Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Sillyfolkboy!

Juliancolton | Talk 16:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Tip: Categorizing images edit

Afrikaans  العربية  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  Esperanto  español  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  magyar  íslenska  italiano  日本語  ქართული  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/−


Hello, Sillyfolkboy!
 
Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply


File:O_Dromeas_Athens.jpg edit

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

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

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

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  +/−

Iconoclast (talk) 17:19, 10 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yawn. If no one can actually be bothered to even wash this dirty sculpture, then I also presume no one would have bothered to seek to protect its copyrights from the "abuses" of a registered charity seeking to improve knowledge worldwide. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)Reply


File tagging File:ShannonRowburyTrialsFinal08_300dpi.jpg edit

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 may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:ShannonRowburyTrialsFinal08_300dpi.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).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.
It seems that this file needs a confirmation e-mail from its copyright holder(s) in order to be hosted on Commons. It is the case for any copyrighted logo, content coming from an identified website or publication, or credited to somebody else than the Commons user. The copyright holder (maybe it's you, maybe not) should send us an e-mail in this form to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. When the e-mail has been sent, please apply {{OTRS pending}} on the image page (in the "permission" field) to tell us so (and to prevent the file from being deleted). Please don't ignore this message, contact me instead if you want to discuss the issue or if you have a question about the procedure. Eusebius (talk) 22:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Additional image tagging edit

I don't see the point of you additionally nominating images for deletion when they have already been reviewed, have a clear notice of the current Flickr licence and have a speedy tag, such as File:Sewnet-Bishaw.jpg and others from the same source. Nomination generally spurs discussion but reviewed and tagged images can be deleted without discussion when the appropriate time has elapsed. That is what reviews are for, while nomination is for images that may additional require discussion about the merits of their status and are not clear cut. Good luck. Ww2censor (talk) 08:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi ww2Censor - sorry wasn't aware of that the 7-day speedy procedure was used to trump deletion nominations. Maybe it's just the culture change from Wikipedia but seven days seems like a relatively unspeedy time period and the editor kept re-adding the images to the articles. Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 17:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply
No problem. It's not that 7-day speedy trumps a deletion nomination. Indeed on enwiki speedy is usually same day but not here. Speedy is usually quicker than a nomination and it is clear cut rather than possibly needing discussion like a deletion nomination. I can understands the frustration of an editor readding images to an article when they are clearly copyvios. Did you tell that editor the image is a copyvio and ask them to stop? It might just work and if not you need a little patience. Cheers. Ww2censor (talk) 19:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

File:Runner over blank map.jpg edit

 
File:Runner over blank map.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!

TintoMeches, 20:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

File:Jogging couple - legs.jpg edit

Deutsch  English  español  فارسی  français  hrvatski  italiano  日本語  മലയാളം  Nederlands  sicilianu  Tiếng Việt  +/−


 
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:Jogging couple - legs.jpg, has been reviewed by an administrator or reviewer and found available on Flickr under the license Noncommercial ( ), No derivative works ( ), or All Rights Reserved ( ), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. Unless the Flickr user changes the license to one that Wikimedia Commons accepts, the file will be speedily deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as   (CC BY),     (CC BY-SA),   (CC0) and   (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. Once the license on Flickr is changed, you may replace the {{Unfree Flickr file}} tag with {{Flickrreview}} so that an administrator or reviewer can review the image again.

odder (talk) 22:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

  • @Odder: This image was a derivative of File:Jogging couple.jpg - which has been verified as previously (and therefore currently) being available under the given free license. How do I request undeletion? Also, I used to upload these kinds of amendments through the old DerivativeFX tool which no longer appears to exist. Is there any new tool or method which I can use to do the equivalent? Sillyfolkboy (talk) 13:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
    • @Sillyfolkboy: Thanks for the helpful hint. The original version was not linking to the derivative which I nominated for deletion, so I was not aware that we had the original file on Commons, and that it was released under CC-BY-SA 2.0. I have now undeleted that file, and linked the original and derivative together, and added a note about the change of license on Flickr so all should be good now. As for your question about derivativeFX, I am afraid that I know of no alternative to that tool, and our list of upload tools doesn't help much; perhaps ask at the village pump? Thanks, and have a good evening, odder (talk) 19:54, 8 January 2015 (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, Majora (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Reply