Open main menu
Archive 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.



forgotten to delete? --Mbdortmund (talk) 00:54, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

No, its undeleted by Yann, there will be a new DR. Thanks for the notice about the undeletion.
Best regards,
Huib talk 15:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The Crypte.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Yay! Huib talk 15:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


Why delete Kit_body_inter0910h.png ??? Bruno-bantalk 13h48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

My reasons are in the Deletion Requested thats linked on your talkpage, its best to discuss there.
Best regards,
Huib talk 16:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Problems continue

Is this constructive editing (please help me understand if so) or continued stalking? EmilEikS (talk) 11:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

PS You have already archived our previous input on this from last week. EmilEikS (talk) 11:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

More here. I have tried to correct a mess, not create one. EmilEikS (talk) 12:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reaction (Again) my personal life is getting pretty busy :(
I can say in my personal opinion that I think that Mr Pieter isn't the best best users to work with, he isn't nice and kind of rude.. I would suggest to ignore him complete, he is on a colission course with himself, Commons cant accept people that keep being rude or almost trolling.
Best regards,
Huib talk 15:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you! I have reached the same conclusion as you - the usual good policy of not feeding the troll - but what do we do when he destroys my work after I've done hundreds of new uploads? For example the Ristesson History category which he now has made hidden again, so that people cannot cross-reference through the source category to find other related images they might wish to use? EmilEikS (talk) 22:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Email send Huib talk 10:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | 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 | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | +/−

Hello, Abigor/Archives/2009!

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]]

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 05:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


File:Movie_projector.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/− 18:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Bishopsgate Institute

I see you deleted the media page for a CC-licensed Flickr image that I have been trying to upload from Flickr via Bryan's tool. Unfortunately the tool had temporary server problems and I wrote to the maintainer to help fix the upload (which I understand may take up to 24h). I am not sure what happens if you remove the media page while the upload is pending. Am I supposed to restart the procedure or upload manually? --DarTar (talk) 08:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I cleaned the category with all broken uploads, the bot have a lot of broken uploads and I think I delete every month 100 images, its for the best to start the upload again, that is the most fast way.
Btw Bryan is on a Holiday so he can't look at the bot :(
Best regards,
Huib talk 15:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I tried the upload again, but it gives the same error :( --DarTar (talk) 07:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
I fixed it for you, a manual upload solved the problem. Could you please check if I moved the correct image to Commons?
Best regards,
Huib talk 10:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks, the image is the right one. --DarTar (talk) 11:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


File:Urbanus_Middelkerke.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi Abigor!

I noticed, you're very experienced user of Wikipedia Commons. I have received a couple of messages from you.

I understand PFTS index graph that I have recently uploaded is a fair use content, right? Should I instead upload it here

Also could you please explain how the license for [Middlesex University old logo] should look like. I asked for a permission to use it at the University and they don't seem to understand what I am asking them about. Do they need to provide a formal letter or something?


Invest in knowledge (talk) 17:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

There are two ways how you can handle this, lets start with the easy one.
If you want to use both the files on the English Wikipedia you could use Special:Upload on the English Wikipedia and upload both the files there. When you choose to upload there you will see a lot of option and choose the correct one, once uploaded on the English Wikipedia there shouldn't be any problems anymore.
The English Wikipedia has a different upload policy, that policy makes it possible to upload unfree material, something thats not possible on Commons.
There is also a difficult way:
You could contact the website for both images asking them to release there logo or images under a free license so you can upload it to Commons, the company should give you a writen statement and you need to forward the email with the statement to our OTRS team, the will try to verify te permission and will give you a number when its done, the number you will get is needed.. The number has to go on the permission place on the upload form.
The writen email should contain some stuff like:
I <name>, give permission to use image <link> under a the <license> and I understand that I give permission to anybody to use the image in a personal or commercial way, I understand that everybody is free to modify, share-alike or use the images and that the need to give me credit by re-use.
But you should only try the hard way when you want to use the images on a other Wikipedia version than the English Wikipedia.
I hope my answers helped, but when you need more help just ask. :)
Huib talk 17:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your swift reply. But you see I created PFTS index graph myself. There is no place on the internet, where you can find exactly the same image other than here. I simply used the data from pfts website (freely available to everyone), exported it into MO Excel and created a graph. Do I still need to ask them for a permission to use the data even if it is as freely available as, for example, the consolidated financial statements of big public companies are?
Anyway, for the time being, I shall delete both images from Commons and upload them here. Once I get more safisticated in all of this, I will come back...
Thanks again for your help.
Invest in knowledge (talk) 08:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Church Heel by night.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.


Hi Abigor, you've nominated File:BellLightbox.jpg for deletion even though I personally took the photo and uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons.

The current image isn't the same as the one I deleted yesterday, the version I deleted was from Flickr with a unfree license (all rights reserved), per COM:L are only free images allowed on Commons so I deleted it.
This picture is own work, so I don't have a problem with this one.
Best regards,
Huib talk 19:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Italian CoAs

Hi. I noticed that some of the CoA's in the original list of Commons:Deletion requests/Italian CoA seems to have been missed. namely these ~220 files. Since I take it you had automated the deletion fo the others I was wondering if you could do these too. I left a note about the issue on the talk page of the DR. Cheers /Lokal_Profil 18:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice,
Yesterday I used a script to delete all those files indeed, there where more than 2.000 files and I couldn't get it done by hand ;-)
I have deleted your list manual, I think all files are now removed from Commons :)
Thanks again for the notice,
Huib talk 19:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I've searched out a few more and deleted them to. Also tried to plug a few of the holes through which these have leaked in to commons. Still there will probably be new ones being transwikied from incorrectly tagged images on other wikis for a while. /Lokal_Profil 19:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Im trying to create a filter for the abusefilter to prevent new uploads :) Huib talk 18:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Kawasaki ZX-9R von 2002.jpg

Hi! This file was transferred from the German Wikipedia. There, it was deleted because the license wasn’t added by the uploader. So could you please delete it here, too? Thank you! Ireas talkdeen 08:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your notice, I deleted the image.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


I am new, and I was hopping to add to Wiki my Comments on Ketobbey Patrick Waters. Musician. Austrailan ME... But I can't even add a picture where is says I can add a picture? Please help me...

