User talk:MECU/Archive/May2007
Thorpe Photo edit
Hi MCEU, I know you had a rough time getting a legal image for the Ian Thorpe page. The one on their at the mo is outdated and well just a little fugly! So if you're interested I have a couple of screencaps in my photobucket. If it's legal to use them then you're welcome to use but what I wanted to ask was if you had to ask the original source of the video in this case CNN's quest:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ThorpeonQuest.jpg
If everything I am doing is illegal, sorry! Just forget I said anything! Cheers--Xilef 20:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to hit you up personally for this simple question, but you were the administrator who tagged the image so I didn't know where else to turn. Image:Caterpillar india 3.jpg appears to have been uploaded by the same user who posted it to flickr, allbeit with a different license. Does the license on flickr trump? Or can we ignore flickr and link and use "self" as the source? I'm not really clear what commons policy says to do in this situation. --Selket 15:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. when you get a chance, can you flickrreview Image:Sienna Miller (2007).jpg, so I can delete it form en? Thanks again. --Selket 15:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- It looks to me like Shivanayak (who hasn't edited Commons since 09:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)) uploaded Image:Caterpillar india 3.jpg to Flickr on June 14, 2005, reserving all rights, and then four weeks later decided to release most of those rights to that image by uploading it to Commons and not asserting Flickr as the source in this edit, 09:25, 12 July 2005 (UTC), with {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}}. I suspect Para's addition of Flickr as the source - I think the true source is a photo Shivanayak took with its own Nikon D70 camera in the town Karkala, 17:55, 31 May 2005 (UTC) (timezone based on "IST (UTC+5:30)" in the article w:en:Karkala), and finished reducing/cropping/whatever with PictureProject 1.0.0 W eleven minutes later. — Jeff G. 17:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
A deleted image edit
Hello. Can you tell me please why you deleted Image:Atmosphere-2003-07-27.jpg? -Susanlesch 07:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- To answer my own question either I read the license wrong or it changed. Thanks for catching that. -Susanlesch 07:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
File:Opdyke.gif Deletion edit
Can you please tell me why you deleted the image of File:Opdyke.gif, and why I was not informed? Juda S. Engelmayer 22:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Per this log, the deletion was due to "fair use". "fair use" is not allowed on Wikimedia Commons, and is only allowed in exceptional circumstances on Wikipedia - please see Commons:Licensing#Material under the fair use clause is not allowed on the Commons and w:Wikipedia:Fair use for details. — Jeff G. 12:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Review cropped Flickr pictures edit
Please, could you review: Image:Silviosantos.jpg and Image:Silviosantos2.jpg? Thanks! Dantadd✉ 01:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Thorpe Photo edit
Hi MCEU, I know you had a rough time getting a legal image for the Ian Thorpe page. The one on their at the mo is outdated and well just a little fugly! So if you're interested I have a couple of screencaps in my photobucket. If it's legal to use them then you're welcome to use but what I wanted to ask was if you had to ask the original source of the video in this case CNN's quest:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ThorpeonQuest.jpg
If everything I am doing is illegal, sorry! Just forget I said anything! Cheers--Xilef 20:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok thanks MCEU, what I'm going to do is contact Grandslam but that may take a while. Also I know a lot of people who have been to Swim meets and I will see if they have any photos they took of him! No worries! --Xilef 14:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:P5120087.JPG edit
|
Thanks for uploading Image:P5120087.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. MECU≈talk 22:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:KMM03.jpg edit
Location of this image is: Kroller Muller Museum in the Netherlands. See also tagged category. --Gerardus 14:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:TokyoMapCurrentSpanish.PNG edit
Hi, today you erased this image, from Tokio, in the spanish wikipedia, please, why don't you tell me about this problem, because, I used different images, and I don't notified in my user page about this. If you don't tell me an explanation, I notified another commons administrators about this, because I'm an administrator in spanish wikipedia, and I'm clear about the licenses. Thanks. --Taichi 17:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- thanks for doing a necessary job. I supposed that the historic map of london (Nordens Map of London 1593) I found in the internet is free , because of its age. This doesn't seem to be the case. What must I do (or is this impossible?) to bring this image to Wiki Commons again in order to reimplement it in the article of Christopher Marlowe who died in London 1593. which steps are illegal? (German Wikipedia) http://vrcoll.fa.pitt.edu/medart/image/England/london/Maps-of-London/Map-London-Norden-1593-b.jpg
DWARS images edit
Hi, I was wondering why File:Dwars-logo-1.jpg and File:Dwars-logo-2.jpg were deleted. They were put on wikipedia under a license weren't they? The reason why I am especially bedazzled is because I know User:Wevsdeath is the original designer of the logo and that the DWARSboard has the intention of not asserting copy right over the images. I was a member of that board between 2005 and 2006. So what should I do to upload these images and not get them deleted? C mon 21:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
about deleted image Image:A ulianov portr.jpg edit
I think, that this photo should be just licensed as PD-old as it was done in XIX century. (btw Alexander Ulianov was executed in 1887. So is it really possible, that photographer kould managed to be be still alive by 1937? =)) --MaryannaNesina 22:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
about deleted image Image:Bohdan_Bejze.jpg edit
I ask about application of cause the removal of graphic arts the Bohdan_Bejze.jpg or it lacked category of or licence. All written in description was. I thought licence that someone will write from contained in description data peaceably. Person on picture is public person, picture be executed by news photographer and published in local newspaper, so or can this graphic arts place on Wikimedia Commons not smashing copyright? If so I ask this about restoration on Wiki picture. --Bogusław Pab 11:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- MECU replied in this edit. — Jeff G. 16:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
First, thanks for the OTRS review. I think it was my first forwarded email permission - if not, I certainly haven't done a lot of them.
