaucracy --Lilyu (talk) 23:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

As I said, I agree with you. Just start a new DR for especially these files and this will get handled. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 23:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Please let me know if you start a DR for these files. --High Contrast (talk) 23:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I would be pleased to do so as soon as you send me the M2 green form for requesting me to open a mass DR, but first you will have to fill the yellow 2RF form to request the M2 green form from my secretary. --Lilyu (talk) 06:57, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The M2 green form does not help in in this issue. Please use form A38. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Same situation with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Crew ncis 2009 09 06 thetvdb.jpg that you closed with a deletion, while leaving the exact same type of copyvio (8 portraits) in Category:NCIS (TV series). --Lilyu (talk) 17:08, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

And the same rationale from above applies to this issue. The DR is only for one file. --High Contrast (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I can't see the deleted file, you confirm that it's the same copyvio source as File:Brian Dietzen - NCIS.jpg or File:Cote de Pablo - NCIS.jpg ? --Lilyu (talk) 23:50, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

This file has been deleted with this DR. If you find copyright violations, nominate them. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 Comment The two files that you have mentioned have been deleted by me. They were just cropped version of the deleted file. Thanks for finding this one out. Usually these two files should have been also brought in the DR as well. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but i was not talking about 2 files, i was talking about the 8 other portraits of the same kind in the Category:NCIS (TV series), so the 2 files i mentionned as examples + :

• File:David McCallum - NCIS.jpg
• File:Mark Harmon - NCIS.jpg
• File:Michael Weatherly - NCIS.jpg
• File:Pauley Perrette - NCIS.jpg
• File:Rocky Carroll - NCIS.jpg
• File:Sean Murray - NCIS.jpg

i need you to make a little effort please to finish the job of cleaning those copyvios. (Remember i spoted them while i have no idea what was the deleted file concerned by this DR that you closed).--Lilyu (talk) 12:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I have deleted those files because they are blatant DWs of the deleted file. Please bring such connections in DR next time. Such things must documentated in the correspondending DR. --High Contrast (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

huh ? how could i have done such a thing, the DR was already closed when i saw those files, pro quality, with a source linking to a deleted file, it's only that way that i found the DR... with no idea what was the deleted file.--Lilyu (talk) 16:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

A DR is open for at least 7 days. After that, you normally have to start a new DR for the problematic files. Can you please let the person who created the DWs of the originally deleted file know that his uploads have been deleted? Thanks in advance. --High Contrast (talk) 18:22, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

No, i can't see the description pages anymore.--Lilyu (talk) 05:30, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I see, you forgot the username. It was User:Frantogian. You should tell him that there were certain problematic files by him. --High Contrast (talk) 16:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Lilyu (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

These images from M. Bahri's account

These 5-6 images were recently uploaded within the past 2-3 weeks and failed review from panoramio with an ND restriction. But after MGA73 contacted the copyright owner on the panoramio links--like this--he changed the license immediatedly for all his photos to "ARR." If this was flickr, an image which failed flickrreview would be deleted ASAP. So, why aren't these images from M. Bahri's account deleted from Commons? He clearly doesn't want them here...and they were never free in the first place. They should all be deleted--like one deletes a recently uploaded unfree flickr photo. Will you delete them? Why does anyone have to file a formal DR on a recently uploaded image which failed panoramio review when MGA73 contacted him--and his reply is very clear. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello!
I agree with you! Files deleted. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thank You. I just didn't understand why no one noticed them. But that's OK. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Pole mounted transformers.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support The best in the category. Yann (talk) 10:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Qasr Kharana in Jordan.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 17:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC) Very nice and useful! Is it possible to add a geolocation? -- MJJR 20:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC) Thank you! Added the location. --High Contrast 20:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Atam.jpg

Please take care about rest of user uploads. Thank you. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:56, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I was working on this while you have written here. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 14:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

File:F-82H-46-386.jpg

Updated the source as requested Bwmoll3 (talk) 10:51, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Better now. Does this publication also have an ISBN number? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:At the beach - male abdominal obesity.JPG

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:At the beach - male abdominal obesity.JPG, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Lymantria (talk) 13:14, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done; it was a copy&paste error. Thanks for notifying! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:1º CAMPEONATO AUTONOMICO 1994.jpg

Hola High Contrast, todas las fotografías que estoy subiendo han sido realizadas por socios y simpatizantes del Club escuela de piragüismo Aranjuez y han sido cedidas con el objetivo de documentar la historia que estamos escribiendo, es el motivo de que el autor sea socios del Club escuela de piragüismo Aranjuez y la fuente el club escuela de piragüismo Aranjuez.

Gracias.

High Contrast Hi all I'm uploading pictures were taken by Club members and supporters of school kayaking Aranjuez and have been donated for the purpose of documenting the history we are writing, is the reason that the author is a school Club members Aranjuez canoeing and source canoeing school club Aranjuez.

File:1º CAMPEONATO AUTONOMICO 1994.jpg File:1º EN EL IX DESCENSO DEL RIO SEGURA BLANCA MURCIA 1990.jpg File:2011 cartel raphel.jpg

Piragüismo Aranjuez (talk) 19:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Siehe auch hier. --Túrelio (talk) 10:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Túrelio! Grüße, High Contrast (talk) 15:17, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! River Cloud II in Vilshofen an der Donau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments solide Arbeit. Daß das Weiß ausblutet, ist nicht zu verhindern. --Ralf Roletschek 12:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Permissions

Hello.

Yesterday send an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to license my images.

Gratelful check whether everything is correct.

Thank you.

