Please respect user defined schemes edit

I've seen your request Revision of 766901290. You respected the user id, but you didn't respected the user defined filename scheme. And you didn't respected the license, because the filename is part of the attribution. You said, the filename was meaningless or ambiguous. No, Paris is right, Louvre is right. May be a more detailed name would be better. I renamed the file again, back to user defined scheme and with respect to your request with a more detailed name. Please be much more careful with requests to rename files. XRay 💬 08:35, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

@XRay OK, i will do Miniwark (talk) 08:25, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion edit

 
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!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 04:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply