Agora
Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
| |
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) |
Your latest nominations for deletion
editAgora, thanks for your maintenance work in Commons, but your latest nomination for deletion have a problem.
You have been nominated for deleteion files few minutes after being uploaded, leaving no time for users to edit the page and set the right permissions of the files, of which some clearly does not follow the threshold of originilaty and can be easily edited to change to the right permissions ({{PD-textlogo}} for trademarked logos, {{PD-ineligible}} because too generic or Freedom of Panorama, etc).
Also, you have leaved no valid reasons for the deletion requests (insufficient licensing or No license information).
So please be more careful and please research before nominating a file for deletion, and finally please leave a valid reason. Amitie 10g (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Amtitie 10g, I was not aware of the time the files were uploaded on commons but providing the necessary information is still up to the contributer. I don't see any problem with insufficient licensing as an (in)valid reason for deletion because files with no correct licensing information should be prohibited. Agora (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Gadget voor het taggen
editHoi Agora, voor bestanden zonder benodigde toestemming kun je {{subst:npd}} gebruiken, dan komen ze in een categorie die dagelijks wordt nagelopen en worden ze waarschijnlijk na een week verwijderd. Als je in je voorkeuren de gadget "Quick Delete" aanvinkt, krijg je linksonder een drietal knopjes (zoals "No permission") waarmee je vlug bestanden kunt 'taggen'. Laat het gerust weten als je vragen hebt. :) Met vriendelijke groet, Mathonius (talk) 21:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
|
File:Gezicht op Oostkanaalhaven.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.
|
—LX (talk, contribs) 14:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Question. [1], CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 [2]. Agora (talk) 08:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly. That's a non-free license. We don't allow content limited to non-commercial uses, and we don't allow content that cannot be modified. {{Cc-by-nc-nd 3.0}} is a redirect to a speedy deletion tag. You claimed that the file was licensed under {{Cc-by-3.0}}, which is not true. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
File tagging File:Loge De Korenaar.jpg
editThis media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Loge De Korenaar.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). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Loge De Korenaar.jpg]] ) and the above demanded information in your request. |
Martynnnn (talk) 10:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Dear Reader,
This is quite a surprise for a first experience adding content to WikiPedia. Im also the auther / creater of the image and text. I must say i'm a little bit irritated by the way content is deleted without communication... luckely i haven't run out of patience and i am willing to understand the reason, but its a poor way of dealing with helping hands. So how do we resolve this?
File:Jandebaan.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. |
Notification about possible deletion
editSome 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. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Natuur12 (talk) 13:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
File:Wim_Winters.jpg
editDear Agora,
I cannot understand why you have sent me a message that reads in part: "Thanks for uploading File:Wim Winters.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."
The text in File:Wim_Winters.jpg reads (again in part): "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license: This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license."
I uploaded the file on April 20, 2012, and at that time I affirmed that I was the creator and hence copyright holder of the file ("Own work") and used what was then the standard license, the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
However, to forestall any problems and especially to make sure the file is not deleted, I sent the following statement to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org:
"I hereby affirm that I, Polla ta deina, am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work (picture) File:Wim_Winters.jpg.
I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
[My real name], alias Polla ta deina
June 1, 2015
The type of license used in this statement is different than when I uploaded the file; feel free to consider either as valid.
Sincerely yours,
[My real name], alias Polla ta deina"
I would appreciate hearing from you what caused you to think that "This media is missing permission information" when both the phrase "Own work" and a named license to publish are mentioned.
Sincerely yours, Polla ta deina (talk)
- solved with {OTRS permission|2015060110016095}} - Agora (talk) 11:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Paul Meijer
editMy own picture that is on Wikipedia for months and now you say that it has to be deleted and that it is not from me! I mean WTF. Please remove that warning and let it stay, it is my picture and i give it away for using it. It is not nice to claim that i need a permission from an author when i am the autor! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JordySchaap (talk • contribs) 23:04, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Paul Meijer
editThis file is my own work and i am the owner. I don't understand why Agora want it to delete. This user (Agora) has something against me by wanting to delete all the pages that i have written, delete context i am adding and now questing if this is someone's other work. This is my picture and i agree that everyone can use it. This picture is very old and not new, so i want the claim for deleting removed. Thanks - JordySchaap — Preceding unsigned comment added by JordySchaap (talk • contribs) 23:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Bord Grafwegen.jpg
editThis media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Bord Grafwegen.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
And also:
Yours sincerely, JuTa 06:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
De rechten mbt de foto van Laurens van Rooijen.
editEen goedemorgen, Agora,
ja, de fotograaf stemt volledig in met de eisen van Wikipedia. Dat heb ik in een (rommelige) e-mail.
