This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
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!
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The files listed below, which you uploaded, have been tagged {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the OTRS team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the OTRS team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have not sent the permission, please send it to "permissions-commonswikimedia.org" now. Please quote the file name in your email. If you have, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard, quoting the file name, so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. Please note that this message is being left by an automated bot, whose operator is not an OTRS volunteer, therefore please do not send this information to me, as it will not save your images from deletion. Thanks for your time! Please help translate this message!HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out)05:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for uploading images of several places in Vojvodina. However, I would suggest that you use more specific categorization for your images instead simply "Vojvodina". There are separate subcategories for most settlements in Vojvodina and for other appropriate subjects. For example, proper categories for this image are "Mužlja" and "Education in Zrenjanin" (or if some settlement does not have its separate category for education, then image should be included into category "Education in Vojvodina", but not into main "Vojvodina" category). So, I suggest that you try to use this way of categorization in the future because otherwise other users are forced to do that instead of you. Just a friendly suggestion. PANONIAN (talk) 17:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
License for Grozde of Perko
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Here is license for picture of Tomaž Perko. He wrote with his hand permission for his picture with his hand.
Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
File:Tapai1 JP2.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.
Permission for file Tapai JP2.jpg and Tapai1 JP2.jpg (the same file, but I photographed from far and near the same picture) is here (Tápai István wrote it in Hungarian): File:JP2 Tapai-permission.jpg
Permission in Hungarian free license from author for picture of JP2 praying, which i photographed
Perko and Tápai have not internet, so wrote both with own hand. When I meet Perko, he shall write more for free license yet. He enjoys, that his picture is published on Wikipedia and on other places (1st Slovenian Eucharistic Congress in Celje 2010, newspapers, books etc, for honest use overall)
Permission is given for every use. If my declaration is not enough, let you write formular and autor will rewrite it. He wrote: I drew picture of JP2. Can be used for honest domain. Tápai István 9. V. 2011. --Stebunik (talk) 03:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
V tem primeru - enako je bilo pri Perkovi sliki Lojzeta Grozdeta - je dano dovoljenje v vse namene in povsod. Oba sta celo izrazila ustno željo, da se slika objavi. Ne vem, zakaj potegovati te podrobnosti, ki postanejo vprašljive šele tedaj, ko se pojavi dvom. Kdo pa drugi jamči za resničnost podatkov, če ne jaz, ki sem jih dal gori? Ali pa sem zahteval, da se obnovi slika, za katero je bilo jasno, da ne more pridobiti potrebnih licenc? Izgleda, da so take vrste slike nekomu napoti. Če sem jaz tako diktiral, sem mislil, da je tako potrebno. Avtor je samo to napisal, kar je mislil, da je potrebno, da se slika lahko objavi povsod in vse namene. Nihče pa ni mislil na to, da lahko postane tarča dlakocepstva.--Stebunik (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
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!
Ras67 (talk) 13:51, 13 May 2011 (UTC) File Pagoda-Nerodom-I_1904.jpg is public domain, because is older as 100 years (from year 1904 I scanned, Die katholischen Missionen) --Stebunik (talk) 21:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
When I write about Cambogia, I will use it. Please, let somebody declare: exists maybe this pagoda yet now and publish that picture! --Stebunik (talk) 03:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Slika v črno-belem Pagoda-Nerodom je samo prividno boljša. Če dobro pogledaš, je slika v sivi oziroma rjavi tehniki mnogo natančnejša, saj se vidijo tudi odtenki črk v gotici. Črno-bela slika ni izbrisala le črk, ampak tudi fine nijanse z originalne slike. Zato bi bili potrebni obe verziji: siva je bolj natančna, črno-bela pa lepše izgleda. Poleg tega ima ena originalen napis v gotici, druga je pa brez njega. --Stebunik (talk) 20:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Ne vem, kaj je "originalnega" glede tistega napisa v gotici. Res je star, ampak je del publikacije, ne fotografije, ki je verjetno še starejša. Dokler je glavni predmet datoteke fotografija, je ta konkreten napis postranskega pomena. Kar se lepote tiče pa je tukaj sploh nepomembna (važna je samo natančnost reprodukcije), tako da to ni argument za ohranitev obeh datotek. — YerpoEh?08:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Ogledal sem si tisto mojo originalno skenirano sliko kakor tudi malo prirejeno. Opazil sem, da pri tisti prirejeni ni mogoče videti večje ločljivosti, pri moji pa jo je mogoče videti. --Stebunik (talk) 18:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Jaz sem šel gledat na stran o Srebrni Pagodi, ki si jo Ti naznačil. Jaz višje ločljivosti nisem mogel odpreti (tiste, za katero piše, da jo je nekdo 11. maja 2011 malo popravil). Mislim pa, da Ti misliš na tisto, kar sem jaz skeniral. Če pa je komu všeč, naj briše. Veseli me, da je tista iz leta 1904 omenjena na njihovi strani. Jaz ne bi brisal nobene: če se pa drugim zdi, pa naj. --Stebunik (talk) 19:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