Piragüismo Aranjuez (talk) 16:57, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello!
Thanks for your help! The OTRS-team will handle this. Best regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Setra buses

Hello. I think, you don't known rules sorting buses like this. Good categories including (necessary): manufacturer (like Setra), model (like Setra S 415 HD, if is known), place (like Munich, if is known) and other optional categories like Setra buses by country name. When you put in foto only in optional category Setra buses by country name this foto is unsort by model name. Setra buses with unknown model name and still unsort by model name must by in category Setra buses. Category Setra buses (sort by manufacturer, unsort by model name - waiting for this sort) is not category Setra buses in Germany (sort by manufacturer, by country, unsort by model name and hidden by this sort!!!). This Setra 400-series need category Setra buses. This is not owercat!!! Sort rules are not the same. Marek Banach (talk) 18:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Are these your private rules? --High Contrast (talk) 21:13, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Megaphones

Hi. I was wondering why you're removing "Category:Megaphones" from images such as File:BP Oil Flood Protest Preaching.JPG where they seem prominent to me. What am I missing as to why you think the category is inappropriate? Infrogmation (talk) 22:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, as you might know we categorize the main subject of an image. I agree with you that cat:megaphones could fit here. Thanks for your support. --High Contrast (talk) 22:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

FP Promotion

Hi,

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Qasr Kharana in Jordan.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Qasr Kharana in Jordan.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I received this notification. I think you deserve it. Congratulations !!--Jebulon (talk) 22:27, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your support! Thanks for nominating this image! Kindest regards, High Contrast (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

explanation

hello bonjour can you explain to me what is wrong with the ophélie koering photo i have uploded on the wikicommons in order to illustrate the article of wikipedia on the french actress ophélie koering? thank you & good sunday! pascal

Please, the exact link to this image. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!!!

Hello High Contrast/Archive 6!

Thanks for the compliments.I like Wikipedia.I just try to update and give small edits to such a vast database.But primarily i like adding images to articles.Also thanks for suggesting the Flinfo tool!!! It really made my job easier.WikiMan88 (talk) 11:34, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. Feel free to use this tool. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 11:39, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Request (2)

I'*d like to ask you to recontruct the Category:White Buses because it includes a file and there are some other files following up. So please approve my request ASAP. Thank you --Saviour1981 (talk) 17:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Use this category: Category:White buses for buses in white colour. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2011 - Veste Oberhaus in Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very nice -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT 19:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wallfahrtskirche Mariahilf - Decke.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. Jakubhal 20:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cliffs of Fortaleza de Sagres.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Beautiful! I like it! --A.Ceta 09:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bibliothek der Hochschule Regensburg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good mood! Good Quality! Typical autumn picture in the evening. Great! --A.Ceta 09:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Panoramio Review

Pls feel free to mark a few images if you have the time. I marked 14, I think, today. Its a pity most Admins and trusted reviewers forget about panoramio review. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have recently reviewd some files. But, please also paste this problem on COM:VP so that more users begin to know of this backlog. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 08:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Thanks for telling me about village pump. I did not know how to find it. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:05, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

You`re welcome. --High Contrast (talk) 09:17, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Photograph of free publicity brochure

I don't understand why an image of a free fundraising brochure has been nominated for deletion! Is it a technical problem in the way I submitted the info? What can I do to keep the image? In addition, regarding the use of logos... I copied and pasted this license from the file of the Technion Logo at WikiCommons: This is a logo of an organization, item, or event, and is protected by copyright. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, of logos for certain uses involving identification and critical commentary may qualify as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. Certain commercial use of this image may also be trademark infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content and Wikipedia:Logos. Doesn't that mean it's ok to reproduce established logos on relevant pages? I'm sorry as I am new to this. But I do know for sure there is no copywrite infringement in my images. I just am not sure how to prove that to your satisfaction! Israelscitech (talk) 10:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)IsraelScitech

Hello! Fair use material is not allowed on Commons (=> COM:FAIRUSE). Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:15, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! DAF XF 105.410 truck.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Jakubhal 07:14, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Copyright Violation

I can promise you that the image I uploaded is not a copyright violation. I searched very meticulously for a free use image to replace the one on Butler's page that has him shirtless. I find that very inappropriate for an encyclopedia page: If my image ends up deleted, please help in finding a more appropriate image for Butler's page--Harmony944 (talk) 16:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The same I wanted to tell you. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

16th Troop Carrier Squadron Chase YC-122 Avitruc 1955

Please delete this file. It was loaded with the incorrect filename. I've reloaded it as 309h Troop Carrier Group Fairchild C-123B-2-FA Provider 54-555 Bwmoll3 (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done --High Contrast (talk) 07:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Donaubaum, Vilshofen a.d. Donau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice --Jebulon 15:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Images from Caelum Observatory & The Mount Lemmon SkyCenter

Dear High Contrast, I am looking for an administrator to help me with batch uploading some images. Adam Block from The Mount Lemmon SkyCenter has kindly agreed to release a large amount of his images with a CC BY-SA 3.0 license. He has done this specifically so they can be used on wiki projects. A .zip containing all of the released images can be found here. I would like to be able to upload them all into a category called 'Images from Caelum Observatory & The Mount Lemmon SkyCenter' or something in that vein. Many of them will be very useful and have high EV. A link to one of his galleries showing the relevant copyright statements can be found here. As there is 200+ files in the .zip file, uploading them all would be very tedious. I would be really grateful if you could help me, or point me in the direction of someone who can. Many thanks, Originalwana (talk) 16:55, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Originalwana!
Thank you for making these files available for Wikimedia! Great work - they are definately useful! But I have no experience with batch uploads. Please contact the Administrators' noticeboard for people who have experience with that. Kindest regards and happy editing, High Contrast (talk) 14:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Sendeanlage Schardenberg in Österreich.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments saubere Arbeit. --Ralf Roletschek 20:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Tennengebirge bei Werfen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good for QI--Jebulon 15:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Fort de Boncelles

