Kursant504

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Kursant504!

First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks

Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
There are several tools to upload files.
Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.

Made a mistake?

Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Copyright status: File:T 34 85 10.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:T 34 85 10.jpg

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:T 34 85 10.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ju Ta 20:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Copyright status: File:Bp3-К1931.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Copyright status: File:Bp3-К1931.jpg

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Bp3-К1931.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

Yours sincerely, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:Img-160425184611-001TATF.tif edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Img-160425184611-001TATF.tif has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Drakosh (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:Post-10058-0-03696500-1518256287.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Post-10058-0-03696500-1518256287.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Drakosh (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:Post-2358-0-10514700-1511787830.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Post-2358-0-10514700-1511787830.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Drakosh (talk) 09:24, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:IMG PO-1M.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:IMG PO-1M.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

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

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Copyright,Spreadtrum,2011

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

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

Drakosh (talk) 09:25, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please sign your postings edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Click the "Signature and timestamp"-button to sign your talkpage contributions

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 11:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please sign your postings edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

Click the "Signature and timestamp"-button to sign your talkpage contributions

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 04:29, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:Bp3-К1931.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Bp3-К1931.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Taivo (talk) 14:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Img-ствол-моноблок.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

File:Img-ствол-моноблок.jpg. Извините, а вы не видите несовпадения в датах, упомянутых в шаблоне и указанных в описании файла? Lesless (talk) 11:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Да, спасибо что указали. На этот и несколько других файлов лицензию я указал неправильно, т.к. они не могли быть опубликованы раньше 1944 года - исправлю.Kursant504 (talk) 12:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

А нет, подождите - всё я правильно указал. (меня сбили с мысли разговоры про 1943 год) Данный шаблон разрешен для анонимных произведений до 1951 года, а это второе издание 1952 года (вы сами мне указывали на желательность вторичных источников, первое издание вышло в 1948 году, рисунки в нём те же самые, просто у меня на руках второе издание (как более полное) и проще давать ссылку на него. Если это важно, то изменю источник на первое издание), но и даже первое издание не было первоисточником и все картинки взятые из него уже публиковались ранее, в более ранних версиях руководств и наставлений. пример: http://nedetmir.ru/товар/руководство-службы-85-мм-зенитная-пушк/ https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01005773676 Kursant504 (talk) 17:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File tagging File:Img-ПО-1.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

This media was probably deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Img-ПО-1.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

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

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Img-ПО-1.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Ju Ta 21:44, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File tagging File:Img-По-схема.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

This media was probably deleted.

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

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

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

Ju Ta 21:44, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

File:RedStarNewspaper56.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:RedStarNewspaper56.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

PlanespotterA320 (talk) 01:04, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

You have been blocked for a duration of 3 months edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 3 months for the following reason: {{{2}}}.

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

A.Savin 17:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

File:Затоплений фрегат «Гетьман Сагайдачний».png edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

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

Verbcatcher (talk) 19:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Unblock request edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "I had a reason to believe the files were not-free"

Unblock reason: "Ну-ка, буду разблокировать. Посмотрим, что получается. Taivo (talk) 09:31, 13 April 2022 (UTC)"Reply

This template should be archived normally.

(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ português ∙ suomi ∙ हिन्दी ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

My IP address is 195.182.134.162, block ID is 427517.

(If anyone does not understand what I wrote here in English, please ask questions and clarify what you did not understand.)

I believe that I can be unlocked for the following reasons:

1) I think that the blocking procedure was violated. In particular, the rules state that before blocking, «ensure that the user has been appropriately warned». Blocking was appointed without any warning.

2) Even after the blocking, the administrator who assigned it did't want to explain what he meant by “continued disruptive deletion requests”. I assume they are referring to my five DR. But they were done within 8 minutes and there were no other DR in that day. I do not understand the boundaries of the violation and why it is "continued". The administrator did't want to respond to my mail to him.

