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.

Contents

Please link 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 Aymatth2/Archive 1!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images uploaded to Commons should be useful to all users of Wikimedia projects. This is possible only if the images can be found by other people.

To allow others to find the images you uploaded here, the images should be in some place that can be found by navigating the category structure. This means that you should put the images into appropriate topic pages, categories, optionally galleries, or both of them (see Commons:Categories). To find good categories for your images, the CommonSense tool may help.

You can find a convenient overview of your uploaded files in this gallery.

The important point is that the images should be placed in the general structure somewhere. There are a large number of completely unsorted images on Commons right now. If you would like to help to place some of those images where they can be found, please do!

Thank you. BotMultichillT (talk) 05:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Eyo festival participants 2009.jpg

Critically evaluate Flickr licenses
File:Eyo festival participants 2009.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid. Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters. See Commons:Questionable Flickr images for a list of known bad Flickr users.

Deutsch | English | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | norsk | português | português do Brasil | slovenščina | svenska | русский | українська | +/−

LX (talk, contribs) 12:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Loading

Loading some good images too! Victuallers (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Portrait of Bernabe Araoz.jpg

 
File:Portrait of Bernabe Araoz.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)‎ | +/−

Ezarateesteban 20:43, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Pierre Bonnard 1896 poster for 23rd Salon des Cent exhibition.png

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Pierre Bonnard 1896 poster for 23rd Salon des Cent exhibition.png. 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 OTRS 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.

Jarekt (talk) 05:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Nice clean article2.jpg

 
File:Nice clean article2.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)‎ | +/−

Ww2censor (talk) 19:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. INeverCry 01:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Victorian beauty by Jules David.png

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | italiano | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | 日本語 | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | slovenščina | svenska | українська | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Victorian beauty by Jules David.png. 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 OTRS 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.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

File:Hawaiian lady.jpg

 
File:Hawaiian lady.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)‎ | +/−

Kelly (talk) 14:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

File:La Baionnette 2 December 1915.png

 
File:La Baionnette 2 December 1915.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please 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)‎ | +/−

— Racconish ☎ 14:47, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

You might be interested by this image. — Racconish ☎ 06:55, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Mucha post for XX Salon des Cent.png

 
File:Mucha post for XX Salon des Cent.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please 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)‎ | +/−

Jonund (talk) 10:17, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Central African Rifts.svg

Hello.

Can you add the borders of South Sudan and Eritrea in the File:Central African Rifts.svg you uploaded?

I am adding South Sudan (as well as Montenegro and other possible missing updates) in the PNG maps in Category:Maps needing South Sudan political boundaries and then remove this category after updating them. There were close to 1100 maps since I started to update these files, now it is reduced to less than 750 maps, but there is a long way to go.

Unfortunately I don't know how to edit SVG maps myself, that is why I asked you.

Thank you.

Maphobbyist (talk) 21:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

@Maphobbyist: I have added a very approximate boundary for Eritrea, but am struggling to fit in South Sudan under all the rift detail. There is a free SVG editor called Inkscape, but it takes a bit of experiment to make it work. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the update and information. Unfortunately I am totally "illiterate" when it comes to SVG files. Maphobbyist (talk) 23:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Bassin Tchad

Hello Aymatth2,

Thank you for these fantastic images. Just wondering if it is possible to have an isolated svg for the Tchad Bassin. Same as the one you made for the Iullemmeden bassin.