Bonsoir

J'avoue avoir du mal à comprendre les messages qui passent au sujet de mon article

Ca concerne mes montages photos

Ces montages nous les avons fait, mon mari et moi, avec des photos qui nous appartiennent TOUTES

Je ne parle , hélas , pas anglais et tous les messages me sont envoyés en anglais

Je justifie mes montages et vous souhaitez néanmoins vouloir les supprimer , je ne sais pas comment faire pour éviter cela

Pourriez vous m'expliquer , en français svp , ce que je dois faire

Merci

--Jacquelineguy (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Bonsoir! Tes images restera sur Commons. Ce DR reste ouverte pour seulement quelques jours parce que les règle la demande. Ce n'est pas un problème pour l'image, tes montages certainement pas être effacées. Mais: tu dois indiquer la source exactement; example: [29]. Beaucoup de salutations, High Contrast (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Merci pour la réponse , ça me rassure

A l'avenir j'indiquerai mieux mes sources

Je ne suis pas encore très douée pour comprendre les règles , c'est compliqué quand on est nouveau

J'avais mis le fichier " La Tour d'Air " dans la catégorie " Seraing" mais je ne le vois pas affiché sur ma galerie

Serait ce possible de l'ajouter ? J'aimerai aussi ajouter " Fort de Boncelles " dans la catégorie , c'est possible aussi ?

Cordialement

--Jacquelineguy (talk) 21:01, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rathaus Passau - Turm.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 19:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Rolling stock in Nové Údolí, 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 19:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Please stop this two lying vandals:

here and here. Thanks. --Starscream (talk) 23:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Starscream is constantly pushing POV to certain files, and pushing one of them all over with POV caption. (dialog with him)
User:Martin_H already responded: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Martin_H.#Please_stop_this_two_lying_vandals:. NatanFlayer (talk) 23:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry. I would have done nothing because of this request. For such issues we have the admin noticeboard where things like this cane discussed. This is a classic example for forum shopping. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:05, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Clearly aiming. Therefore, removing the category of "aiming" is pure vandalism. "POV" is pure calumny. Only see. --Starscream (talk) 11:53, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

No aiming. NatanFlayer (talk) 12:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Satellite dish in Austria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Vassil 19:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ex-Iron Curtain barbed wire.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Border sign of the Czech Republic in Nové Údolí.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 20:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mercedes-Benz Travego Bus in Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments A bit tight but QI. A little more space would have been great. --Jovianeye 02:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The town hall of Bad Griesbach im Rottal.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Needs a perspective correction right and left--Jebulon 15:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)  Done --High Contrast 19:04, 4 October 2011 (UTC) Good. Mattbuck 11:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grünanlage, Neue Mitte Passau (4).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough, though sharpening might be nice. Mattbuck 11:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kreuzkogel Gipfelkreuz, 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharp detail, good color --Daniel Case 03:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Veste Niederhaus in Passau.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Fine. --Mattbuck 00:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The desert castle Qasr Kharana in Jordan.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Jakubhal 19:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Mamayev_Kurgan,_The_Motherland_Calls.jpeg

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

Mormegil (talk) 13:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Wärmekraftwerk Pleinting mit Umspannwerk.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good--Jebulon 14:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! ČD Class 814 in Nové Údolí (1).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good enough. --Mattbuck 20:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hochstein (Dreisesselberg) in 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Vassil 10:44, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2P26 Panzerabwehrraketen.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me. --Jakubhal 16:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished

Dear High Contrast, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help. You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 22:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! No climbing warning sign in Petra.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 11:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Demag DF 115P Seitenansicht.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Crop a bit tight left and right maybe, but very good and sharp.--Jebulon 22:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Door in Morocco, 2010.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. Harrison49 11:39, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

File:USS Barnes (CVE-20).jpg

Hi, wie die USN inzwischen rausgefunden hat, stellt das Bild den britischen Träger HMS Tracker (D24) dar. Könntest Du das Bild deshalb in "HMS Tracker (D24) underway" oder so umbenennen? Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done; Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 19:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Danke! Cobatfor (talk) 19:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Keve hjelm.jpg

Hi, Why did you single out this picture for deletion? It is in accordance with Swedish laws for photographs as stated. The publication date of the book alone is sufficient evidence. //Cheers --Bulver (talk) 13:09, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I see, the book date is given. The licencing info is sufficient now. I rmvd the no-source-tag. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot //--Bulver (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --High Contrast (talk) 20:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Erotikk-sjokk.jpg

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

Angelus ^(talk) 02:17, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mahnmal für die Opfer des Nationalsozialismus in Passau.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 11:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Watermark ?

Hello.