Here on Commons you're not allowed to upload cover art or other Fair use material, there are some wikipedia/media projects that are allowing the upload of cover art, this is by example the English Wikipedia.
When you want to upload fair use you need to do it locally but not on Commons, Could you please tell where your article is located?
Best regards,
Huib talk 19:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


This file was deleted for copyright violations. There was no apparent reason given and no notification on any of my talk pages. It was absolutely deleted in error. I created the file based on template maps here, there is nothing even similar in the copyright domain. Please do your fellow wikipedians a favor and notify them when you attempt to take these steps because the file was used on two other pages. Thanks.Pdeitiker (talk)

I think I made a terrible mistake,
I restored the images, I'm so sorry for the inconvenience.
Best regards,
Huib talk 08:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment on J Milburn's RfA

I made a comment on your vote here. I cannot tell if you support or opoose his RfA as the vote says support...whereas you typed in oppose. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:59, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Leoboudv,
My vote is a support vote, but there was a little joke about it on IRC that resulted in this vote, I will change it to make it more transparent. :)
How is the Flickrreviewing coming? I'm very happy you made the decision to become a trusted user :D
Best regards,
Huib talk 08:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks for clarifying your vote. I was confused a little. On your question, the flickr reviewing is fine. Its just a bit unfortunate that some people still 1. never link the author (which is uncourteos) and 2. don't always upload the highest resolution images from flickr. It seems that most uploaders know what license are acceptable on Commons though I have had to file a few DRs like this. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the Barnstar. It is greatly appreciated.

You're completely welcome. Huib talk 13:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

File:E haplogroup.gif

Hi Abigor, you deleted the above image. I had started a discussion with User_talk:Wsiegmund#File:E_haplogroup.gif over the image. I wanted to get his opinion. I spent a lot of hours tracing the image because I wanted to maintain the geography of the contours, but I didn't want to violate any copyrights. Muntuwandi (talk) 06:42, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

You have found the image on the internet and nicely placed a source link on it, so far so good but the source link shows:
Copyright © 2004 by The American Society of Human Genetics. All rights reserved.
So that would mean that the image isn't free under the license you uploaded it and you should ask permission and send it to OTRS.
Without the proper archived permission this would be a copyvio.
Best regards,
Huib talk 08:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes I am fully aware that the image on pubmed is a copyrighted image, however this image is not the same. I have completely redrawn it, but maintained the geometry of the contours. Muntuwandi (talk) 22:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes but with a redraw you don't get new copyrights, you are making a DW that still fully protected by copyright. Huib talk 22:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Metallica logo.png

Did you press the wrong button? –Tryphon 09:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, I think I pressed the wrong button indeed.
I'm going to hide and feel ashame
Best regards,
Huib talk 09:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Royal crypt in Belgium.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Christina Aguilera

Hi Abigor. Could you delete some files of Christina Aguilera, cuz i've uploaded better files from her, please? I'm the uploader of this pictures.


Delete: File:Ain't No Other Man.jpg, File:BacktoBasicsToronto2.jpg, File:Candyman.jpg, File:CandymanEdit.jpg, File:Christina Aguilera Candyman.jpg, File:Christina Aguilera CandymanEdit.jpg, File:Christina Aguilera Still Dirrty.jpg, File:Dirrty Edit Back to Basics.jpg and File:Lady Marmalade.jpg.

Thank you very much. --Daviddavid00 (talk) 14:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that you have uploaded more images with this beautifull woman on it but let me ask this: Why do you want them deleted, I mean the most of them are in use and all images are licensed under a free license. On Commons we are trying to create a big database with free material and those images are with very good quality and free so they are perfect for Commons, could you please give some more info why you want them deleted.
Best regards,
Huib talk 14:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Because i'mve uploaded better pictures to replace it. Look:

If you delete this: File:Ain't No Other Man.jpg, we have this one on Commons (so much better): File:Christina Aguilera - Back to Basics Tour - Ain't No Other Man.jpg.

If you delete this: File:BacktoBasicsToronto2.jpg, we have this one on Commons (so much better): File:Creole Lady Marmalade.jpg.

If you delete this: File:Christina Aguilera Candyman.jpg, we have this one on Commons (so much better): File:Candyman Sweet Sugar.jpg and File:Candyman3Edit.jpg.

Just examples. The picas i mentioned you n the first edit on your discussion, have a lot of problems and are taken so far from the artist. Thank you. --Daviddavid00 (talk) 14:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Our policy say's that we can deleted stuff if we can replace it with the same kind of images and that is in this case not, but why should you get problems with them on Commons? The images where on Commons and are checked so the license and all is correct the author cant complain because we didn't do anything wrong.
I don't mind deleting the images if there are good reasons, but in this case we would lose good pictures for better pictures, all the old images are still in use also and in our scope, and free. I would suggest to let them just stand on Commons because they are all fine by our policies.
If the Flickr using is making problems towards you, you should ask them to send a email to permissions-commons [at] wikimedia [dot] org and let our OTRS team handle it.
Best regards,
Huib talk 14:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Wapen Vindicat

Hoi Huib,

Het plaatje Wapenvindicat.jpg heb ik zelf gemaakt. Er is dus geen sprake van fair use door mij in het plaatsen van het plaatje op wiki commons maar ik wilde door de toevoeging van fair use andere gebruikers aanmoedigen om bij gebruik van het plaatje hetgeen ik niet bezwaarlijk vind, fair use te betrachten. Zou je zo vriendelijk willen zijn het verwijderen weer ongedaan te maken? Bij voorbaat dank.

