User talk:Sahaib/Archive 2

File:Rocket Raccoon by Scott Johnson.jpg

File:Rocket Raccoon by Scott Johnson.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: although this image was indeed uploaded to Flickr by Pat Loika, and Loika did say he was releasing it per Creative Commons, this was not an image that he created. Rather, it is an image from his collection of drawings by other artists (and, indeed, this image is properly credited to Scott Johnson), and he did not have the right to release it per Creative Commons. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

DS (talk) 19:03, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Flickr2Commons

I have just come across a few images you have recently uploaded from Flickr. I would appreciate it if in the future, you used the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool allows images to be moved to Commons from Flickr without having to download the images to your own computer. It also brings in the largest resolution of the image, as well making sure to list the correct license and url, making it easy for the automated Flickr Review system. Also, it is fairly easy to categorize images with this tool. To use it, you just need to go to the url and authorize it (where it says "authorise first"). A1Cafel (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

File:Caw Caw! (4960741047).jpg

File:Caw Caw! (4960741047).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 15:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Lender's Bagels Tee Shirts (17673564986).jpg

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Lender's Bagels Tee Shirts (17673564986).jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work. While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, 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. 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!

 

EugeneZelenko (talk) 21:08, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Category:Nevada by city by year

You don't need to create a separate in Nevada by city for each year. If the category doesn't exist, the Reno category goes into Nevada and in the US by city subcategories which makes more sense than hundreds of Nevada by city when we haven't even fleshed out Las Vegas yet. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Revision of 697479002

I've seen your modification. Yes, the image is colored - a little bit. But it's black-and-white with additional colors. So I reverted your modification and added a hint to the description. Not all black-and-white images are black and white. Sometimes sepia is used as color, it is a touch of blue and sepia. I didn't found a suitable category (like Category:Hand-colored photographs for hand-colored photographs). Hopefully you'll agree. If you may check the black-and-white categories, you'll find a lot of black-and-white photographs with a touch of color. --XRay 💬 14:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@XRay: , ok. Sahaib (talk) 14:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Have a nice day! --XRay 💬 14:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Use of {{Most populous cities of the world}} for less-than-global topics

Regarding this edit, when I authored the original template, I added the guidance "This template is intended for use with categories involving international interactions or trends like trade and international politics. Local topics like buildings, culture, and people should use city- and country-specific templates." There are at least three reasons for this:

1. There are many editors who really do not like navigation templates. The more navigation templates you add to a category, the more likely you are to spark a backlash against them, especially as the growing numbers of templates require more and more scrolling to view the non-navigational content of the category
2. The more navigational templates you add to a category, the more likely it is that you're going to encourage others to extend the navigational templates themselves to include more and more items, again requiring more scrolling and offending those who like "clean" categories.
3. Presenting Category:People wearing sunglasses in Washington, D.C. alongside Category:People wearing sunglasses in Dhaka, for example, is going to give the appearance of linking media of really different places by the most trivial of detail. If you do this, it will call into question the very existence of {{Most populous cities of the world}}.

So to summarize, I'd like to encourage you to restrict the use of {{Most populous cities of the world}} to only truly global phenomena like demographics, international relations, trade, global challenges like pollution, climate change, pandemics, etc. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

@DanielPenfield: , ok. Sahaib (talk) 20:23, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Category:Men wearing hats with beards

I'd like to suggest changing the category to Category:Men with beards wearing hats. As is, it sounds like the hats have beards. It might just be personal preference but just wanted to suggest a re-wording. Mjrmtg (talk) 19:04, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

@Mjrmtg: , I don't have a preference with the names, so you can move the category if you want. Sahaib (talk) 14:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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:

• File:Glasgow Murals (24455935957).jpg

And also:

• File:Glasgow Murals (25450579058).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (25450581738).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (25450583498).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542468859).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542469779).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542470659).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542485369).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542486699).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542487399).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (27542490109).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39290496742).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39290498282).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39290499482).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39290507272).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39319312401).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39319314421).jpg
• File:Glasgow Murals (39319314771).jpg

Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 07:55, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:Geograph images by place

Category:Geograph images by place 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!