3) Some administrators Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections#User:Kursant504 argued that an urgent block without warning was supposedly necessary to stop my vandalism and that "It was necessary to stop him." However, you can see that all the edits for which, as I understand, I was blocked were made one-time, within 8 minutes. And there were no such requests either before or after that. The blocking was appointed only 13 hours (!!!) after that. What urgency and need to “stop him” can we talk about here?

4) The rules do not clearly indicate what vandalism is (only some examples are given). As I understand it, each administrator determines for himself what "vandalism" is. I believe that the administrator A.Savin could interpret this concept in a biased way, since judging by his personal page, he supports a specific side in the conflict in Ukraine. It raises reasonable doubts that the users, endowed with administrator rights and declaring such a position, can always act objectively in matters related to this conflict. And I believe that there should always be justifications for punishments, blocking should be reasoned. Just "You are a vandal - you are blocked" is not correct. Correct “You are didn't right, because…”, “You are wrong, because…”. Right now there is were no explanation...

5) Proportionality of punishment. The Commons:Blocking_policy#When_blocking rules state that “use a block duration that is proportional to the time likely needed for the user to familiarize themselves with relevant policies and adjust their behaviour. Also consider the user's past behaviour and the severity of the disruption." It is difficult to imagine how an objective administrator could justify for himself a blocking period of as much as 3 months. Moreover, without even creating conditions for me to realize my mistake and get acquainted with the rules: after all, I was not told why exactly I was blocked for and what I violated. Therefore, I believe that such a long blocking was precisely a punitive.

5.1) In addition, it should be noted that almost all of my DR that I submitted earlier were confirmed. And when my images were under DR, I always treated it correctly and with understanding. I tried to eliminate the disadvantages that were pointed out to me.

5.2) What was the real harm done to the Commons by my actions? I nominated multiple photos for deletion? How does this affect it and to how it can be used in other wiki's projects? There are many examples when DR hang for many months (or maybe years - I can’t give an example right now) and this does not harm it in any way. Photos continue to be used in articles. What harm does the fact of a DR cause? I had doubts, justified. I thought it would be useful if the another users look at it, made sure that the photos are “free” and can be used, the administrator will check it and made a result. The topic is hot, and even in my other deletion nominations, it is clear that now a lot of users are trying to download files from the Internet under free licenses. This is a problem for Wikipedia.

5.3) I believe that the past week since the start of the block was enough and I can be unblocked. I note that I deliberately did not immediately submit a request for unblocking, as I decided first to try to contact the administrator who blocked me, once again carefully study the rules, and find out the opinion of other administrators.

6) By the violation itself. Again: I remind you that the administrator actually refused to delineate its boundaries and this is just my guess.

6.1) Some of the files, which are frames from the video, had clearly incorrect attribution. Instead of the author, an extremely vague wording was indicated: "military television of Ukraine." I followed the link to the original video (it turned out to be not military TV), which was uploaded under the supposedly free license of "Ukrinform TV". However, I went to their official website www.ukrinform.ua (youtube-channel says that "This YouTube channel is the property and official channel of the Ukrinform agency") and it clearly states that: a) - all rights reserved; b) the use and citation of materials offline - requires a separate written permission (and I remind you that Wikimedia justifies the need to place on only materials that allow free commercial use, including for publishing wiki's projects on DVDs and books Commons:Licensing [1].
That is for offline use. I saw here a clear contradiction that the same files can be published both freely and not freely. And in my practice I have already come across such a moment that the copyright owner does not always understand what Creative Commons licenses really mean. They indicate on their resources as CC and at the same time serious conditions and restrictions on the use of materials that do not fit the CC-license. Sometimes they just don't realize that their CC-licensed content is being made available for use in ways that they don't really want (such as allowing commercial use). In addition to this, the original video, which is posted on youtube, its real author is also not specified in detail. It is indicated: “military television of Ukraine”. It is not clear to me what kind of television this is and why Ukrinform TV has the right to distribute clearly other people's videos under its own free CC-license. It seems to me that the "free" status of this video is very controversial. Therefore, I considered these materials not free and not suitable for Wikimedia. I assumed that the real state of affairs would be clarified during the discussion on DR.