Groeten Papoise (talk) 15:19, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha Huib
Ik heb het zelf alweer terug geplaatst maar dit maal met "copyright volledig vrijgegeven"; iedereen mag het van mij gebruiken. Ik neem aan dat dat zo in orde is.
Papoise (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Het plaatje was als ik het goed heb het logo van een Groningse studentenvereniging, dit houdt in dat die vereniging de rechten hebt over het logo, en ook als je hem nagetekend krijg je er geen rechten over.
Voordat je een logo kan gebruiken op Commons, moet er toestemming worden gestuurd vanuit de vereniging naar Commons, in deze toestemming moet staan dat de vereniging akkoord gaat met het plaatsen van het logo onder een vrije licentie en dat ze weten dat het inhoudt dat iedereen het logo mag gebruiken voor zowel persoonlijk als commercieel gebruik.
Deze email moet gestuurd worden met een emailadres dat gelinkt kan worden met de vereniging zodat we zeker weten dat de vereniging ook akkoord gaat. Ik weet dat dit een lastige omweg is maar het is de enige manier om zeker te weten dat de eigenaar van het logo ook echt akkoord gaat met de vrije licentie. Het emailadres hiervoor is permissions-nl [at] wikimedia [dot] org
Ik heb de afbeelding ook weer verwijderd, deze zal worden teruggeplaatst nadat de toestemming in ons OTRS systeem is geregeld.
Huib talk 15:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

No me toques los...

Mira, la imagen f1portal.jpg que he subido es MIA. MIA MIA MIA te queda claro? la he hecho yo con mi ordenador, es una foto mía, no violo ningun copyright porque no tiene. el juego (f1portal) esta de acuerdo con que la suba y no se que cojones quieres que te diga, estoy harto ya que he subido como 45 veces esta foto y me la borrais todas las veces, dejarla en paz ya porque es MIA os queda claro? coño ya.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimoxo (talk • contribs) df|  17:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC) (UTC)
Translation: Look, the image f1portal.jpg which I have uploaded is MINE MINE MINE MINE, have you understood?. I've made this image with my computer and I'm not violating any copyright because this image does not have any. The game (f1portal) agreed to upload this image I do not know what the fuck do you want me to say you. I'm sick that I've uploaded this image 45 times and all of them it has been deleted. Do not touch it becuse it is MINE, understood?, fuck you. -translated by Dferg
I would like to ask you to remain calm and friendly we are all volunteers trying to keep Commons the best project in the world right now.
The file you are referring to is a screen shot from a website or a game, when you make a screen shot you don't get rights about the image so its also not possible to place the image under a free license.
If you want to use the screen shot in our database you need to ask permission from the authors of the site, the should send there permission to permission-commons[at]wikimedia[dot]org , when the permission is archived the file will be undeleted.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Traducción: Hola, te agradeceré que te mantengas calmado y no faltes al respeto, todos nosotros somos voluntarios y queremos lo mejor para el proyecto. El fichero al que se refiere es una captura de pantalla de un videojuego o de una página web, cuando hace una captura de pantalla, usted no adquiere derechos sobre dicha imágen y no es posible utilizarla aquí bajo licencia libre. Si quiere poner la captura de pantalla en nuestra base de datos, tiene que solicitar un permiso por escrito y enviarlo a permissions-commons Una vez se haya recibido el permiso, el ficher será restaurado. Atentamente. -translated by Dferg.


Ok, and now I load a new picture, but this image is from other web site. Checks this picture, not is from the official my space site: Hope you serve ok. This image is seemed, but not is equal, checked. The original is more big, and my picture is small. BYE.

The problem with the image and the other logo you uploaded is that you don't get any rights when recreate or make a look a like from a logo, the rights stay by the original owner so we should need permission to our OTRS system, without the OTRS permission we cant be sure if the author really want to release it under a free license.
A other problem is that you are cropping a part from a image thats on photobucket, photobucket doesn't show the licensing so we don't know if the author wants to release it under a free license, and again you should contact the author ask permission and send it to OTRS.
Without the permission in our OTRS system you cant use images you found on the internet, logo's or other material that you didn't create yourself. Therefor I deleted it again.
Please send your permission for releasing the image under a free license to OTRS before uploading it again,
Huib talk 23:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, just want what I'm editing is very good, so I need the image, so I looked for and also find an image with the NGX logo on Flickr and said: Some rights reserved. That image whether yes or not can upload.

Do you have a link for me to the image on Flickr so I can check?
Best regards,
Huib talk 23:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, this is the link: Bye.

The license is okay for uploading on Commons, I don't know if the image is a DW or origal work but I let a other admin decide that.
Best regards,
Huib talk 23:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Good, Then if you can climb. Just let me know and I will upload.

Go ahead and upload :) Huib talk 23:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, how are you? Already upload the image yesterday: What do I have to put in the permission section? I put "GFDL-1.2", is ok or not.