Thank you very much for your help.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hich91 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • There is a map of the river basin, File:Chad River Basin relief 2.png. I do not know of an online map of the Sedimentary Basin, which is slightly smaller. If there were one, I could use it as the basis for an svg. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Revista CRÓNICA 13-12-1931 Fermín Galán y A. Garcia Hernández fusilados.jpg

 
File:Revista CRÓNICA 13-12-1931 Fermín Galán y A. Garcia Hernández fusilados.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)‎ | +/−

strakhov (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

File:19270604 Le Figaro Supplément littéraire page 1 + copyright symbol.svg

 
File:19270604 Le Figaro Supplément littéraire page 1 + copyright symbol.svg 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)‎ | +/−

— Racconish💬 14:44, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

  Thanks for writing the excellent essay Commons:Collective work. Over time and with community comment this could be the foundation of a Commons guideline that everyone follows. Your proposal here would not be obvious to many people first encountering the problem you address but I think after reading this essay many people would find this advice to be a good idea. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:28, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Collective work at risk

Hi Aymatth2, I do not understand, what is going on here? Why should we think it has any copyrights whatsoever? Disquieting. Iñaki LL (talk) 21:06, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

  • This is just a warning. The newspaper is in the public domain since it was published in 1936, more than 70 years ago, but an individual contribution would not be public domain if its author was still alive 70 years ago, which is quite likely. The contribution could not be pulled out and published stand-alone without violating the author's copyright. The only attributed piece I see is a short notice from Ramón Sierra Bustamante (1898–1988), the civil governor, which may not be subject to copyright since it is an official communication (I do not know if that applies in Spain). But unattributed articles would be protected if the author was identified later. Aymatth2 (talk) 23:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Danzig Free State

I think in English it should be called Free City of Danzig. --jdx Re: 09:27, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

  • You are right. I will fix it. Aymatth2 (talk) 11:54, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright rules by territory/Germany

Hi, Aymatth2,

regarding your recent changes to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany, I would like to ask you to pay a bit more attention, particularly so because you seem to be doing a revamp of dozens of other Rules by Territory pages as well. I don't know if you have noticed my reverts (which is why I'm writing this). Last week, you claimed the regular term of protection is 50 years. That was wrong, and I fixed it. Then a few days ago, you added a statement saying that "the main IP law" of Germany currently is the 1907 Kunsturhebergesetz. That was also wrong. All of the copyright provisions went out of force in the 1960s when the Urheberrechtsgesetz went into force. Besides, "the main IP law" seems like a rather odd choice of terminology. Intellectual property law includes not only copyright but also patent law (Patent Act), design law (Designs Act), among others. These are not "lesser" IP laws.

I also noticed that you are adding to the country profiles the date of accession to the WIPO Convention. Why do you think this is relevant? The WIPO Convention is an administrative treaty that established the WIPO. It doesn't contain any copyright or related provisions. From my experience in the field of IP law, it is extremely rare somebody even mentions that convention (why would they?), and the treaty seems clearly irrelevant for any practical purpose here on Commons. On the other hand, the infobox does not make any mention of the date of accession to the 1996 WIPO treaties (WCT/WPPT) - which would be infinitely more valuable information as it may actually affect the interpretation of the law. (However, I doubt it makes much sense, from an effort/benefit perspective, to give these dates on Commons in the first place. The few users familiar with the international copyright system know where to find them.)

Best, — Pajz (talk) 10:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Pajz: Thank you for your feedback. I have been working in a bit of a vacuum, trying to consolidate information in country specific pages from scattered sources in Wikimedia Commons and from the WIPO Lex database, and appreciate advice from an informed contributor. See here for the discussion before I started this project. I do not pretend to be an expert on copyright laws, so am mostly relying on copy-and-paste.
  • WIPO is not as complete as I would like, but seems a good starting point, with some information for almost all countries. The WIPO Lex entry on Copyright and Related Rights for Germany is here. It is pedantically accurate to say "listed the [law] as the main IP law enacted by the legislature", since that is the heading used by WIPO.
  • Typically WIPO puts the base act for current copyright law at the foot of their list, often with consolidated amendments, and above that lists the amending acts and acts on other IP topics such as patents and collective management. With Germany, WIPO puts the Act of January 9, 1907 (as amended up to Act of February 16, 2001) at the foot of the list. I did not spot that further up they put the September 9, 1965 Copyright Act, as amended up to Act of September 1, 2017, which is obviously the one that applies. It is not clear why WIPO would have given the text of the 1907 act, since they usually only list acts that are still relevant, or why Germany would have been amending the 1907 act up to 2001 when it had been replaced by the 1965 act. I am glad you spotted the problem. I will add a pointer to the 1965 act as amended.
  • I have no idea where "50 years" came from. I usually try to be very careful, and that makes no sense. Hopefully there are not too many other errors.
  • Yes, WIPO treaty date would be much more relevant. I may take another pass through WIPO Lex and add it in.
  • Thank you again for the feedback. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Note on transclusion limitations