I found this image at Flickr and uploaded it as it was under a free licence. However, it has a watermark on it. Do you know any tools that could be useful in removing the watermark ? I've requested a peer review for the Bulgaria article in the English wiki, and I plan to propose it for FA status and all images have to be perfect. And sorry for not responding on my talk page, I only stop by to upload here and I'm somewhat short on time for other issues. Best, - Tourbillon 17:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I thought you were not active any more. Welcome back! Well, photoshop is a quite good software but it is not free. A more simple alternative is for instance the software paint.net (Wiki-article: en:Paint.NET). Regards, High Contrast (talk) 17:31, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Floral ornaments

Hello. The mentioned figures ( File:Flower Ornament Coloured.svg, File:Floweret 6 Red.svg) are simple wide-spread shapes and they are not results of creative work. May be the correct license is: {{PD-ineligible}} But when I upload pictures the form page doesn't give me a chance to write the most suitable license by hand. --Gabriel VanHelsing (talk) 18:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello! They are widly spread but I think they are not ineligible for copyright. Are those drawings your own work? --High Contrast (talk) 18:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I saw another pictures with the same source (for example File:Floral heart.png). I used old dingbat fonts too, edited and coloured the figures and then upload them to Wikimedia.--Gabriel VanHelsing (talk) 18:51, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Floral heart.png is a bad example. Please don't take it as an example. But, did you draw all thos files? --High Contrast (talk) 19:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Please do not remove problem tags arbitrary. --High Contrast (talk) 19:03, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello. You're a very strict administrator and it's good for Wikimedia. But File:Floral heart.png is not a bad example. It's a medieval ornament (from medieval books and walls) and not a subject of copyright. That's why dingbat fonts contain symbols or figures of very old or very simple shapes. For instance File:Vine leaf ornament.svg is a medieval ornament too but the user that uploaded it has declared it as an own work. I consider the data given by the first user is more correctly and honestly than the second one. --Gabriel VanHelsing (talk) 16:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, I know that it is a medieval ornament. I know it all and I know that this motive should not have any copyright restriction anymore. But this is not of interest in this issue. I fear that we talk at cross-purposes. The source-field should be filled correctly with source information: that means usually that it should be stated who is the author of it (if the uploader him/herself, then "{{own}}" for own work) and if it was taken from the web or from a book, then we need the complete source information for that. Well, again: are those symbols that you have uploaded your own work? Or did you take it from another website? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Now, I'm confused. I'll explain in detail. First as I have declared I use a very simple or very old figure from a dingbat font as a template. Then I edit it until it meets my views and finally I colour it. What should I fill in the fields: Sourse and Author. Who's the author: me, dinbat fonts creators or an unknown illustrator of past centures? Can you help me? --Gabriel VanHelsing (talk) 18:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

So these images are derivative works of existing, likely copyrighted files? You must be aware that the following files are likely not ineligible for copyright, so that {{PD-ineligible}} or CC-zero does not apply: [30], [31], [32], [33]. Please be aware of the fact that "wide-spread figures" does not make images ineligible for copyright as well. --High Contrast (talk) 22:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. There were presidential elections yesterday in our country and I took part in their organization and had no possibility to answer your comment.
Your explanations help me to learn some more things about rules in Wikimedia. And let me explain something about fonts and dingbat fonts. A font may be a subject to copuright as a whole font or as a style, but its elements are not copyrighted. (Maybe that's why there is no particular wish to create fonts since the 1990s.) Otherwise every literate person should ask permission and pay a fee to fonts owners for every letter, digit, dot, comma, mathematica sign he/she wrotes or for every triangle, square, cross, star, rhomb, heart, cloud, sun, arrow, drop, snowflake, leaf, floweret, fir tree, writing nib, clock, watch he/she draws because they are elemets of different copyrighted font in different variants. There are a lot of signs in the fonts: $, €, ¥, £, signs of disabled people, road signs, "no smoking" sign, metropolitain stations [34], river stations [35], tiny Mona Liza, tiny Michelangelo's touching hands, tiny portrait of Washington, tiny medieval ornaments (such as mentioned above), signs of guns, clipboards, pencils, phones and other wide-spread common used symbols in all sorts of variations. I've uploaded another files using different dingbat fonts as sources and no other administrator made me a remark. I can't specify a name of the dingbat fonts because different fonts use the same elements. If you consider I don't fill properly the source-fields, please show me the correct way to fill them, but I think it's honestly to declare the uplouded ornaments are not my creations, they are from different dingbat files. --Gabriel VanHelsing (talk) 15:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

A problem with pictures

I upload a pictures to a 0 AD article, a free source and glp game, the pictures i took from http://www.wildfiregames.com/0ad/ You can read that in the page:

New Release: 0 A.D. Alpha 7 Geronium 0 A.D. News Feed Posted by Jeru on Sep 17 2011, 01:22 AM Comments: 0 - (Post a comment!) Wildfire Games, an international group of volunteer game developers, proudly announces the release of "0 A.D. Alpha 7 Geronium", the seventh alpha version of 0 A.D., a free, open-source game of ancient warfare. This alpha debuts Carthage, a mighty, versatile naval civilization, includes a dynamic border game mechanic, a new main menu and several new music tracks featuring live performances by professional musicians.

Easy Download and Install Download and installation instructions are available for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X. 0 A.D. is free of charge and always will be. You can redistribute it and modify it as long as you abide by the GPL. You can even use parts of the art and sound for your own projects as long as you abide by CC-BY-SA. No "freemium" model, no in-game advertising, no catch.

Is a copyright vilation?

plz wait you answer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadox13 (talk • contribs)

You made several mistakes in your uploads. You placed these files under weird licences here that did not fit, like e.g. PD-old or something like that. If these video game screenshots are released under CC-by-sa, then you have to state that explicitly with a valid notice to the homepage where this is written. I have restored all images and I have put on all relevant information. If you decide to uploade new files from this website, please give all information that are relevant - as I did. Regards and thanks for helping. --High Contrast (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for you help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadox13 (talk • contribs)

Again, you did the same mistakes with File:Dynamic-borders.jpg! State all relevant information as I did for the other files of you! --High Contrast (talk) 20:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

rational for deletion

hi;

you closed this debate & deleted the images without providing ANY explanation for your decision?

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:The_Gabaldon_Building_of_Ilocos_Norte_National_High_School.jpg

please clarify?