No, you need to place the text see below there
I fixed it for you,
Huib talk 04:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Igor Kapišinský.jpg

Your decision is wrong. You wrote "it is the best one we have on Commons so its not poor quality since there a no other versions." It is not true. You don't take into account mention of Bonnifac [1], that the problem of only one picture was solved (and replaced in Slovak Wikipedia). Look at Special:Contributions/Miloš for another photos of the same person (nominally: File:Dr. Igor Kapišinský.JPG, File:Kapišinský -hvezdár.jpg, File:Kapišinský matematik.jpg). Please, be kind to author's and pictured person's wishes, look over your decision and remove poor quality file. Thanks. --Beren (talk) 23:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe there are other files and Commons, and yes the are from better quality but still I stand my ground and bad quality isn't a reason for deletion.
Commons is a project dedicated for Collecting free media, the image is free so it can stay on Commons, Commons makes sure people can choose free images or other type of files. The people that use Commons are free to choose the image they want, when we delete stuff that we think is poor quality we make the choose for them and that isn't our job here.
I did a checkusage yesterday and the image was in use (on a userpage) so its in scope also, I cant find a good reason for deletion so I made it kept, its the right decission in this case.
Best regards,
Huib talk 08:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
1. You said "bad quality isn't a reason for deletion". But it is not true. As you can see in Commons:Deletion_policy#Redundant/bad quality, it is valid reason, when the file is replaced by better one.
2. As I see, there is no usage on userpage (at least now). If it is not true, please give me link pointing to such usage.
Author asked for deletion, because pictured person thinks, that he is pictured by indignified way. He cooperated with author to supply better replacement. And what is their reward? We reject what he wants and still publish this photo. Without reason - nobody really needs such poor quality image when much more better is available. It effectively undermines future cooperations. Do you really think, that such merciless decisions can help the project? --Beren (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
If you want a second opinion I would be happy to give one: Abigor said "not a good reason". Images can be deleted if they are of poor quality and they are unused and probably newer will be used. But the image was used and we can't just replace an image on a wiki and then delete the image. We have to be sure the users on the wiki agrees the new image is better. I suggest you start a new DR in a few weeks when we have seen if the Wiki accepts the change. Then maybe the result will be differend. --MGA73 (talk) 22:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for second opinion, but I need answer from Abigor. "We have to be sure the users on the wiki agrees the new image is better" - you can be sure. Waiting a few weeks is only waste of time, if I must, I will start new DR immediately. But cooperation with closing administrator is prefered way. --Beren (talk) 23:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Its not so simple like you think it is, Commons is dedicated to collection free media, the image you want to have deleted is per policy free enough for Commons so there isn't a license problem.
The quality isn't very good but still the subject is complete visible and if people want it the can use it, at the point of closure it was still in use, that people removed te use after the closure doesn't change a thing about the closure.
you are forgetting some important things, we have a Wikimedia user that took the time to upload the image and place it under a free license, this users wasn't involved in the DR and and the admin that closes can choose out:
  • Deleting a image from a user that didn't raise his opinion, and we aren't even sure he knows about the deletion request.
  • Keeping the image, it was in use and maybe it will not be used anymore but its complety free and stands nobody in the way.
A administrator makes a decision, and in this case I decided keep..
But please explain why are you so determent to get it deleted, even when its not used its stand nobody in the way and maybe someday there comes somebody that completely need that image and is very happy with it.
O one last thing, when you start a new deletion request I will close it right away, just making a new Dr when you don't like the result isn't how we work here.
Huib talk 23:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
@Abigor (with edit. conflict): I thought you cannot surprise me more... Please, read deletion request before closing it. It is important. You said "we have a Wikimedia user that took the time to upload the image and place it under a free license, this users wasn't involved in the DR ...". It is not true again. Please, look at the file File:Igor Kapišinský.jpg, who is uploader and author. It is User:Miloš. And look at this diff in DR. Who edited it? Yes, it is the same User:Miloš. And he voted for deletion, can you see?
If you want to know, why I argue for deleting the image, it is not the problem of image itself. I am firm believer, that administrators should have chance to sensitively judge arguments and consider if consensus was reached. They have this chance in Commons. I argue for it on Czech Wikipedia. Therefore I cannot be indolent if I was noticed, that administrator maked illogical decision. I must prove, that system can solve such mistakes of administrator.
If you close my appeal (I don't know if it will be necessary, maybe I am naive, but I still hope, that you correct your mistakes and keep things in peace), althrough you are directly involved in previous decision, it is conflict of interest. You should left next decision on another administrator. Don't do it, please, really. I don't want your desysoping, but the choice is yours. --Beren (talk) 01:49, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I was warned about this talk. I'd like to repeat chronology of this case, because it seems to be no other revisory possibility except this talk ("new deletion request will be closed"). So:
1. There was the User:Miloš editor of slovak article about Dr. Kapisinsky, he had opportunity to take picture and decided to publish it (to Commons).
2. The person in the article had objections about text and photo. As I mentioned in the Deletion request Kapisinsky never allowed to publish picture, taken and uploaded by Milos.
3. There was some other delete votes (poor quality) and keep agrument (there is no other better picture).
4. Milos (creator and uploader of picture) voted delete here.
5. Milos uploaded three new pictures into Category:Igor Kapišinský with good will to fulfill argument about "no other better picture".
6. Bonnifac (me) had cannceled these arguments in Delete request here. It was approved by slovak sysop Bubamara here.
I think, it has to be rule about someone mistakes. Milos uploaded bad picture, had troubles, had good will with better pictures and still there is no possibility to delete controversial, no more used picture?! Please, keep this in your mind. --Bonnifac (talk) 01:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Small update: Milos voted with this comment "I, the uploader of the picture, doesn't have permission from the person on the picture". No permission is needed if picture taken on a public place. Maybe uploader just voted delete because he thought it was here illegal? I se no reason to rush a deletion here. --MGA73 (talk) 07:37, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Person on the picture explicitly said to Miloš, that he disagree with publishing of such picture. But he agrees to cooperate to replace photo by better alternative. Yes, illegality of publishing such photo in Slovak law is debatable (it is problem of other than copyright law), but Miloš does not write anything about illegality. So it is pointless to speculate about hypothesis, that he thinks about illegality and his argument is wrong. He simply wants to keep good relationship with pictured person. --Beren (talk) 15:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm starting to repeat myself but the image if free, no permission is needed and the subject is clearly visible. Our Deletion policy Say's that there isn't a main rule if deletion for bad quality and its handled case by case, In this case I decided that it was keep. We have now 4 images of this person on Commons, I don't think thats enough to start deleting stuff, when its not used it stands nobody in the way and it still inside our COM:SCOPE. The image was in use when I closed the Deletion request, the uses have been replaced after the closure, if you really want it gone I would say wait a month and nominate it again, the deletion request is closed according our policy and I'm not going to change my decision just because some people don't like it. Milos voted delete, yes but a free licenses cant be revoked and the image isn't breaking rules so his comment doesn't make sense. Yes there are other images available but when you look at the sizes its still the 3 best picture in the category. I would like to ask you once again please stop discussion and respect my decission, this is Commons a free media repository we have 4,864,791 free files, some are good quality some less good but there is just one important thing all the files are free. Huib talk 08:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