--Multichill (talk) 12:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:Wyoming_photographs_taken_on_1973-06-01

Wyoming photographs taken on 1973-06-01 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!

Ricky81682 (talk) 04:05, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Royal Academy (3424694680).jpg

File:Royal Academy (3424694680).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!

Túrelio (talk) 09:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Upper Ground, SE1 (3424684630).jpg

File:Upper Ground, SE1 (3424684630).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!

Túrelio (talk) 09:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Whitfield Street, London W1 (3424732064).jpg

File:Whitfield Street, London W1 (3424732064).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!

Túrelio (talk) 09:53, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Categories

Would you please stop, and seek consensus first? Thanks. --A.Savin 14:35, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

@A.Savin: who would I seek consensus from? Sahaib (talk) 14:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

For example COM:VP, Commons talk:Categories etc. --A.Savin 14:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Category:1895 black and white portrait photographs of men

Hi, This doesn't make sense. There is no color portrait of people from 1895. Rollback, and do not create such categories. Yann (talk) 10:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: , a lot of the categories do have colour photographs such as Category:1933 portrait photographs of women, Category:1919 portrait photographs of men, Category:1893 portrait photographs of women, etc. Colour photography has existed for a long time, for example these are actual colored photographs Category:Mohammed Alim Khan, Emir of Bukhara by Prokudin-Gorsky (1911). Sahaib (talk) 10:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Young woman with orchids in her hair.jpg is not a color photograph. It was painted after the picture was made. Please read some documentation about history of photography before creating any such category. Idem for File:Roman Dmowski in color.jpg, see the original here. Thanks, Yann (talk) 10:51, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: , I never claimed any of those were "real" coloured photographs, I was talking about Category:Mohammed Alim Khan, Emir of Bukhara by Prokudin-Gorsky (1911). Another good example is File:Colonel William Willoughby Verner, Sanger Shepherd process, by Sarah Acland 1903.png. Sahaib (talk)

Category:1895_black_and_white_portrait_photographs_of_men

1895 black and white portrait photographs of men 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!

Yann (talk) 10:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your thanks

Fyi: Category_talk:Lisbon Szilas (talk) 08:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:New_Pride_Flag

New Pride Flag 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!

Amousey (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for all the Thank you(s)! A moral booster for me. Krok6kola (talk) 19:56, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

File:Raccoon Story (2926620260).png

File:Raccoon Story (2926620260).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

File:Bloody Raccoon (2930848711).png

File:Bloody Raccoon (2930848711).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!

Nv8200p (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate the thanks, but why did you thank me for an edit from 2013?

You just thanked me for a minor mistaken categorization I made (and then immediately fixed), back in 2013. While I appreciate the gesture, this seems ... slightly odd, given that you didn't even have an account back then. I'd be interested in you want to say more about how you came across the edit. :-) JesseW (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

@JesseW: As you can see from this log, I thank too many people. I don't know why and I should probably focus more on editing. :-) Sahaib (talk) 07:35, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. :-) And I see that you edited the category recently, so that explains how you were looking at the history. Continue as you were. :-P JesseW (talk) 16:56, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:Association football players from Russia by name by year

Good morning! You can't put all the football players in Russia in this category because of the big routine work? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 04:13, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Help

Hello! I have a request to distribute by country Category:Racecar drivers by name by year by country, since in Category:Racecar drivers by name by year 659 names. MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 15:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

New categories

Hello. I have some new category ideas for you:

1. Cyclists by name by year by country‎ (in Cyclists by name by year 125 names)

2. Lugers by name by year by country (in Lugers by name by year 226 names)

3. Tennis players by name by year by country (in Tennis players by name by year 453 names)

4. Sportspeople from Poland by name by year 100+ names to Parachutists from Poland by name by year)

MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 05:33, 19 May 2023 (UTC)