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.


March - April 2016

Contents

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Camargue cattle, Saint-Gilles 07.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Erfgoedkmwimpel.jpg

Dear Christian Ferrer, please restore File:Erfgoedkmwimpel.jpg. OTRS ticket:2016022910013461 confirms the identity of the author. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 09:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Thank you, Taketa (talk) 17:12, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Camargue cattle, Saint-Gilles 08.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Camargue cattle, Saint-Gilles 09.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Your warning

Hello

Thanks for your warning. As you mentioned User:Natuur12 does not wish to discuss her closure anymore.

I am therefore bring it to your kind attention (since you are also a Commons administrator) that the image in question is not a "Free Cultural Work" as defined in the WMF Resolution from [1].

To satisfy the definition,

These are the additional conditions in order for a work to be considered free:
Availability of source data: Where a final work has been obtained through the compilation or processing of a source file or multiple source files, all underlying source data should be available alongside the work itself under the same conditions. This can be the score of a musical composition, the models used in a 3D scene, the data of a scientific publication, the source code of a computer application, or any other such information.

Now that Mr. Odder has released the EXIF data, it is very clear that the source RAW files are not in public domain, or with the uploader.

Therefore kindly arrange that the source files from where these images were pirated are also released under the same terms simultaneously,ie. if this image is to be kept.

As another administrator has also noted, a substantial amount of COPYRIGHTED TEXT contained in the EXIF was also distributed under a PD licence after 2 community DRs. 04:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohsinpathania (talk • contribs) 05:36, 7 March 2016‎ (UTC)
  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
  • Be sure I am not for or against the deletion of this image. I also have great respect for the people who are standing up alone against the consensus when they think that consensus is wrong, and sometimes this very well can be true. However he made it clear he did not want to discuss this, you can not harass someone until he agrees with you. I myself sometimes disagree with consensus or with some of my colleague administrator's decisions however I di not harass nobody until they do agree with me. To have a consensus you can try Commons:Village pump or Commons:Village pump/Copyright if you want. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:49, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Canal du Rhône à Sète, Saint-Gilles 02.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gardian and Camargue cattles, Saint-Gilles 02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:14, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Canal du Rhône à Sète, Saint-Gilles 04.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Canal and field in Saint-Gilles 01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gardian and Camargue cattles, Saint-Gilles 06.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

deletion of files

Hi Christian Ferrer it appears that certain files were by mistake deleted.

I've contacted the author of the images before the they were uploaded and I received a reply by email detailing copyright information.

Here's what was said by the author in an email that was received in reply to the request of copyright information on the screenshots of projects.

"These screenshots are in Public Domain, Feel free to do with them what you would like."

The uploads were made in good faith based on what the author said in reply to an email requesting copyright information.

The author in question is a user on SourceForge.net known as "orbitalsatelite" https://sourceforge.net/u/orbitalsatelite/profile/

I would believe that no copyright violation has occurred based on what the author of the software has said by email.

FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Hi, when you upload files from the web, you must put links to the sources where you found the images, instead of "own work". I restored two files, but for File:HOIC INTERFACE.png I see no clear license at source [2]. And for File:LOWC v.1.png I don't find the source. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The LOWC was screenshot was found here https://sourceforge.net/projects/lowc/ released under GPLv3 if I remember correctly.

I've asked the author to fix the license issue on High Orbit Ion Cannon. currently waiting for a reply. Hope this helps. FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I've received a reply and the license is currently stated on the web page.[3] FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 21:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gardian and Camargue cattles, Saint-Gilles 09.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Canal du Rhône à Sète, Saint-Gilles 03.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gardian and Camargue cattles, Saint-Gilles 08.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gardian and Camargue cattles, Saint-Gilles 07.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Gardian and Camargue cattles, Saint-Gilles 11.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Tomas drohobycki

Please close second part of request. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Phalacrocorax fuscescens in flight 1 - SE Tasmania.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Phalacrocorax fuscescens in flight 1 - SE Tasmania.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:08, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Gornergrat in Wallis, Switzerland, 2012 August.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gornergrat in Wallis, Switzerland, 2012 August.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination Notification