6.2 According to those photos where the message was presented as a source, from Twitter and the free license "PD-UA-exempt" is indicated. It should be noted that it does not apply to photographs, but only (in this case) to published official documents of state power, to which I do not include the message from Twitter. In addition, I considered that these photos cannot belong to the public domain, because Article 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” (to which the license refers) states that "public domain is works and objects of related rights, the validity period copyright and (or) related rights for which has expired;" I found it unlikely that these photos had their copyright expired in 1 day. The link is given to a message on the "Cargo-200" Twitter account that these photos allegedly "was published by the head of the Ministry of Digital Development Mikhail Fedorov" without any link to the publication itself. Wasn't it right to give a link specifically to the minister's publication? I believe that these materials definitely cannot be placed under the free license "PD-UA-exempt". As myself am not registered on Twitter and could't check is Mikhail Fedorov posted these photos there. Or maybe he didn't publish them there or just anywhere else. In general, there is no confirmation that these were published in official documents of the Ukrainian state.

6.3) As you can see, I made a request to delete not all files from these sources (for example, I did not create requests for source videos), but selected only some of them to make sure by their example whether they are really suitable for wiki projects. Now I understand that taking 2-3 examples was redundant and one would be enough. And even then, if there were a weighty reasons for this. And then, in case of deletion, it would be possible to replicate DR's for all such materials.

7) Yes, I admit that I was too casual about these DRs and I should have taken more time to justify my position. But, as you can see from my edits, I usually only have the opportunity to be active for some, limited periods of time. And then they blocked me by the evening, and I did not have time to participate in the discussion. Although I understand that this is my personal problem and not a wikimedia issue. And in this case, I needed to postpone the DRs until the moment when I would have the necessary amount of time to issue it and state my position in detail.

Thank you for reading.

What do you think – why you were blocked? And let's imagine, that you are unblocked. Is it possible, that you will not make mistakes, but you will be blocked nevertheless? Why? Or why not? Taivo (talk) 09:44, 12 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

As I said in point 7, I think I got banned for making 5 DRs. My obvious mistake was that I did not write a detailed justification for my DRs. Because of this, they seemed unreasonable to users. As I now know, users complained about this to the administrators: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Russian_propagandist.

Unfortunately no one bothered to figure it out. For example, the question about "PD-UA-exempt"-license was raised during the discussion, but no one answered it, and the administrator simply closed the DR. Kursant504 (talk) 02:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I think that in the future there can be a situation that I can be blocked by biased users even if I am not mistaken.

A few examples that I can just image:

1) for example, after unlocking, I will create a new DR on one of the same photos, but already carefully reasonable. Again, biased users (who accused me of being a "Russian propagandist") and a biased administrator from UA can converge together. Not necessarily the same as now. As I noticed from the list of administrators, there are quite a few Ukrainian-speaking administrators who openly support one of the sides of the conflict. I may be banned again simply because they don't like my Wikimedia Commons contribution and my reasonable DRs, not because I'm wrong.

2) Some people may not like captions for those photos that I upload to wikimedia. Although almost always I only quote the official position of the authors, the official titles of the videos and the official descriptions for them. And this, as far as I know, is allowed. I have already seen that users complained about these captions and photo titles (not here, but on the Ru-Wikipedia) because they think it is not neutral enough (these are features of the current rules on "Ukrainian" topics at Ru-Wiki). And again: complaint from biased users + biased administrator = blocking. Kursant504 (talk) 03:08, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Clarification according to example 2: users who didn't like the names or description of the "my" photos are already trying to change them. I can disagree with their interpretation of the official descriptions and cancel such edits. This may serve as a basis for a complaint against me. Kursant504 (talk) 03:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

File:Three cats 001.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Three cats 001.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Verbcatcher (talk) 11:44, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

File:Российские десантники в бою с украинскими войсками захватили ПТРК и другое вооружение 004.png edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Российские десантники в бою с украинскими войсками захватили ПТРК и другое вооружение 004.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

80.49.142.137 16:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

COM:AN/U edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#"Russian invasion of Ukraine" name edit warring. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

Andy Dingley (talk) 16:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Please do not edit war edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ русский ∙ 日本語 ∙ +/−

You currently appear to be participating in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, and once it is known that there is a disagreement should discuss the issues on the relevant talk page rather than repeatedly undoing other users’ contributions. If necessary you can ask for more input at Commons:Dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to ask for temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing – even if you are right about the content issue.