Could you please elaborate your conclusion "This photo was official photo of Pope in parochial offices round 1963 and so became public domain". Why should it be PD now? --Túrelio (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Because it was exposed for public use and it is not artificicial picture. It was exposed in public place and it is in public domaine now too, I think. If it is not so, excuse me and delete it. Now it is my exemplar. I photographed this picture too; it shall be free license, maybe?--Stebunik (talk) 19:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
What do you exactly mean by "was exposed for public use"? If you want to claim it per Freedom-of-panorama exemption of Serbia, please look here, whether it fulfills the conditions. --Túrelio (talk) 19:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Protected is, when is photographer known. How can be photo protected, when photographer is unknown? It is photography of Pope Paul VI and it was exposed during his life. It is now my photography, in my posession, because it is donated to me today from paroch of Titel and Lok. I give my photography as free license. Why not? I have photographed this photography too and I will give it on Wikipedia - I think, that than it shall not be problem.--Stebunik (talk) 21:51, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
"Protected is, when is photographer known" - No, that is not generally true. There are special regulations for truely anonymous works. But even anonymous works are protected. And it is very unlikely that an such officially looking shot of a pope is really an anonymous work. A work is not anonymous because you or I don't know the name of the artist/photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 09:09, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:Pope_Paul-VI.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!
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!
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!
Koledarček je bil izdan konec leta 1943 za leto 1944. Torej je star letos 71 let. Slika je bila objavljena takrat in se torej lahko obnovi.--Stebunik (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer.
You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Jamaica has 95 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Honduras has a general copyright term of 75 years, but it does implement the rule of the shorter term. Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II (more information), Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II (known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia) and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions (more information).
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/PDMCreative Commons Public Domain Mark 1.0falsefalse In USA is in public domain, because it was edited in Jugoslavia, where is license 70 years of stamping. --Stebunik (talk) 18:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
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!
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!
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!
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!
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!
is made from my sister Marija round 1968 year with her photoaparat. She permissed to me for all here photos an for this too to use them with free license on Wikipedia and overall. --91.148.64.15319:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
is made from my sister Jelen Marija round 1968 year with her photoaparat. She permissed to me for all here photos an for this too to use them with free license on Wikipedia and overall. --Stebunik (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Živjo, čeprav je bila ta slika že izbrisana, se lahko obnovi, če pošlješ e-mail z njenim dovoljenjem ali sken njenega pisnega dovoljenja na naslov, naveden na strani COM:OTRS. Če potrebuješ pomoč, sporoči. --Eleassar(t/p)19:31, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Danes sem dobil pisno dovoljenje od avtorice slike, moje sestre Marije Jelen. Tukaj ga dodajam.
DOVOLJENJE - PERMISSION
Inbox
Blaž Jelen
<hmeljar@gmail.com> Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:24 PM
To: Janez Jelen <mukimaka@gmail.com>
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Delete | Show original
Slovensko:
DOVOLJENJE
Jaz, Marija Jelen, dipl. ing. agr., sem avtorica te slike, ko moja mama Marija Jelen-Brenčič
MJB tipka na pisalni stroj Underwood. Slika je nastala okrog leta 1985.
Dovoljujem, da se ta slika objavi na Wikipediji in povsod drugod pod "prosto licenco".
Marija Jelen, dipl. ing. agr
Šalek, 28. januarja 2013
English:
PERMISSION
I, Marija Jelen, dipl. ing. agr., I am the author of this picture, when Marija Jelen-Brenčič
MJB writes on the typewriter "Underwood". The picture was made around 1985.
I give permission for the publication of this image, on Wikipedia and elsewhere under the
"free license".
Marija Jelen, dipl. ing. agr
Šalek, 28th January 2013
File:MJB-by-writing.jpg
Pozdravljen. Dovoljenje je videti ok, vendar ni navedeno, katero prosto licenco. Lahko uporabiš licenco CC BY-SA 2.5 SI ali katero drugo. Predlagam, da sestra izpolni obrazec na COM:OTRS/sl, potem pa ga pošlješ na permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Hvala, lp. --Eleassar(t/p)09:06, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Licenca za File:MJB-by-writing.jpg naj bo (licenca Creative Commons Pripis Dovoljenja-Razširjanje pod enakimi pogoji 3.0). Hvala.--Stebunik (talk) 11:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
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!
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!
wikimedia.org" now. Please quote the file name in your email. If you have, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard, quoting the file name, so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. Please note that this message is being left by an automated bot, whose operator is not an OTRS volunteer, therefore please do not send this information to me, as it will not save your images from deletion. Thanks for your time! Please help translate this message! HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out) 05:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