Hi Christian Ferrer/Archive18

You were previously nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandise@wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! Jseddon (WMF) (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

DR

Hi, Christian. I reviewed this DR and I was inclined to close this before completing the seven days. In my opinion, it is a clearly copyright violation. However, I would like to know your opinion. Regards. Érico (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

  • @Érico: Hi, much more than the half are also already tagged for speedy deletion. And some others will likely be soon tagged for speedy as well. I think you can delete all and close the DR. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:29, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Done!   Érico (talk) 19:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Copyvio logo tagging

Hi Christian Ferrer,

Could you explain why you believe File:Union San Carlos.png, File:Tocornal.png, and File:Stalingrado Union.png meet the threshold of originality? They seem to be just basic shapes and text. I just want to make sure I have not been passing over logos that should have been tagged as copyvios. Thanks! --Majora (talk) 04:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

  • @Majora: Hi, I will lie by saying I did not think the same as you. Unfortunately I saw this three logos after to have performed batch task. There was so many logos, I tried to keep the more simple, sadly the extra colored borders of those three ones, made them seem complicated among the others. And at this time I did not see that they was so simple. I deleted all the others myself, and for those three ones, by opening the files to delete them, I saw they was no so complex. Then, being not sure, I chose to let another administrator decide...Do you think they deserve to be undelete? Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
    I guess it is better to air on the side of caution with copyright issues. No, I don't think they should be undeleted. If the person who uploaded them wants to make a case for them they can post an undeletion request. My reason for asking was that I primarily tag copyvios and I just wanted to get some insight on your thought process. That way I can adjust my tagging in the future. Thank you for the explanation. It is appreciated. --Majora (talk) 05:56, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
  • @Majora:I must add they are unidentified and unused, and if an extra border is not sufficient to warrant a copyright in the USA, there is not evidences they indeed come from the USA. Some countries have much lower TOO. Without more accurate descriptions and categorizations, as the title is not enough to determine the country of origin, we can't really know if they are protected or not. Then PCP must apply IMO. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:57, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

File:LDWA Logo.jpg

Sorry to bother you, but a file that I tagged as missing permission (File:LDWA Logo.jpg) and you subsequently deleted apparently now has permission via OTRS (see this thread on my user talk page, or here after it has been archived). Would it be possible for you to restore this file? If not, is there a particular administrator that you recommend I speak to about this?

Sorry for the hassle, and thanks for all your hard work on Commons! Michael Barera (talk) 17:56, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

deletion

Hello Christian Ferrer, you have deleted a whole load of files that I was given specific permission by the copyright owner to put on Wikimedia.

After I did so, I was asked by another member of Wikimedia admin to provide evidence of the copyright ownership to whoever deals with permissions at wikimedia.

I said I would do this. In the mean time, I requested the files not to be deleted until the guys at permissions had assessed the images and the email giving permission to use them. Instead of hearing back from permissions, I woke up this morning to find you have already deleted the files.

This raises several questions:

1) Are you the person who is handling the ticket I have in action with Wikimedia permissions?

2) If you are, why did you not contact me and let me know what criteria I need to meet to get these pictures accepted.

3) If you are not, why did you ignore the note I put on the file that this was being dealt with at permissions?

I admit I find this whole process very time consuming and arcane. I have been given permission by the copyright owner to put them up here, but don't understand how to communicate that to you, or what you need to see as evidence. Deletion without explanation or notification is troubling and extremely frustrating and moves me no further forward. WHAT DO I NEED TO DO TO MEET YOUR CRITERIA? I am doing this to help out the copyright owner, and I need your help in getting this done with the least amount of time taken for any of us.

Your guidance would be very much appreciated so that I'm not left flailing around in the dark.

Thank you.

User: MattWingett.