Second, however - you deleted sections from the author's email that I thought were relevant. I thought I was careful enough to avoid things like email address and other stuff that could make her liable to harassment, while leaving in useful information that I thought helped describe the image. May I restore it? If not all, is there any specific part that can be put back in/should be left out?
Thanks, AnonEMouse 20:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
This is not fair use logo, this is GPL image from GPL software installer, from here. Restore please. And see that image Image:Pidgin_logo.png, and this Image:Pidgin.svg. --Sk-ru 00:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks edit
Thanks for the descriptive edit summary here - I'm new to this thing and still learning, so I'm glad there are experienced people on the watch! :) Take care, riana_dzasta 03:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)~
Re: Image:Mailbox HuangPu Road Shanghai.jpg edit
Hi. When you upload images from flickr, such as Image:Mailbox HuangPu Road Shanghai.jpg, please be sure to select the correct "from flickr" license in the dropdown box so that an extra tag gets added so a bot or human can flickr review the image to ensure the license is correct and free. This will help the image stay here at Commons, even if the flickr user changes the license there. Alternatively, you can just put {{Flickrreview}} on the image description page and a bot/human will review the image. Thanks for your hard work! MECU≈talk 13:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hi MECU, yes I forgot to mention the source but I apologize and from now on I will do my best. Your comment is also valid for this pic. Regards. Neizham_22 14:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I would welcome your input on this draft policy. thanks, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 08:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Please note that this emblem ist nothing but a COA with letters. It is not a logo, because it is not used as one. Also there was a note in the description that it is a "amtliches Werk". See also Image:Bayern Wappen.svg. I kindly ask for undeletion. Thanks and BFN, -- Mattes 16:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC) P.S. The applicable tag is PD Coa Germany (Template:PD-Coa-Germany)
I fixed the flickr's link, can you please sto the cancellation procedure? Thanks --Sailko 22:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
OMG! edit
A real Oh my God! here when I looked into your edit on Image:El trole 31.jpg. I'm not really up to speed on the handling of incorrect Flickr images and I thought I had seen just about all the backlogs we had. I guess I found a new one: Category:Possibly unfree Flickr images with over 1,000 images. Do you have any idea how we are going to treat those and when? Tucking them in a bin and waiting until they are used everywhere is not an option, at least for me... Cheers! Siebrand 13:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- You can see the discussion we had here: Commons_talk:Flickr_images#Possibly_unfree_images. Kinda died off, but that's as far as we got on the topic. It makes doing a flickr review within 2 weeks pretty important. I follow this, though it doesn't seem to be an official guideline or policy, though I think it should be, especially since I have nothing else to follow. Also, I've never seen the problem with CheckUsage you had on that image deletion. It's possible they used it in the 30 minutes between when we checked. But I have no doubt that the CU is possible to give errors, since it uses out-of-date databases I think (I don't really know how it works, but it's a great tool). MECU≈talk 13:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I'll read myself in the discussion and see what I can learn from it. Thank you for the reply. That bus was added to the article on 22 May, so not in tha thalf hour[1]. Strange... Cheers! Siebrand 13:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Redundant image edit
Thank you for deleting the duplicate of this image — I uploaded the image a second time as there was already a file on the English Wikipedia called "Kenny G.jpg". I was going to request that the old version be deleted, but wasn't sure how to. So anyway, cheers. =) -Panser Born- (talk) 22:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