But it is handle case by case by community, not by arbitrary decisions of some administrator. His inclusionism is not a valid argument. Administrator is not a ruler. Your decision are:
  • against the will of community (5:2 for deletion, recommendation of J Milburn should not be considered, because based on obsolete arguments)
  • against the will of author/uploader
  • against the will of pictured person
  • against the common sense, because if author and pictured person worked on replacement of poor quality picture, they helped us, so we should help them too, to not break next cooperation. Merciless decisions are going against the project. Such decisions prevent future enlarging of project's content in this area.
  • based on false claims
  • based on claims, that was not previously put into discussion (It is agains the unwritten ethic of closure deleting discussion, if you have brand new argument, that is not mentioned in discussion, you should not simply close discussion with the argument, but put it into discussion to allow other people to discuss it, and left closure to other administrator.)
I am sorry, but your false arguments in discussion prevent me from believing you, that there was any usage in user space (I checked it and uploader had not the file used on his user pages and no other people has the reason for such usage). I must ask you for some proof.
You call for respect. But it is possible to respect such decision? Of course NOT! If you want to be respected, you must act with careful respect to others. Only such decisions deserve the respect. Your decision deserves correction. I will start new deletion request this week if no other solution will be founded. --Beren (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

A administrator closes a deletion request on base of arguments not on votes so the 5:2 is kind of useless. There are 3 arguments for keep and 5 for delete, from the 5 delete arguments there are two saying bad quality and three are referring to a discussions that the photo isn't free (personality rights)

  • The photo looks like its taken on a public place so there is not a personality rights issue with this images, so the argument of the 3 delete votes doesn't have any value.
  • With above in our head we have still 2 votes for delete and three for keep, that means that the Commons community more arguments give for keep than for delete, so deleting this image is against the will of the community so me as adminsitrator have closed it as keep.
  • Your argument that the keep is against the will of the author doesn't stand any ground, when you release something under a free license it cant be revoked and his argument for deletion is again a personality rights issue.
  • Your argument against common sense is kind of pov, common sense is keeping when there are more argument for keep than for delete.
  • Based on false claims, I really don't know what you mean because I closed it based on arguments.
  • Also I didn't close it after that somebody give new facts, there where no new responds in this discussion for 5 days, the arguments I give are my keep reasons and not a new argument in the discussion.

I would like to ask you to remain calm and civil, by saying that you don't believe that there where any uses, you are calling me a liar, I am happy to discuss this matter until the end of time but I will not answer anymore when you call me a liar, I am respectful to you and giving correct answers to any question you ask all I want in return is the same kind of behaviour, unless you have solid proof that I was lying indeed I would like you to take back those words.

A final word, feel free to start a new deletion request and make sure the people that say delete base there   Delete on facts instead of incorrect things, when things are based on fact there count more heavy and have more value than if the are based on incorrect stuff, I would like to warn you that starting a new deletion request based on the same things can be seen as a bad faith nomination or a nomination trying to disrupt the Commons community.

Best regards, Huib talk 16:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Arguments for deletion for poor quality:
  • Bonnifac: (among other arguments) "... You could agree, the picture isn't looking representative. ..."
  • Bubamara: "I agree with Bonnifac."
  • Ra1n: "Poor quality."
  • Daniel Baránek: "Really poor quality."
Claim of the author/uploader:
  • Miloš: "I, the uploader of the picture, doesn't have permission from the person on the picture."
He does not say anything about law, really, so don't speculate about it, such speculations are complete nonsense.
I can proof it by [2] (summary in Slovak).
The will of the author have nothing to do with the license. He cannot change the license, it is true, but it does not mean, that he cannot change his will.
Therefore counting only 3 votes for delete is nonsense.
If you don't know about your incorrect claims, please find the string "it is not true" in this discussion. You can see points to some of them.
If you think, that other people must blindly trust you and cannot ask for the proof, although your claims are more and more unbelievable, it is your problem. Why you did not write the argument at the moment, when you closed the request? It is really strange. You can take back your argument or proof it pointing to page, where the image was used. But you choose, that it is better to you to stop discussion with occassion, that I am calling you liar :-(. It is not true, I only stopped believe you in this thing without proof. I really don't know, if you are liar (it is your words, not mine), but there are suspicious circumstances. --Beren (talk) 18:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Essentially, the closing administrator has spoken, and has already said he's repeating himself, so this discussion is going nowhere fast. I can only suggest you start a new deletion request as suggested in COM:DR#Appeal. I think that would be the next step here. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I will do so. --Beren (talk) 21:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Done. --Beren (talk) 12:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice, I will respond there. Huib talk 17:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Your assistance please.