  • Hello Matt, there is no problem, if compliant permissions were indeed mailed then the files will be undeleted as soon as mails will be reviewed by volunteers. There is work waiting and it may take some time before messages are examined. Pending these permissions, simple messages to the talk pages were not sufficient, and the publications of the images a copyright violation. And not need to score uppercase. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Bandeau petittion

Je t'ai "emprunté" ton bandeau pour le mettre sur ma page et j'ai signé aussi... --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Copyright Warning

Hello Christian Ferrer,

I was not aware there was a seperate Wikimedia website from the Wikipedia website for a long time and thus did not see the copyright issues until a few days ago. I am still new to the Wikipedia editing process and was unfamiliar with the methods to add images. I have added most of the images again using the proper methods I believe. Is this right?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Washtimesfrontpg.jpg

Can you delete all the other images I uploaded? I do not know how to do that. How do I address the warnings on my page?

Regards, Marquis de Faux

  • Hello Marquis de Faux, I'm not a specialist of fair use practice in Wikidedia but I think https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Washtimesfrontpg.jpg if fine, although an administrator of Wikipedia would be a better partner to this topic. Regarding your other uploads, they seems to be logos below the Threshold of originality then acceptable for us. However, the sources should not be "own work" but links to your sources. And {{PD-textlogo}} should be added to the licensing section.
  • The only issue is the photo of Walter E. Williams, which seems to come from the internet and it will likely deleted soon, as I tagged it as copyvio.
  • For the warnings on your talk page, do nothing, especially does not erase them. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:52, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Is it copyright for me to upload a screenshot I took of a website? I took the screenshot, but it got deleted.

  • Most of the content that can be found on websites is protected by copyright, and is not free until there is an evidence of free licensing made by the copyright owners of the website. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:44, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Église Saint-Félix de Lézignan-Corbières, cf03.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Signature

Hi Christian, you forgot to sign here. Greetings --Code (talk) 06:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Rajesultanpur

I see that you left a warning about copyright violations on Rajesultanpur's talk page. I have just tagged and notified Rajesultanpur of 11 more copyright violations (one other image happened to be able to fit under PD-textlogo, but that was just luck). I figured I would let you know, since I presume you have had more experience with Rajesultanpur. Elisfkc (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Thanks you for to have reported, although his talk page is in my watch list and I have seen anyway. Uploads deleted and user blocked one week. These are Indian logos and India, as UK, has a low threshold of originality. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Essay question

Hi, Chris - does Commons accommodate essays like what we have on en.Wikipedia? I think there's a need for an essay on underwater photography. I reviewed some of the underwater images that were promoted to FA, and in light of some of the comments for opposing quality images while promoting lesser quality images, there appears to be a need for it. Atsme 📞 16:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

  • @Atsme: Hi, in underwater photography there are of course specific constraints that cause changes on the final picture. We have Commons:Image guidelines, maybe underwater photography can be a section in this page. Any changes must of course go through the discussion page. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:39, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Église Saint-Félix de Lézignan-Corbières, cf05.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Christian cross near Saint-Thibéry cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Re:Dont remove speedy

What are the affected files for my Speedy removals? If you're reffering to Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2016-03#Multiple_Government_House_of_Thailand_photos, the reason is very clear (vandalism, even from the original uploader who attemps to get rid his photos already released into the PD). --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)



Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Pinus halepensis cone, Vic-la-Gardiole cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Salagou Lake, Liausson 17.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Ayshe (ship, 1999), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Santa Maria Manuela (ship, 1937), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2016 (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:
Ayshe (ship, 1999).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Stella Polare (ship, 1965), Sète cf01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Santa Maria Manuela (ship, 1937), Sète cf01 cropped.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Maguelone Cathedral, entrance 01 .jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Maguelone Cathedral, entrance 01 .jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Dar Młodzieży (ship, 1982), Sète cf01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Voiliers au Quai Général Durand, Sète cf01 .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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Vieux Crabe (ship, 1951), Sète cf01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Le Don du Vent et La Grace, Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:28, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

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

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Le Don du Vent et La Grace, Sète cf01 BW.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! La Grace (ship, 2010), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Nao Victoria (ship, 1992), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:18, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Imagem descritiva para o artigo Processo de Impeachment de Michel Temer

Alguém por favor reverta isto para que o artigo possa ter de volta a sua imagem. Não consigo utilizar a imagem de maneira correta para que ela permaneça hospedada aqui. O site da imagem é este [4] e não sei qual licença, permissão e autor devo atribuir a ela.