Lx 121 (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

per nominator: Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. --High Contrast (talk) 15:46, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

low-res & lack of exif DO NOT constitute proof of copyvio; not de facto, & not in commons' policy & guidelines. the images are clearly snapshots & not professional photography; no evidence of a copyvio, or copyvio source for the images was provided. do you really consider that a good basis for closing & deleting a disputed dd, with only 2 commentors, after only 1 week open discussion? (not to mention failing to provide a rational for your decision in the close) o__0 Lx 121 (talk) 07:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

What should this silly "o__0" mean? --High Contrast (talk) 08:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

the emoticon indicates my incredulity that you, as an administrator, consider this a good basis for you decision-making & actions. i also note that you have not (yet?) addressed the concerns i have expressed, with your actions in this case. Lx 121 (talk) 10:02, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, then this "o__0" is no personal attack or something near it. The other sentence by you is not true. Look a few lines above. --High Contrast (talk) 13:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Je comprends pas pourquoi vous proposer ce fichier [36] à la supression, puisque la majorité des autres qui proviennent de Flicker sont tous autorisés à être publier sur Wikipédia voici un exemple : [37] donc je vous prie de bien vouloir annuler cette proposition a la suppression. Cordialement --Saber68 (talk) 19:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Coast of Albufeira in Portugal.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 08:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Guard at Prague Castle.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good !--Jebulon 00:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Heinkel Kabine - Kraftstofftank.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 09:38, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Jordanian Police automobile (Audi).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. With a more strong crop at bottom composition could be better. But, QI as is -- George Chernilevsky 10:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Luitpoldbrücke in Passau - Pylonen.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Carschten 20:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Blick vom Dreisesselberg in Richtung Süden.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments {{{3}}}

File:Kaganmertkaraslan.jpg

Was'n das? Bestimmt keine Grumman E-1 Tracer... Und die Kategorie Category:3',5'-cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase 2A, GAF A and GAF B domains klingt auch ziemlich merkwürdig. Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Naja, diese Kategorie 3',5'-cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase 2A, GAF A and GAF B domains klingt komisch, scheint aber hinsichtlich dieser Proteindomäne gültig zu sein. Das Bild hingegen strotzt nur so von Mängel: ich habe einen Quelle-gesucht-Hinweis gesetzt. Mal sehen, ob da noch etwas kommt. Gruß und danke für den Hinweis, High Contrast (talk) 15:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Waste management in Petra, Jordan.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. The most original picture from Petra ! --Vassil 17:03, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Front wheel of a tractor.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not that sexy, but good for QI.--Jebulon 09:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! McCormick International tractor.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ugly background, but main subject is good, enough for QI--Jebulon 09:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! LKW zur Kanalreinigung in Deutschland (2).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, crop maybe a bit tight.--Jebulon 09:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

No source tagging

Dear High Contrast, please don't ever tag files that have a source as {{No source}} like you did at File:47 Ursae Majoris b-v1.jpg. If you don't believe it or don't understand it {{No source}} is not the right thing to do, do a regular deletion request. Multichill (talk) 11:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

That wasn't me. But is "own work" correct with this image? --High Contrast (talk) 11:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

History says it was you. No reason to doubt own work. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

No, there must be some software error. Such things are not caused be me. --High Contrast (talk) 11:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Dubious. More likely that you are not always you. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Silly accusation. Rather not, Kuper. More likely a software error. --High Contrast (talk) 11:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Whatever it is, it is a serious ploblem. See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User_problems#Software error or compromised admin account?. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Kuiper. --High Contrast (talk) 11:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

MTS logo → DR

Hallo High Contrast, I have converted your copyvio tag to a DR (Commons:Deletion_requests/File:MTS-2010.gif). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 14:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Erpert's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert (talk) 17:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Erpert's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert (talk) 06:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Disturbed photo

I'm sorry, I didn't know they must be able to used commercially. Hope the new images I uploaded are OK. --Viscontino (talk) 16:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

No need for apologies. Everybody makes such mistakes at any time. I posted a link for an easy upload on your page. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Erpert's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert (talk) 23:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Erpert's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert (talk) 23:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Erpert's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert (talk) 19:46, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Erpert's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert (talk) 15:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Georgia Department of Defense Logo

Under United States law, government images are under the public domain, therefore the photos I used for the Georgia Department of Defense page are not violating any copyright laws and need to be un-deleted. Thanks.GeorgiaGuardsman (talk) 15:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Please contact User:Denniss for this issue. I deleted this file: File:Clay National Guard Center.jpg and this one is a blatant copyright violation. --High Contrast (talk) 17:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Dredge ship on the Danube.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good, althought the composition is a bit wild. Mvg, Basvb 10:05, 30 October 2011 (UTC)  Comment Well, it was the best from this angle. Six ships were towed together. --High Contrast 13:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Digger DTR*

Hello, I received your notifications about the lack of proper source for these images. I know see a message of 2008 about that already, which for some reason I didn't get or forgot to reply to. These issues will be fixed ASAP. This media were uploaded with the kind permission of Digger DTR. I will clarify the source. Thanks, Edit: These images have a source, a licence, and a short description: what is missing? The images belong to the Digger foundation (digger.ch), and they agreed to publish them under the terms of the GFDL. --Tnorth (talk) 11:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for that positive response. Please send your permission for those valuable files to our OTRS-team which deals with such special permissions. Thanks in advance. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Gilardino and Soccer.ru