As you continue to move things to their respective base pages I just want to make you aware of an odd limitation with mediawiki that shouldn't become a problem but if it does at least I can make sure it is well know since it is something a lot of people never run into. Mediawiki actually has a hard limit on the number of things that can be transcluded onto one page and it is not based on the number of transclusions but on the size of said transclusions. These limits are also hidden so they aren't readily available unless you know where to look. You have to edit the entire page, preview the page while in editing mode, then scroll all the way down the very bottom where you'll see something titled "Parser profiling data". Within there is something that says "Post-expand include size". Right now COM:FOP is listed at 1,125,386/2,097,152 bytes. Looking at what you have left there I don't think you'll reach the limit but if you do transclusion will actually break. This can be seen on old DR listing pages that haven't been processed yet. For example after Commons:Deletion requests/2018/07#File:Aldo Mieli.jpg is just a bunch of #ifexist statements. Those show because the page has reached it transclusion limit and everything after that limit fails to render. Like I said, I don't believe you will hit this limit going off of what you have left to do on that specific page. But I don't know about any other pages you are planning on doing or if I'm just bad at guesstimating. So if that does happen and everything starts breaking this is why. --Majora (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllEurope

 
Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllEurope 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 project page, 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.

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)‎ | +/−

A.Savin 12:04, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllAfrica

 
Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllAfrica 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 project page, 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.

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)‎ | +/−

A.Savin 12:05, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllAmericas

 
Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllAmericas 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 project page, 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.

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)‎ | +/−

A.Savin 12:06, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllAsia

 
Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllAsia 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 project page, 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.

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)‎ | +/−

A.Savin 12:06, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllRules

 
Commons:Freedom of panorama/AllRules 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 project page, 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.

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)‎ | +/−

A.Savin 12:07, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Original Barnstar
for the overhaul of the the copyright rules by country. Yann (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Stamps