Pedro Jorge Nunes da Costa (talk) 14:28, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Sadly I don't speak Portuguese and also you did not quote the file that is affected. However, the link above lead to a website with a clear copyright notice "Copyright © 2009-2015 Esmael Morais. Todos os direitos reservados.", so you can not upload an image coming from there without a permission via OTRS from the copyright owner of the image. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf03.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey Christian

Hey Christian, I got you message about copyright images. I own all of these pictures which is why i checked the box for, "I own the rights to these images." How can I make them available to the public domain?..

Translation request

Hello Christian! Could you please translate this watchlist notice to fr?

| en = '''Patrollers''': Please help in reducing the backlog of unpatrolled edits. You can do this by [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&hidepatrolled=1 using this link]. There is currently {{Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit/nrraw}} unpatrolled edits (last updated {{REVISIONMONTH: Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit/nrraw}}-{{REVISIONDAY2: Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit/nrraw}}-{{REVISIONYEAR: Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit}}). Thank you! Tip: To patrol more easier and faster, use [[User:Krinkle/Tools/Real-Time Recent Changes|RTRC]].

Thank you for your time! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

| fr = '''Patrouilleurs''': S'il vous plaît, aidez à réduire l'arriéré des modifications non vérifiées. Vous pouvez faire cela en [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&hidepatrolled=1 utilisant ce lien]. Il y a en ce moment {{Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit/nrraw}} modifications non vérifiées (dernière mise à jour {{REVISIONMONTH: Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit/nrraw}}-{{REVISIONDAY2: Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit/nrraw}}-{{REVISIONYEAR: Commons:Counter Vandalism Unit}}). Merci! Astuce: Pour patrouiller plus facilement et plus rapidement, utilisez [[User:Krinkle/Tools/Real-Time Recent Changes|RTRC]].
Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:51, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

  Added Thanks for your fast response!   --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Vieux Crabe (ship, 1951), Sète cf02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Honey bee portrait (5454333517).jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Honey bee portrait (5454333517).jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Le Don du Vent (ship, 1940), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

File:ROSE.2003.USA.16MM.SHORTCUT.MONICA DEMES.jpg

Hi, Christian. I notice that when you deleted this file, you wrote "and also user is not Monica Demes". I now have an OTRS ticket from someone representing Ms Demes who claims to be empowered to license the file (and the other ones the user uploaded) CC-BY-SA. Are you certain that User:Demes Monica is not Monica Demes? Thanks! --Rrburke (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Hi Rrburke, no I'm not certain User:Demes Monica is not Monica Demes. I deleted it but I did not write the rationale, it was tagged for speedy deletion by someone else. When the rationale does not include a link to prove an obvious copyvio I usualy search with google search image. I did not remember exactly this file but if I deleted it, it is likely because I searched and found a previous publication or an evidence of previous publication, then I considered it as not an own work, it is why I did not change the rationale which also includes "user misunderstood what 'own work' means". Is there an evidence that the person who send the OTRS permission have the right to freely license the image? is it the copyright owner? Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Christian Ferrer:: yes, the permission is sent from a domain which would have the authority to license the images. --Rrburke (talk) 16:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
  • @Rrburke: I restored the files, please add the OTRS ticket to the file pages as I have not OTRS access and I can't do it myself. Thanks, Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:02, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Quai Général Durand, Escale à Sète 2016 cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Quai Général Durand, Escale à Sète 2016 cf02.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The masts of the Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! La Grace (ship, 2010), Sète cf02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


Hello. First off

-> Hello. First off, I don't know if this is your talk page or not so I'm sorry if it isn't. But I have a major question. How come the images that I am uploading are copyright when other people upload images from the same places and they aren't getting notified. All I'm trying to do is get some images for my first post and I'm very confused on what is considered not copyright when you get images from online. I'm sorry for breaking copyright things but I just don't understand why this is copyright when other people upload images the same way on the same place for their other articles and it's not copyright for them. Thats all and thanks for notifying me. Also, wheres a place where I can get images where none of them are copyright? Thanks. Jonesrmj (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)jonesrmj <-