Hi, sorry but I've respect the Template:Soccer.ru. What I've wrong? --Narayan89 (talk) 15:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Everything ok. The image of you did not load when I watched the source homepage. Now it went correctly and as a consequence I have remove the copyvio-notice. Thanks for your support! Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 15:52, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem:). Bye! --Narayan89 (talk) 16:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seealpe, Nebelhorn im Allgäu.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 21:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! The desert castle Qasr Kharana, Jordan.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 08:16, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Volkswagen Polizeibus in München.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good --Jebulon 23:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Anthroplogy - human skull of a boy.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Aussichtswarte Frohnwald, 2011.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 13:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bayerischer Plöckenstein.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I should have prefered a less centered composition, but good quality, QI IMO. --Vassil 21:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Panoramio review

Please feel free to mark some images of old churches in the panoramio category if you can. I marked quite a bit yesterday....but its not good to have 1 person marking panoramio images only. Thank You for any help which you can give. Regards, Leoboudv (talk) 02:55, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am recently quite bound but of course I can help. Just reviewed some. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:28, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Thank you. Unfortunately, Dcoetzee created a bot for reviewing picasa images but nothing has been done for panoramio. It must all be done by hand. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:09, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I pointed it already out: there is a need for a review-bot for panoramio-files. --High Contrast (talk) 23:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Actually, Commons urgently needs a bot to review images from Indafoto rather than panoramio right now. I've pointed this out to Dcoetzee twice already...the second time here But he doesn't respond because I assume he's much too busy to create a new bot for this task. But when there are 2,900+ images mostly from Indafoto waiting for review in the category I referenced, something should be done. But this all...takes time sadly. Thanks anyway for your reply. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

PS: This is a typical image from Indafoto from the mountain of 2900 images. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Hanomag F-Reihe.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI.--ArildV 00:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Salix caprea in Spring.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok.ArildV 01:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Courtyard of Castle Hohenwerfen, 2011.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  CommentI do not like the composition here, with the mountain out of focus. I can not see what aperture you chose, but I would have liked to have had even the mountain in focus. --ArildV 01:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)*  Support The subject of the image is in focus. --Archaeodontosaurus 06:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Images copyright information

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Apovlsen's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, High Contrast. You have new messages at Apovlsen's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Albufeira coast in Portugal.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good an usefull to demonstrate erosion --Haneburger 06:19, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Lanz Bulldog gets started.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I really like it, QI for me -- Achim Raschka 18:35, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Henri Delaunay.png ; File:Coupe de France.jpg ; File:Alger19300001.jpg

These 3 file are to be deleted. The first shows a person born in 1883 at 30 years old about (photo of 1913 about). The second the football cup of France built in 1917 : a very public thing everybody can take photo. The third is a part of the newspaper of the subject's federation. I have a paper of the president of these one which authorize me to use this kind of document. I can send it you ; but how and where ? Sorry for my very poor english and thank you. Good night--Claude PIARD (talk) 21:35, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Please do not upload randomly taken files from the internet. Just a thing can be photographed legally does not mean that you can every image of it you find on the web. You must be the author of it. --High Contrast (talk) 21:39, 18 November 2011 (UT

But I am the true author of the scan call Alger19300001.jpg. And the photo of Henri Delaunay is also a very old thing (90 years ???). What licence in these case ?--Claude PIARD (talk) 22:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Henri Delaunay.png: when was this image taken? Henri Delaunay died in the 50ies.

File:Alger19300001.jpg: you are not the author of this file. You may have scanned it but that does not make you the author. Evidence for FAL-licence is missing. --High Contrast (talk) 22:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Kann ja mal passieren …

… dass etwas daneben geht. ;-) --Leyo 23:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

wie peinlich --High Contrast (talk) 09:42, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Military_Museum_of_the_Chinese_People's_Revolution_-_aircraft.jpg

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

Sven Manguard (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for finding it out! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:39, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

File:HMS Victorious on fire.jpg

Hallo! Das IWM hat seine Website neu gemacht und die Bilder gibt es jetzt größer, schöner, besser... Darunter auch obiges, welches nach IWM aber HMS Formidable zeigt und nicht die Victorious. Umbenennen in "HMS Formidable (67) on fire 1945"? Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 17:41, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Also soll der neue Dateiname File:HMS Formidable on fire.jpg lauten? Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 20:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

File:HMS Formidable (67) on fire 1945.jpg! Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 10:15, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done --High Contrast (talk) 19:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Danke! Cobatfor (talk) 20:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Fahndungsplakat_-_RAF.jpg

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

sугсго 14:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I do not understand

Hello High Contrast! I'm Madonna Fan. I wanted to tell you because I delete the images I upload? If ever something was wrong in uploading images, I apologize. It was not my intention. Please could you explain if I do not understand. Thank you! Greetings. --User:MadonnaFan (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Because your uploads are copyright violations. Please read COM:L for more information. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:11, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok! Thank you! Greetings! --MadonnaFan (talk) 16:13, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. --High Contrast (talk) 16:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you monitor this pls?

I don't get to Commons very often so wonder if you could keep an eye on this please. moriori (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I tagged it as a copyright violation - it seems that it is one since it was found on a copyrighted webpage. Thanks for your support. In future you can just nominate such images with the "Nominate for deletion" on the left side. Regards and happy editing, High Contrast (talk) 21:31, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Chaarge.JPG

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chaarge.JPG
The source is http://af.mil that is for US Govt. works. Than you can see in the metadata for the image, it goes like this
"Master Sgt. Douglas Clayton puts his training to use during the 75th Security Forces Squadron Combat Readiness Training course at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, Oct. 18, 2010. The one-week course physically and mentally prepares Airmen for deployments. Sergeant Clayton is the flight chief for the squadron. (U.S. Air Force photo/Staff Sgt. Brittany Barker)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by RussianTrooper (talk • contribs)

Your argument is well know. You should know that EXIF information can be easily modified. So, please add more specific and traceable source information. Thank you. --High Contrast (talk) 09:04, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, I fixed everthing with this image. Please learn from that. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Кирилло-Белозерский монастырь

Трактор - обычный Беларус--Wolkodlak (talk) 10:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

большо́е спаси́бо! --High Contrast (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Seealpe - Nebelhorn im Allgäu.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok. --kallerna 18:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Arnulfpark - Wohngebäude.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Taxiarchos228 10:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

An Invite to join Aviation WikiProject

Hi, you are cordially invited to join the Aviation WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Commons' coverage of aviation. This includes aircraft, airports, airlines and other topics.