You deleted File:Al Qaeda scrapbook 2.jpg. I believe the {{copyvio}} tag was placed in error. Merely republishing a public domain image does not grant the republisher all rights to that image.

Although the tag told the tag placer to leave a good-faith heads-up on my talk page they did not do that. I am not happy about that.

So, what would my next step be in getting that image restored? Geo Swan (talk) 04:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, I have undeleted the images and made a normal deletion request for it. I believe that when there is a discussion we should not speedy images.
The Dr can be found here, I hope you will place your view on it there.
Best regards,
Huib talk 04:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Music Cat.gif

Can I get a copy of the edit history of File:Music Cat.gif that you deleted recently, thank you.--Otterathome (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I can give you the copy of the file history, that wouldn't be a problem, but would you mind telling me why you need it?

  • (diff) 17:51, 7 August 2009 . . Conti (Talk | contribs | block) (534 bytes) (copyvio)

  • (diff) 09:36, 26 April 2009 . . Túrelio (Talk | contribs | block) (327 bytes) (Quick-adding category lolcats (using HotCat.js))

* (diff) 09:03, 26 April 2009 . . Edmon Khoury (Talk | contribs | block) (306 bytes) ({{Information |Description={{en|1=<small><code></code></small>}} |Source=Own work by uploader |Author=Edmon Khoury |Date=1996 |Permission=Edmon khoury |other_versions= }} <!--{{ImageUpload|full}}-->)

Best regards,
Huib talk 17:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


I took the photo site Flickr. Yesterday the photographer copyright authorized the use of the work. Please do not delete the photo! Thanks! --Pedu0303 (talk) 18:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem with the images is simple, we do not have a source link to the image self we do have a link to the photostream of the user but I couldn't find the picture on it. Could you please give me the direct link to the image page so I can handle the rest?
Best regards,
Huib talk 18:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


Muito Obrigado! (Thanks!) --Pedu0303 (talk) 18:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Your Welcome. Huib talk 18:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed that on Flicker license is "All rights reserved". Do we have a permission somewhere? --MGA73 (talk) 11:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
No we havent yet, I didnt mark it as reviewed because the license was changed in CC-BY-NC instead of all rights reserved, I did a Flickrmail to the users hoping he would change the license in a correct free license, since that havent been done yet feel free to Speedy delete it MGA73 I dont think he will give permission when he changed the license back in all rights reserver. Huib talk 11:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


Thank you for explaining me the map problems. I didn't know copyright laws are that strict.

You're welcome, when you need help please ask me, I will always try to help you.
Best regards,
Huib talk 07:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

File deletion

Hi, Abigor! May I ask why File:Bodo sperling, "die transformation des pentagramms zu einem friedensstern in einem europa ohne mauern".jpg was deleted? We intended zu use it for a number of articles on de:WP. Thanks for your answer and best regards, --Papphase (talk) 07:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I deleted that file because it was marked as a copyright violation, what means that the image was taken from the internet without permission by the author.
I hope my answer helps you,
Huib talk 07:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello Papphase. In my oppinion the file has been rightfully deleted since the file is copyrighted (see image source: "©edgar maass"). Silver Spoon (talk) 08:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for you answers, of course the image had to be deleted then. I'm somewhat flabbergasted because the user who uploaded it as his own work at length lectured others about copyrights and "Geschmacksmuster" at some other point. He was very insistent on his rights, seems like he's not so keen on those of others... --Papphase (talk) 12:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much:)--George Mel (talk) 13:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Huib talk 17:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


Please do not delete my pictures. Before you delete anything ask me [3]! Moving too fast, let you clear. I deleted personal pictures. Basically seven pictures were not mine. --Tamasflex (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't need to ask you if I can delete a image, we as adminstrators have a policy that we can delete stuff that isn't own work on sight, when you uploaded 7 copyvios in 10 images it will make us think the other three are also copyvios.
So please only upload own work, we don't need to delete and everybody is happy ;) but nice photographs btw, they are very usefull.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the explanation. Now is not the picture is not mine. I am sure in the future no longer be problems. See my pictures if you find something wrong. In case you find something that you send the confirmation is made by me. Best regards, --Tamasflex (talk) 18:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, feel free to Contact me on my talkpage when you need help with something.
Thank you for your work on Commons,
Huib talk 19:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Sam & Max Comic-Con 07

Hi. I add a comment on i dont know where i should add it. Anyway: 1) everything about starwar is deleted 2) It is not a cosplay (something self made, look like original), it Sam & Max costums. ~ bayo or talk 15:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what I can do on that so one two three, I cant undelete without a communety support offcourse. I believe its the best when you make a new undeletion request, because nobody checks te archives and a new request will get new attention.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

If you feel like it?

Review my OP blocks here & Meta and make sure that the same are blocked on both wikis? Not got time at present (bot created accounts on them) cheers --Herby talk thyme 15:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Herby,
I reviewed your OP blocks for this month and blocked the once on Meta if it wasn't done yet, and blocked the on Commons if it wasn't done yet.
Shall I check longer back in your blocking history or is it okay now :)
Best regards,
Huib talk 16:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Much appreciated. First I got interrupted & then I was trying to finish something else off & I was afraid I would not get back to it. They were allowing bot created accounts to be created (as far as we can see). It has happened before - you can see a pattern in the usernames I've just blocked on both wiki. Many thanks --Herby talk thyme 16:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes I see the pattern in the usernames, I am glad I could help you :) Its always nice to do something to help others. You're very welcome. Huib talk 17:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Same task today if you have the time - same accounts being created with the pattern XxxxxXxxxx - worth watching for here & Meta. So far all have been exploited IPs some with 6+ accounts on. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
You had to wait a little bit longer today, I realised that I had a private life also today :O
I have cross checked the OP again here and on Meta, but why should somebody want to create bot accounts? Mass-vandalism or something like that?
I keep a eye on those pattern for the accounts.
All the best,
Huib talk 16:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks (& yes we both have "lives" - I'm just back on for a minute!).
Never can be sure about these things but it could be related to this. There have been plenty of instances in the past (& it is affecting a number of wikis).
I appreciate your help. Regards --Herby talk thyme 16:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, checks this picture


And put that is correct load.