All the work you have done on the stamp details look good now that you have transcluded them from Commons:Stamps/Public domain to the individual country copyright pages. So, a couple of questions. How are those of us have an interest in the worldview of the stamp copyright to see if someone makes any changes that would need review for accuracy or just awareness? Any details that are unknown now, but are added won't appear on Commons:Stamps/Public domain unless the editor knows to transclude it. I'm not going to add every country copyright page to my watchlist just to watch postage stamp copyright details that I have been doing for over 12 years, unless you know a better way. Ww2censor (talk) 22:48, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: Now that all the information on copyright laws, durations, tags, stamps, currency, freedom of panorama etc. for a given country are consolidated on one page, it will be easier to ensure that the information is all consistent with that country's current copyright laws, and it will be easier for a contributor to find out if the image they want to upload is o.k. But it is less convenient for people who have a specialized interest in a particular aspect of copyright rules.
  • To the first point, check Commons:Stamps/Public domain/AllAfrica. This is a transcluded list of all sections with the title "Stamps" in any of the country-specific pages. If an editor adds a section for "Stamps" to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Algeria, it will show up on the list – they do not have to know how to transclude it, but do have to use the right title. It would be simple to replace the list in Commons:Stamps/Public domain with an automatic list of all countries, or to make a separate list of all countries. Should I do the first or the second? It would just take a few minutes.
  • To the second point, I do not have a good answer. If someone changes Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ethiopia#Stamps the change will show up for anyone watching the Ethiopia page, and will be reflected on the Commons:Stamps/Public domain page, but will not show as a watchlist change to the Commons:Stamps/Public domain page. Before, if someone changed Commons:Stamps/Public domain#Ethiopia a person watching the Ethiopia page would not see it. The underlying problem is that there is no way to watch a set of sections in a group of pages, e.g. all "Stamps" or all "Ethiopia" sections in [page list]. You do not want to see all the changes to the "Germany" page, and someone interested only in Germany does not want to see all the changes in the "Stamps" page.
I have just finished a fairly mechanical process of pulling together different types of information for each country. There are a lot of inconsistencies. The standard durations may come from the original 1997 Act, the currency duration comes from the 2010 revision, and WIPO says the 2015 Act has completely replaced the 1997 Act. To me the first priority is to bring all the country rule sets up to the same consistent level, and that can only be done if all the rules for each country are held in one place. I believe the new structure is on balance an improvement, but will think on about how to address your very real concern, and welcome suggestions. I will post it on the technical support pages – there just may be an easy solution. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:12, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I've been having a good think about the implementation you have done of all the country copyright pages and as I mentioned I have determined that patrolling each individual country copyright page would mean having them all on ones watchlist. What is more likely is that some editors, like me, have an interest in stamps or FoP and their copyright details, which I have been doing here for about 12 years, and maybe they have an interest a selection of countries. Freedom of panorama is another specialised interest. Errors have been made and modifications of various kinds must be reviewed, so these need to be watched and that will be virtually impossible without an additional approximately 200 pages to add to ones watchlist. While the individual country pages do look good, I think the implementation has been done in reverse. On the Stamps talk page you asked about which way the transclusion should be done and I did not see that there would be an issue except now that it has been done I see the issue. What you really need to do was transclude the Stamps and FoP country sections into the individual country pages and not the way you did. That way specialist watchers need only watch the Stamps or FOP page and whatever countries they are interested in, not 200 additional pages. I really feel that is much more practical and effective for real world editors then the new system you made and they still see the stamps and FoP details for individual countries. Editors can then patrol any changes to those topics. It may be quite a bit more work but I suggest reverting to roughly this edit for the Stamps page and transclude the entries from there. Think about it as it makes much more sense and the pages still retain all the same information.
This page Commons:Stamps/Public domain/AllAfrica does not offer a solution either make little sense until the Stamps or FoP pages get too long. Then they can be split into continent pages but only when absolutely necessary. Ww2censor (talk) 22:41, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ww2censor: I recognise your concern. Some points:
  • Before starting this large and tedious job of consolidating information into country-specific pages I opened up discussions on the topic pages, and left these discussions open for over a week. I received no objections, some support, and have generally had positive feedback over the result.
  • Simply reverting to the earlier topic-specific pages is not an option, since it would leave content duplicated on the country pages and the topic pages, and these versions would inevitably start to diverge. Already changes have been made to the rules on the country pages.
  • It would take another major job to transfer the content back to all the topic-specific pages and place transclusions on the country pages. This should only be started after gaining consensus at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or some other widely used forum.
  • I have opened the question of a technical solution to the watchlist problem at Commons:Help desk#Section watch, but so far have not got any workable suggestion. There may be one though. I would not want to undertake another huge job to switch all the content back to the topic pages and then find it was not needed.
  • The basic question, to me, is whether the rules for German freedom of panorama, for example, are more likely to be maintained by people interested in German rules or in freedom of panorama rules. If the laws or legal findings change, who is more likely to spot the change and to correctly interpret the implications?
Let's give the new structure a try for a few weeks, so people can get used to it, and then we can discuss further improvements. I would not rule out moving the country/topic sections from the country pages to the topic pages, but would not want to rush into it. Aymatth2 (talk) 23:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for reply so quickly. Don't get me wrong it all LOOKS good but that is not the issue. Yes it would be a quite lot of work to redo but perhaps no one really thought about the practicality until now I had to review and fe pages and even wanted to edit some stamp details so only then did I really see the problem and yes you did ask but that's not the point. I do not expect you to simply revert just the stamps and FoP pages but you obviously have to retransclude those details into the country pages to avoid duplication. I could help if you need but the longer it gets left I doubt anyone will have the will to do anything. Let's do it while it is fresh. Virtually there will be virtually no difference. Each individual country only need to be edited once to remove the details and replace with the transclusion. In response to your hypothetical German question, it does not matter which page they come to. If they arrive at the country page they will clearly see it is transcluded and make the appropriate edits on the main page. Then anyone watching the FoP page will see the edit but does have to also watch the German country page. Somewhere I seem to remember reading that having many tranclusions on one page put more demands on the servers to deliver the page but I don't know where I read that. Obviously transcluding from the topic pages means the country pages have a few trasnclusion while the current Stamps or FoP page have loads (I did not count them). Think about as i think it would be better to do sooner rather than later, and as I said I'd lend a hand. Ww2censor (talk) 00:18, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Ww2censor: The recent restructuring was discussed at length in various places, starting with the Village pump, over several weeks. It took a lot of work, starting with creation of individual pages for each country. A decision to make a further major change should not be rushed. We need to take the time to digest the effects of the new structure, good and bad, and then to discuss further improvements. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:05, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