Beware, or you will be blocked again. --Yann (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

As I understand rules - edit war was started by user Tm. Why did I and only I get the warning? Can you explane, please? Kursant504 (talk) 02:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

File:Уничтожение батареи гаубиц М777 американского производства 005.png edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Уничтожение батареи гаубиц М777 американского производства 005.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

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

Mandorakatiki (talk) 21:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Категория edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Russian propaganda of Russian invasion of Ukraine Здравствуйте. Прошу пояснить, почему Вы добавляете эту категорию в скриншоты боевых действий. Согласно той же ВП - пропаганда - распространение взглядов, фактов, аргументов, часто слухов, искаженной информации или заведомо ложных сведений. Я не вижу на этих файлах ничего пропагандистского. Если бы там были лозунги, авторские работы, плакаты и т.п., - то ещё был бы какой-то смысл. Также лучше сразу грузить видео, а не скриншоты. Ценность скриншота невелика по сравнению с видео, да и качество плохое. Можно грузить видео прямо с сайта МО РФ, украинские фото и видео тоже можно загружать. Юрий Д.К. (talk) 05:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Да не обращайте вы внимания на эти категории. Там и без меня чего только не понаставят. Почему они в ней? Описание вполне подходит: "Note: All propaganda categories should contain government propaganda only. See the introduction to Category:Government propaganda for more info. и "This category is for materials which are deliberately intended to be works of government propaganda, that is, works meant to influence a particular political opinion in an emotional or sensational manner. Please do only include material that a reliable source has labeled as propaganda.". Я в этом не вижу ничего плохого. Видео не загружаю, так как на мой взгляд в статьях удобнее использовать именно фото (скриншоты), которые показывают конкретные важные моменты, чем большие видео, которые ещё и не у всех могут загружаться (например на рабочих компьютерах, где ограничен просмотр видео) и содержать часто много "воды".--Kursant504 (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

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

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

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

Affected:

File:ВС РФ на Запорожском направлении пресекли попытку контратаки ВСУ 001.png

And also:

Yours sincerely, Юрий Д.К. (talk) 10:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Copyright status: File:Вручение медалей «Золотая Звезда» 8.12.2022 002.png edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Copyright status: File:Вручение медалей «Золотая Звезда» 8.12.2022 002.png

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Вручение медалей «Золотая Звезда» 8.12.2022 002.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

And also:

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 06:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Мда. Планка в разделе "лицензирование" указывающая свободную лицензию "Kremlin.ru" у файлов походу стоит чисто для красоты... Kursant504 (talk) 06:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Copyright status: File:Вручение медалей «Золотая Звезда» 8.12.2022 025.jpg edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Copyright status: File:Вручение медалей «Золотая Звезда» 8.12.2022 025.jpg

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

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Вручение медалей «Золотая Звезда» 8.12.2022 025.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

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

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

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

And also:

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 07:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Мда х2...Kursant504 (talk) 07:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open! edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open! edit

Latest comment: 11 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you voted in Round 1 of the 2022 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in the second round. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2022.

Round 2 will end at 18 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Obviously disturbing edit

Latest comment: 9 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Your statement here is obviously illogical, even absurd.
I refuted your points of view one by one, and the sysops also deleted the corresponding infringing photos. If you go one step further and present similar absurd reasons for preventing consensus, I will ask sysops to intervene. Lemonaka (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

COM:AN/U edit

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

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Kursant504. Enough disruptive DR for Soviet related content..

Add topic