Denkt u dat zo'n e-mail volstaat? Of moet het formeler?
Het is zo'n e-mail van antwoord en doorsturen etc. In de mail leg ik hem de twee cruciale citaten voor, waarin ge-explicteerd wordt dat de fotograaf akkoord is met het feit dat het gebruikers toegestaan is de afbeelding te gebruiken, te kopiëren, aan te passen of te verkopen.
De fotograaf bevestigt dat hij afziet van enig recht. In een eerdere mail meldt hij dat hij naamsvermelding op prijs stelt.
Met vriendelijke groet
Michiel — Preceding unsigned comment added by MountainR (talk • contribs) 09:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Daarvoor kunt u de procedure op Commons:OTRS/nl volgen. Ik weet, het is wat lastig, maar met auteursrechten wordt zorgvuldig omgesprongen. mvg Agora (talk) 09:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- OK, dank voor de info, ik ga er mee aan de slag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MountainR (talk • contribs) 11:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Files Stichting Sleepboothaven Maassluis
editBeste Agora, Wat is de reden dat je de File:Stichting Sleepoothaven Maassluis met Elbe, Tonijn en Maassluisje.jpg en File:Havenkom Maassluis Stichting Sleepboothaven Maassluis.jpg hebt verwijderd? --Mauricevv (talk) 09:25, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Ik heb niets verwijderd, ze enkel daarvoor genomineerd. De reden was auteursrechtenschending aangezien het aantoonbaar afbeeldingen van elders zijn en er geen vrijgave was maar een niet afdoende licentie was opgegeven. mvg - Agora (talk) 10:20, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Het is vrij normaal dat foto's en afbeeldingen om meer plekken getoond worden. Ik ben de maker en eigenaar van deze foto's. Moet ik ze nu opnieuw uploaden? En heb je tips hoe ik kan voorkomen dat ze weer worden verwijderd? --Mauricevv (talk) 10:35, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Je kan ze vrij (laten) geven via Commons:OTRS/nl of zorgen dat op de 'vindplaats' een licentie staat waaruit overgenomen kan worden [3] (oid). Bij het uploaden dient de licentie daarmee in overeenstemming te zijn. Ik weet dat het vaak wat geforceerd overkomt bij eigen werk, of rechthebbende van, maar juist met auteursrechten wordt hier streng mee om gegaan en dienen dit soort zaken ook goed geregeld te zijn. mvg - Agora (talk) 10:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Het is vrij normaal dat foto's en afbeeldingen om meer plekken getoond worden. Ik ben de maker en eigenaar van deze foto's. Moet ik ze nu opnieuw uploaden? En heb je tips hoe ik kan voorkomen dat ze weer worden verwijderd? --Mauricevv (talk) 10:35, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
De rechten mbt de foto van Egbert-Jan Weeber.