I think that both files are correct, I marked the first one has reviewed so people can see that the image is from Flickr and is checked by a trusted user or a administrator.
The second image is a logo, I think that one is to simple for copyright so I changed the license in {{PD-ineligible}}.
But both files are correct uploaded on Commons, thank you for your uploads,
Huib talk 05:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Anyone who looks at the deletion log or your contribution list will soon notice that you never stopp working. Thank you and keep up the good work. MGA73 (talk) 16:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Yay! Thank you so much :D Huib talk 16:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
How does one concur :-)? SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Why file:Westminster sound.ogg deleted?

I am destroyed, because you have deleted this file. Why? Can you give me an explanation? Thanks.--Wikipit (talk) 09:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I deleted your file because it says:
source: Internet.
When you just take a picture of the internet it doesn't mean that its free enough, you can only use images like written on COM:L and if you want to use this file you should contact the owner and ask for permission to use it under a free license, otherwhise it will stay delete.
I'm sorry I cant help you any futher.
Huib talk 18:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


Thank you Abigor for administrating images on wikimedia. CC 3.0 by author of image email has been mailed by author. Please un-protect CorrinneYuGlasses.jpg CorrinneYu (talk)Corrinne Yu

Dear Corrinne Yu and dear Abigor, via OTRS I received the appropriate permissions. I replaced the images and made the arrangements to keep them. Thank you again for releasing the images. Best regards, m:Mark W (Mwpnl) ¦ talk 17:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your fast reaction Mark :) Huib talk 17:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Kapel in Zeeland.jpg

Beste Abigor. Volgens de auteurslink bij de foto Kapel in Zeeland ben jij de maker van deze foto. Zou je kunnen aangeven welke kapel is afgebeeld en in welke plaats deze kapel ligt? Met vriendelijke groet, Encyo (talk) 09:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

De foto is gemaakt in het dorpje Zeeland in niet in de provincie, als ik het helemaal correct heb staat deze kapel op de udenseweg in Zeeland ongeveer ter hoogte van nr 4. Maar het is al een poosje geleden dat ik er geweest bent.
Huib talk 18:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Dank. Ik heb je antwoord verwerkt in de beschrijving, o.a. op Kapel. Met vriendelijke groet, Encyo (talk) 09:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi there again! You wrote the category was protected till Sept 2, so how could this] happen? Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

A administrator can still edit protected pages and that is what happend. The file is still protected untill 2 Sept, but as I read it this change has been requested on the talkpage and there where no objections for it for two weeks, that makes it okay for a administrator to edit a protected page and I don't really see what I can do, but is it really a problem if the category is hidden? You could make a page and redirect that to the category so people can still find it. Huib talk 05:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The situation I mean is this: in a WP article or on Commons someone sees an interesting historical picture we have taken and submitted, such as a rare 14th century portrait bust or hard-to-find royal grave, and would like to check the "Ristesson History" category to see if there are more (and there are many more!). See what I mean? Sincerely, SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I think I know a work arround, when I have sometime I think I can fix the problem.
But first some rest, I'm a little bit sick.
Huib talk 07:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Get some rest! That's more important if you're not feeling well! SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I found some time to clean out the backlogs but almost forgotten this :(
I have made the page Ristesson History, when you go to the page you will come in the category, so when you search on Ristesson History you will end up there, and images or articles on other wiki's could be linked to that, so that it isn't hidden anymore.
Its also possible to make a link to this page on all files in a category by bot.
Would this work for you?
Huib talk 17:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Since no one would know to look for the Ristesson History page, because they never would have heard of it, I think we might need the bot would solve the problem. THANK YOU for these efforts! Sincerely SergeWoodzing (talk)
Before a bot can solve the problem there needs to be a solution. So what should be done? Add the text "For more images by Ristesson see Category:Ristesson History." In the source field at the end? Or should {{User:EmilEikS/Template:Southerly Clubs}} be added? The template could contain a link to the category. --MGA73 (talk) 21:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
That template is already on all the images. The problem is the RH category being hidden so that people can't cross-reference and cross-check through it with the ease of a non-hidden category. How to create something that will substitute for that is beyond my technical forté to advise anyone about :-(. I'm just sad it has to be (?) hidden. SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:04, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
You do know that "hidden categories" aren't hidden at all for most regular editors. You can change this in your preferences. Rocket000 (talk) 05:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
No I didn't, thanx. Looked at Preferences a bit but couldn't figure out how do do it. On the other hand: then why are they hidden at all to anyone? What's the advantage for the project? SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Preferences > Appearance. Then scroll down to the bottom section "Advanced options" and it's right in the middle. Usually categories are hidden for maintenance reasons. It's to present only the content-oriented ones to readers and everything else to us editors (if we wish so). You might get better idea by looking at what's all hidden on Wikipedia. BTW, even for those that do have the categories hidden from them, they will still see them in categories. For example, if you go to Category:Ristesson Ent you'll see the "hidden" category regardless of your settings. I don't know why that is. Rocket000 (talk) 09:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


Checks my new pick

Put that is correct load. Bye.