We look forward to welcoming you to the project! russavia (talk) 06:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation! Of course I continue helping in this topic. I'll have an eye on it. Greetings, High Contrast (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Therion software images

Sorry, I don't understand:

Therion is a open source cave surveying software package designed for the purpose of drawing cave maps and archiving the data describing the cave.

author: Martin Budaj, modified by Martin Sluka

So, where is a problem???

Martin Sluka

The problem is that you did not provide any evidence that this software is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license. Please do that. --High Contrast (talk) 16:55, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Presslufthammer - Granitzentrum Hauzenberg.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments I supported it in june 2010, I support now.--Jebulon 11:21, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

4DeBlikvanger2.jpg

I changed the Permission for this file from public domain to free to use. I'm the co-author of the file and we, me and the other maker, give permission to use this file on Wikimedia Commons. As I'm new to Wikimedia Commons and as I'm a native of the Netherlands, I'm not familiair with all the ins and outs (yet). Let there be no doubt: this file was added to wikimedia for public use with our (the makers) explicit permission.

Hello! Don't worry - just because the file was nominated for deletion does not mean that it will be deleted. I personally believe that your statement above is true. But some evidence for that is needed: it means you just have to send a confirmation Email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (detailed explanation what to do can be found here in dutch: Commons:OTRS/nl). Regards, High Contrast (talk) 16:26, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Eagle in the Tennengebirge, Austria.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice--Lmbuga 20:05, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Edits

Hi, sag mal, ich habe da einen User auf meiner Diskussion, der will, dass man im Allgemeinen Fotos gar nicht verändert. Ich finde aber, dass Commons kein öffentliches Archiv ist. Gibt's da eine allgemeine Richtlinie? Danke und Grüße Cobatfor (talk) 07:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hallo! Sämtliche, auf Commons frei verfügbare, Dateien auf Commons dürfen oder besser müssen "veränderbar" sein. Das ist sozusage eine Grundvoraussetzung für frei Dateien auf Commons. Nachzulesen ist das hier: Commons:Licensing unter dem Gliederungspunkt "Acceptable licenses". Ich hoffe, dass es weiterhilft. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 09:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Zur geneigten Kenntnisnahme

dies, endlich :-) --:bdk: 14:18, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hübsch! Jetzt fehlen nur noch 20 Bilder je Kategorie ;) --High Contrast (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

* Frohe Weihnacht und einen guten Start ins neue Jahr
* Prettige Kerstdagen en een gelukkig nieuw jaar
* Merry Christmas and a happy New Year
from --Neozoon (talk) 23:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Vielen Dank! Gleiches wünsche ich auch dir! Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 19:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Enderman.png

Hi, can this be closed now that the deletion notice was removed from the file? I admit that I'm not sure about the conclusion of this discussion... --Guillaume2303 (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I won't close it because it seems the discussion needs to get new input since it is unclear that it is released under a free CC licence. I personally see no problems but User:NVO. The DR-tag is now re-installed again. --High Contrast (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Copyright

Hello,

Thank you for the warning. I was unaware of what I was doing. If you give me a little bit I will be sure to correct all of the photos I have uploaded. I work at the JSC and was told to upload our photos to Wikipedia from the Crew Earth Obs. website. If you could tell me the easiest way to correct the copyright information I would be happy to change all of them. I do not plan to take credit for all of their hard work :)

Thank you! Aresceo (talk) 19:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Aresceo

Hi! Glad to have a resonse from you! I have answered on your talk page. --High Contrast (talk) 20:50, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Thanks for the quick response as well! I will get started on that immediately. Everything should be good and legal by tomorrow.

And by the way the pictures from my department are not satellite images. They are Astronaut Imagery taken by mounted or handheld cameras from the ISS. That is what makes the pictures so unique, knowing that there is a human behind the camera. My boss wanted me to get our pictures out there because everyone does think that only satellites take pictures from space. If you ever need Earth Imagery feel free to use our website! (With proper citation of course :])

And actually I have a question. How did you make the pictures at a larger resolution? It may just be me but it would appear the few pictures that you corrected are at a higher resolution than the ones that I have corrected. And also while I have your attention, is this an acceptable correction?

Thanks again! I'll be in touch if I have any more questions. Aresceo (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Aresceo

It is everything okay with this image. The only thing that I have corrected were the round brackets at the source link. Besides, I uploaded the highest resolution: If you want to do that, you have just to click on "Request" (on the source page; file Size 1467592 bytes). Then, this page opens and you just have to "Navigate to ftp://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ESC_large_ISS005_ISS005-E-20945.JPG". Mostly, this link opens not with the first try (some problem message appears). But after you try to open it for a few times, the image can be downloaded. I usually crop out the bottom.