editDag Agora, onlangs is er een foto van Egbert-Jan Weeber gemaakt door Greetje Mulder van zijn wikipagina afgehaald. De foto is echter rechtenvrij. Wat moet er gebeuren om die foto alsnog erop te krijgen? Moet de fotograaf een verklaring mailen en waar moet die verklaring naartoe? Greetje Mulder kan namelijk niet inloggen, maar kan de verklaring wel naar mij mailen. Eerlijk gezegd vind ik het nogal een ongebruiksvriendelijke procedure. Wellicht dat jij het simpel kan uitleggen. Dank alvast! Groet Martijn Jas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasman1966 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Die foto stond ook op IMDB [4] waar duidelijk de copyright bij aangegeven stond. Die hierheen overzetten, en ook niet de juiste licentie invullen daarbij was een duidelijke schending die zsm verwijderd werd. Uiteraard kan de fotograaf haar werk vrijgeven, ook indirect via u. De procedure daarvoor staat op Commons:OTRS/nl. mvg - Agora (talk) 12:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
help me
editcopyriht by mehdi rajabian instagram. Please help me, improve this article. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mehdi.Rajabian.Musician_composer_iranian_barg.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anoosh.da (talk • contribs) 07:10, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Anoosh.da
Beste Agora,
Excuses voor het breken van de auteursrechten. Ik heb net een email naar het OTRS-team gestuurd met de toestemming van https://www.haveverwarming.nl/ om de foto's te mogen gebruiken. Veder heb ik bij de foto's niet de code {{OTRS pending} gebruiken om te laten zien dat de foto in behandeling is, Kan ik dit oplossen? Als er nog meer problemen zijn met de foto's hoor ik het graag!
met vriendelijke groet,
Marc B — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbossenbroek (talk • contribs) 09:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Mireya Derksen.jpg - why marked for deletion?
editIf I publish a photo which is my own, and it cannot be seen or found anywhere else, how would you conclude it's possible copyright violation? What investigation did you do to come to this conclusion? Kind regards, JayDee2014 (talk) 21:13, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
- Uploaders name is not copyrightholder, permission unclear. But that should not be a difficult problem to fix; Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mireya Derksen.jpg. Not a speedy deletion, but still the license rights must be clear. - Agora (talk) 13:28, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
File:DieTimFoto.jpg
editI AM the owner of the image and i'm uploading it with my OWN permission.. User:Luxurylifenl
- Then there will be no problem sending the permission as stated in the template, Agora (talk) 17:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Jeangu Macrooy
editHi there. The photo used is the official press photo of Jeangu Macrooy as used on his website. This photo is free to be used for non commercial purposes. Panoramabar (talk) 20:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, the problem is the license as one work. The picture is obviously taken from his own site. Agora (talk) 20:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Foto BorzoGallery
editHi Agora, kennelijk voldoet mijn afbeelding niet aan de criteria. De foto is eigendom van BorzoGallery en zij geven toestemming voor het gebruik ervan. Geen idee hoe ik dit op kan lossen. Basdeb (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Marked for deletion: foto Roald van Elswijk
editBeste Agora, ik zie dat u mijn foto gemarkeerd heeft voor deletion. Ik ben zelf de persoon in de foto en heb de foto zelf gemaakt. Ik gebruik 'm verder alleen op mijn eigen website, hetverbindingsteken.nl. De foto is, lijkt mij, copyrightvrij. Wat is nu het probleem en hoe kan ik dit oplossen? Ik vind het wat vreemd dat een door mijzelf gemaakt foto gemarkeerd wordt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strákurinn (talk • contribs)
- Beste Strákurinn, aan een gebruiksnaam en een claim 'eigen werk' kan men natuurlijk niet ruiken dat het ook daadwerkelijk om een eigen foto gaat waar u ook de rechten van hebt. Zeker als de foto ook elders voorkomt, is al snel de vraag of het geen autersrechtenschending is, daar is men hier vrij steng in. U kunt dat aantonen via Commons:OTRS, zie ook het sjabloon op uw gebruikspagina. mvg - Agora (talk) 19:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
File:Cristel_van_de_Ven
edit@Agora, I have the same problem. You marked https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cristel_van_de_Ven.jpg for deletion shortly after it was published. The photographer has been credited. The site where you found the duplicate (https://ibo.nl/docent/drs-christel-van-de-ven/) also uses this photo, as do other websites, all with the permission of the photographer. The photographer has yet to complete the Commons licensing form for this picture. You can rest assured we will complete the information, because we are not about to sell anyone short. Please remove the nomination, or tell me how to proceed to prevent deletion before we can complete the info as we want to. I am a newb and very much open to your suggestions Ideeënbus (talk) 16:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- The license should be correct before uploading, not afterwards. But feel free to try again with proper licensing. - Agora (talk) 13:33, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
File:De Nijmeegse Stadskrant.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. |