When I press the source link I see a different images, could you please fix the link so it directs to the correct image?
Best regards,
Huib talk 05:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


Dear Abigor, I uploaded a picture [4] ( for page [5]) and do not see the page. What's happening? Neither my albums do not see[6]. I was blocked? I've written and I demonstrated that the optical and pictures are mine. Please see what happens.--Tamasflex (talk) 10:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

When I check I can see all your images there. It could be that you checked when the toolserver had some problems, but those are fixed now.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I see it was a matter of time. -- 18:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem, you're welcome. Huib talk 18:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Photos 2

Dear Abigor,

Do not understand what the problem is with the pictures:

    * Image: Ref tel.png is Uncategorized since 27 June 2009.
    * Image: Uncategorized Refraktor.png is since 27 June 2009.
    * Image: Uncategorized Kepschem.png is since 27 June 2009.
    * Image: Uncategorized Dynameter1.png is since 28 June 2009.
    * Image: Uncategorized Kepschem2.jpg is since 1 July 2009.
    * Image: Uncategorized Lunettefr.png is since 7 July 2009.
    * Image: Schwarzschild.png was Uncategorized on 10 August 2009.
    * Image: Objektiv3.jpg was Uncategorized on 13 August 2009.
    * Image: LaborMik1.jpg was Uncategorized on 13 August 2009.
    * Image: Mechanika.jpg was Uncategorized on 13 August 2009.
    * Image: Opticalmicroscope.jpg was Uncategorized on 13 August 2009.

We categorized each. What wrong?--Tamasflex (talk) 10:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I checked two images from the list and both of them are in a category but the categories are placed there by the same bot that did send you the warning.
Its important to have all material in categories because we are close to 5.000.000 files and when there are images that cant be found in a category it would be useless and nobody would find it.
It is also possible that you give a category after the bot checked it, in that case you still get a warning.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


I could not really translate to anything but I understood. Pictures that are not categorized can categorize later? Also where can I look to fix the mistake but did not see. I hope you will not be deleted pictures Uncategorized.--Tamasflex (talk) 18:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Its not important to give them a category fast, just do it when you have enough time, we dont delete pictures because they dont have a cat :)
Best regards,
Huib talk 18:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Riceburners photos

Hi, could you delete all pictures by, they seems all to be copyvios? Typ932 (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the note, I checked it and it looks like Flickrwashing, it smells like Flickrwashing so I nuked all of them for Flickrwashing.
I will ask the bot owner to add the photostream to the blacklist.
Best regards,
Huib talk 17:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
For the record, I agree.[7] Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Closure of deletion requests

Could you please add the {{OTRS}} tag on these two images:

You closed the deletion requests without adding the OTRS ticket numbers, so someone may list them again for deletion. Sv1xv (talk) 06:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The OTRS is mentioned here COM:OTRS/N#OTRS_in_deletion_request. Sadly I do not speak Spanish so I can't tell excactly what it gives permission to. Hope it can help you a little (Huib is away for the moment). --MGA73 (talk) 10:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Tiptoety confirmed the permission, Abigor closed the deletion requests and Vriullop (OTRS agent) tagged the images as appropiate. Now that the article has been restored at eswiki and the images are correctly licensed, the rationale of the deletion requests are void and that's why I asked to close them. df|  10:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that some images were tagged with this OTRS. But the two images above were not tagged. If the permission is also valid for these two they should also be tagged. That was why I made this comment. --MGA73 (talk) 11:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I have contacted Vriullop to check the ticket again and tag the images left. Cheers, df|  14:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


Hoi Abigor cq. Huib,

Ik kon niet zo snel vinden waar ik het kon melden en gezien ik je van de Nederlandse Wiki ken, leg ik het maar even bij jou neer. Ik wilde even melden dat File:Joan Halifax o.jpg en File:Joan Halifax and the Dalai Lama.jpg identiek zijn. Een van de beide zou daarom kunnen verdwijnen.

Veel plezier hier met je nuttige werk hier op Commons. Groet, Davin7 (talk) 09:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

  •   Done - you can also use {{duplicate|File to keep}}.--MGA73 (talk) 10:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
    Thnx Davin7 (talk) 07:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hi, could you delete the images that have duplicated and renamed images like below. I finished up checking on whether they're used or not. They are all clear, so please delete the images on the first column (?) of the list. Thanks--Caspian blue 15:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

  Done, I (double)checked and deleted all the images in left first column of the list. Thanks! m:Mark W (Mwpnl) ¦ talk 16:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
No need to do such a special request: renamed images are tagged with a {{Bad name|new file name}} and get finally deleted some moment in time. --Foroa (talk) 16:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Ah, I did not know that Abigor is on a trip. Thank you, Mwpnl for taking the job of deleting the list. Also Foroa, thank you for the action in moving the many categories to appropriate places. With you guy's presence, Commons keep "safe" and clean". :) Thanks.--Caspian blue 13:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

FP promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:The Crypte.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Crypte.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.


Empty file (?)

Hi there! I have tried to correct the problem of the missing image here but have not succeeded. Can you figure out what's wrong? SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I took a look at it and noticed that the image page didn't had a extension (.jpg) was missing, that is something that would be impossible to solve by just uploading.
I have created the page on the right place with a good extension and redirected the old page to the new and good page, I guess that this solves all problems :)
Best regards,
Huib talk 09:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Great - thanx! SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

  The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I would like to thank you for your kind involvement in the situation I found myself in. I believe nothing could hurt as much as words could, and nothing could heal as much as words could. Your kind words were the best medicine for my wounds   Thank you!--2+2=4 (talk)
yay! thank you for the star, I felt honoured to help you out of your situation, I'm still here to Serve and Protect the content and the users on Wikimedia Commons :) Huib talk 16:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Abigor/Archives/2009/August".