  • Hello, firstly I am sorry if I misled you by overloading my talk page, yes it's indeed my talk page. Your uploads are copyright violations because the images were previously published without a free license. If you are a photographer and took yourself a photo, that's mean you're the copyright owner and then you can decide to upload your photo with the compatible license of your choice. If you upload a photo taken from internet taken by another photographer, the source of the photo must have a clear notice showing a compatible license. E.g. "© 2016 All right reserved" at the bottom of a page on internet will usually not be ok. At the opposite a web page with "All the content is under CC BY-SA 4.0" will be ok. We can not decide if a photo is free or not, only the copyright owner can do that. In summary your source must have a clear free license or the copyright owner must send an explicit permission via com:OTRS
    A lot of copyright violations are uploaded on Wikimedia Commons every days and it is indeed possible that some uploaders aren't yet getting notified, we erase these images, copyright violations, as soon as we saw them.
    Sadly, most of my uploads are photos taken by me and I don't know very much the free sources on internet. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:05, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Alright. That makes things a little better to understand. I am planning to take pictures of these buildings and I even have a drone so I could get aerial pictures. I apologize for uploading a lot of copyright pictures without realizing it and I'll try to really make sure if something is copyright before uploading something. Thanks! :) Jonesrmj (talk) 13:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)jonesrmj

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Vrouwe Antje (ship, 1902), Sète cf02.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Mast of the Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Other lifeforms

The gallery was created per request/statement of problem at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Red alga Ceramium tenuicorne.jpg - It's probably not going to be a hugely populated category for a bit, but it's necessary. One can hope that one passes, otherwise it might be a bit. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:59, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Spanish flag on the Nao Victoria ship cf01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Nao Victoria (ship, 1992), Sète cf02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:PokemonJA8956.JPG

Hello, have you consulted Ellin before overturning their close? I don't like admins overturning other admins' decisions without discussing. It looks like to me that your new "close" is a supervote. Thanks, Poké95 03:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Hello, of what you like or don't like is currently not one of my biggest concern, nor I consider this as a major part of my responsibility or liability. I have not read anywhere that administors should have such "I like" approval coming from you. You have too high an opinion of yourself, or maybe you made a grammatical error above.
    The rationale for the DR was "DW" and my rationale to close this DR was "per nomination, drawings are not DM". If one compares this case to copyright rules by territory, e.g. a FoP that don't allow reproduction of 2D work, never a drawing of this size on the image will be considered as DM if it was on a building façade. I'm wonder what magic touch or what legal law now exempts this artistic fresco, whatever it represents Pokemon or other, from legal protection just because it is on a vehicule. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi everybody: I have no problem with this close. I had closed it the other way because I saw nothing new from the prior DN's. But I'm not upset about it and since Christian has more information and can close it as deleted, I don't have a problem with that. I have the greatest respect for Christian's work on Commons. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Chemins du Vent (ship, 1948), Sète cf01.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.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Vrouwe Antje (ship, 1902), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:35, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Shtandart (ship, 1999), Sète cf02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Nao Victoria (ship, 1992), Sète cf04.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Le Don du Vent (ship, 1940), Sète cf02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Lido de Thau, Sète, Hérault 14.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lido de Thau, Sète, Hérault 14.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Marité (ship, 1923) and other ships, Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! The masts of the Marité (ship, 1923), Sète cf01.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Nao Victoria (ship, 1992), Sète cf04.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Nao Victoria (ship, 1992), Sète cf04.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Rhapsody (ship, 1996), Sète cf01.jpg

Bonjour Anthony, il me semble que tu m'avais parlé du Napoléon Bonaparte, ça y est, j'ai pris une photo lors d'une de ces escales. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Bonsoir,
Merci beaucoup de t’en être souvenu et de me l’avoir signalé   Je mettrais la page à jour lorsque mes examens seront finis.
Encore merci et bonne soirée. --Lev. Anthony (talk) 21:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Marité (ship, 1923), Sète cf02.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.

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Christian Ferrer/Archive18".