To get a sense of the size of the problem, I did a rough analysis of the Commons:Stamps edit history, skipping my own edits. There have been 490 total edits since the page was created in February 2006 by Sebjarod. No changes were made between 30 May 2018 and 18 October 2018. Excluding users who only edited on one or two days, 24 users made 314 edits. Of these, five made edits in 2017 or 2018:

Last edit First edit User Total edits
21 February 2018 19 June 2016 Materialscientist 8
21 May 2018 12 August 2017 Gone Postal 33
13 November 2018 12 April 2012 Gestumblindi 6
31 October 2018 18 September 2007 Ww2censor 51
15 February 2017 22 July 2016 Oobmak 3

The new structure does not affect the ability of these editors to view or change Stamps information, but does make it harder for them to watch for changes to this information. On the other hand, it is now much easier for editors interested in the rules for a particular country to monitor and change information on all aspects of that country's rules. One possible solution, which may be useful on other wikis and other types of transclusion page, would involve a bot. It would

  • Take a copy of Commons:Stamps after transclusion and save it as Commons:Stamps/Rendered
  • Repeat every day, but only save to Commons:Stamps/Rendered if there has been a change

Users interested in monitoring changes would just have to watch Commons:Stamps/Rendered and check the diffs to this page. I will follow up with the techies to see how hard it would be to develop a bot like this. It is quite possible that something similar exists already. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:47, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Stamps: break

  • See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/El Salvador for an example of a correction to stamps information while updating the country information. Aymatth2 (talk) 23:24, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
    • That's exactly my point: if I want to see such edits to review or patrol those changes I have to watchlist every country. Anyway, I already did one like that. If your bot suggestion would work it might solve the issue but I'm unsure about that. Ww2censor (talk) 00:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The person interested only in reviewing or patroling changes to rules for El Salvador or Central America does not want to check all the changes to the Stamps, Currency, FOP, etc. pages. Other examples:
It is much easier when reviewing a new or amended law to make all the changes in one place, on the country's page. The changes will show on watchlists of people interested in that country. Perhaps we can find a way to make them also show on watchlists of people interested in specific topics. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
I still think you just don't get it. So let's look at your example: The person interested only in reviewing or patrolling changes to rules for El Salvador or Central America does not want to check all the changes to the Stamps, Currency, FOP, etc. pages maybe not, but they would only need to watchlist El Salvador and the topic pages, perhaps a total of 4 or 5 pages but the topic watchers have to watchlist every country page, making how many, about 200. Your example actually proves my point exactly. Ww2censor (talk) 17:17, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
We cannot please everyone unless the bot-type solution or some equivalent is practical. My sympathy is with the El Salvador user, perhaps a native of that country, contributor of many images of El Salvador, and the closest we have to an expert on the copyright laws of El Salvador. He should not have to check thousands of watchlist alerts on the topic pages, none of which concern El Salvador. He should be able to manage the rules for his country in one place. He will be the first line of defense for spotting vandalism or innocent errors with the rules for El Salvador. The topic expert can perhaps add more value by periodically scanning all the entries for their topic to ensure completeness and consistency in vocabulary and style. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