Happy editing! --High Contrast (talk) 17:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Serena_Williams,_Family_Circle_Cup_2008.jpg

File:Serena_Williams,_Family_Circle_Cup_2008.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

FASTILY_s ^(TALK) 21:23, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

BTR-Serie und Category:KPV

Hi! Ich habe gesehen, daß Du die Kat entfernt hast. Gibts dafür eine Begründung? Eingefügt hatte ich sie, weil die BTRs in der Regel mit dem 14,5er KPW bewaffnet sind. --Markscheider (talk) 13:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Das stimmt nur bedingt, aber nicht alle BTRs sind mit dem 14,5er KPW bewaffnet. Ich wurde diesbzgl. per Email benachrichtigt. Gruß, High Contrast (talk) 07:45, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Deshalb "in der Regel". Das KPW ist die Standardbewaffnung, nur Spezialversionen wie Artillerieführung, chemische Aufklärung usw. führen es nicht. Aber meinetwegen, wenn Du diese Ausnahmen als so gravierend ansiehst, daß man die BTR Kategorien nicht in die Kategorie KPV einordnen kann, dann bleibt nur eine Möglichkeit: Du gehst jedes Bild einzeln durch und setzt die Category:KPV in die einzelnen Bilder, auf denen das MG zu erkennen ist. Fröhliche Weihnachten!--Markscheider (talk) 08:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Das ist die einzig sinnvolle Möglichkeit, denn auf Commons wird nur das kategorisiert, was tatsächlich auf einem Bild zu erkennen ist. Ebenso. --High Contrast (talk) 08:24, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Man könnte noch die BTRs in Untertypen aufteilen und die KPW-Kategorie dann nur den Kampfversionen zuordnen - allerdings habe ich dafür nicht genügend Detailwissen.--Markscheider (talk) 08:58, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Könnte man, aber: Auf Commons gilt zudem der Grundsatz, dass bloß das sog. main subject (COM:CAT) kategorisiert werden sollte. Folglich verdienten nur diejenigen Bilder die KPW-Kategorie, die tatsächlich diese Waffen draufgesetzt haben. Ich werde die nächsten Tage die BTR-Kategorien durchforsten und versuchen die KPW-Kat. einzubauen. --High Contrast (talk) 09:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Fotos de la Alianza y M1A1 Abrams

Estimado High Contrast, las fotos La Alianza lateral.jpg y La Alianza frontal.jpg son trabajo propio por lo que cedo el permiso para que se puedan hacer lo que se quiera con ellas. En cuanto a M1A1 Abrams es de la Wikimedia inglesa en la que se especifica entre otros que es una foto de dominio público. Saludos. --myfgsl (talk) 10:05, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

"Wikipedia inglesa" is no sufficient source. Sorry. --High Contrast (talk) 10:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

¿Y ahora?--myfgsl (talk) 16:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Nevertheless, the licence is absolutely incorrect because you are not the author of it and you have not the right to place it under a CC-by licence. --High Contrast (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Lo siento, pero no se a ciencia cierta que cubre y como se utilizan las diferentes licencias, puse una de ellas sin saber si podía o no.--myfgsl (talk) 19:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem, the image is saved by now. It is an image of the US Marine Corps thus an image that is in the public domain. --High Contrast (talk) 08:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

File:OIPFGlogto.jpg

Hi, could you please look at this deletion request, either to keep or to delete this file? Thanks --Wvk (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, the consensus seems to be that this file falls under the {{PD-Iran}}-"rule". Regards, High Contrast (talk)

Thanks, and a happy new year! --Wvk (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. I wish you the same. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Cosmos Hotel

The Cosmos Hotel likely violates Russian COM:FOP since it was built in 1979 and is not a generic looking building. I discusseed the problem with MGA73 here Would you consider filing a speedy delete tag on this upload? I imagine all the other images in the cat for this Hotel should face a mass DR (if you know how to do this) except for one where De Minimis can be used. (it is mentioned in my question to MGA73). Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! In my view this building does not meet the threshold of originality. I oppose a mass DR since some images are "simple" photographs like e.g. this one. How do you see this? --High Contrast (talk) 23:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: I asked Admin and Bureaucrat (indirectly) EugeneZelenko a question about a bridge in France and a mosque in Russia here sometime ago. EugeneZelenko said that FOP in Russia depends upon the date of construction. If the mosque was built in the 19th century, it may be kept if the architect died 70 years ago...presumably. But as for Hotel Cosmos, it was built in 1979, so the architect cannot be deceased for 70 years since the time difference between 1979 and 2011 is 32 years only so there is a problem (with this picture under Russian copyright law) especially since its not a standard industrial designed bland building but a unique design--which should fall under copyright laws. But why don't you ask EugeneZelenko just to be sure? He would know more about all the intricacies of Russian copyright law...and say if the image is not acceptable to Commons. Tell him that if its OK to please pass the image file or if not to to file a DR. At least, you are open and flexible to Eugene. That is what I do. So, far all the evidence from MGA73 and EugeneZelenko suggests the answer is not OK for Commons. I passed this other image and another here due to the template which EugeneZelenko told me...that Russian and Soviet emblemed monuments are generally OK and in the public domain. But the hotel has no symbols. It may be best to ask Eugene to get 100% certainty if this image is OK for Commons. (plus he can pass the image if its OK). Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
•  Comment: I won't tag your image but the risk is someone may either decline to mark it or tag it for deletion of course. That is why I suggest EugeneZelenko to get some certainty here. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I know about the Russian FOP-issues and I agree with you that they are sometimes quite complicated and oftenly controversial results come out of DRs. But all in all claiming copyright on simple shaped strucutres is not possible and in my view the Cosmos Hotel is one of those "simple" structures - especially if you do not have a detailed view on the building's face. If the hotel has Soviet "symbols" on it does not matter - only the age of some structure does. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 09:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)