FoP links

Hi Aymatth2,
I reverted your edit because thousands of active links like these (and even these) turned dead. Sealle (talk) 21:02, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

@Sealle: Thanks - My mistake. I should have anticipated that. There is no urgency to get rid of this list, particularly when there is a deletion discussion about the per-continent lists that would replace it. Would you see a problem if the only links left were from archived pages? Aymatth2 (talk) 00:02, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Well, if I understood your question correctly, I’m pretty sure that links of the form COM:FOP#Australia will continue to be created on talkpages by virtue of habit. Beyond that, I find it convenient to compare the peculiarities of different countries’ legislation on the same page. Sealle (talk) 08:26, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
@Sealle: I can see value in comparing the countries, but the main COM:FOP is getting a bit big, at 1,332,639 bytes out of a maximum allowed 2,097,152 bytes. It will have to be broken up at some point. The five regional pages like COM:FOP/Africa are smaller, load faster, and also show countries that do not have FOP rules defined. At some point we should think about moving to them. Habits are hard to break. I can make shortcuts like COM:Australia#FOP and change all active links over to them. Maybe with time people will get used to them. Thoughts? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:17, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I suppose, this issue is worth discussing with the community at COM:VPP. Sealle (talk) 13:23, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I can start a discussion there. I will hold off for a couple of weeks though. The consolidation of rules on country-specific pages like COM:Australia is new, and other issues like the broken links to COM:FOP are bound to emerge. Best to see what they are first. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:36, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
@Sealle: I started a discussion at COM:VPP#Split up Freedom of Panorama country list. Before doing so I went through the obvious license templates and pointed them to the country-specific articles, looked at categories etc. But there are still huge numbers of links to entries in the COM:FOP country table. Comments welcome. Don't be polite. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

It's time to create a navigational template

First of all, thanks for all your hard work in splitting and researching all the copyright rules per territory, it's a great and noble endeavour. However when I'm on a page I cannot see any navigational templates at the bottom for navigating between countries, did you just forget about it or are you planning on creating one after you're done with all of the hard work in first creating these pages? Maybe listing all countries in one template would overpopulate it, you could split it per continent and then link to the other navigational templates with a "See also" tab, and maybe historical (extinct) territories could also have their own navigational template for places like the Free City of Danzig and Yugoslavia while they could also both be listed at Europe, but that Manchukuo would be listed at "extinct States and territories" and can still be included in the Asia template. Anyhow there are many ways to go about it. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Why did I not think of that? I actually made a template, {{Copyright rules by territory}}, very early in the process, but it did not occur to me to put it at the foot of all the country pages. I don't think it is too big: it can default to state collapsed. I will tidy it up, then go ahead and add it. Thanks - an excellent suggestion. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:10, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Done. Definitely an improvement. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I did notice that you had them in earlier drafts. Feel free to add improvements to them as you go, your restructuring is really making it easier to learn what copyright rules apply where. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:13, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
I made the template when we were just discussing moving everything to country-specific pages, and put it into COM:CRT and COM:FOP, but did not think to put it in the country pages. It helps pull them all together. Thanks for the suggestion and the feedback. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Scale bar on "Maps for Free"

Hallo Aymatth2,

how did you get in the File:Imatong Mountains.png the scale bar in? By hand or is there a function on Maps for free. Regards Peter in s (talk) 13:51, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

  • @Peter in s: that was 7 years ago! It looks to me as though I put it in by hand. I probably matched the map to Google Maps to get the scale and other locations, but that is just a guess. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. I just hoped there is an easier way. Peter in s (talk) 02:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Aymatth2/Archive 1".