Open main menu
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, EChastain!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 19:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Contents

Commons:Categories and please avoid "over-categorization"Edit

Hi, some categories have been tagged as {categorize}, therefore p.e. that edit has been fixed. Please also check Commons:categories and avoid so-called "over-categorization", among them categories of countries, cities etc. Best regards, Roland zh (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Ooty golf course.jpgEdit

 
File:Ooty golf course.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 | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | 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)‎ | +/−

Diannaa (talk) 01:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

File tagging File:Aniceto Lacson.gifEdit

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Aniceto Lacson.gif. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:59, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I don't know any more. It was cleared for transfer on en:wiki. That's all I know.

Nevermind, I figured it out. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Boundary_markers_in_BritainEdit

Oxyman (talk) 14:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


Category:Hasbala LakeEdit

117Avenue (talk) 22:21, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Village of Kesternich Map - 1944.jpgEdit

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Village of Kesternich Map - 1944.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Diannaa (talk) 23:46, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

  • It was on en:wiki marked as approved for transfer to the Commons. That's all I know. EChastain (talk) 01:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Boundary_markers_of_ScotlandEdit

Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding “keys“, they’re used to change the sorting order displayed in galleries and lists. The two main purposes are: to skip to the ‘meat’ of the topic, passing over forenames, introductory phrases echoing the parent category’s name, &c.; and to force ‘special‘ or index categories to the top with leading spaces or punctuation. In this case the initial space makes the cat appear near the beginning of the list, then under S among other entries also starting that way.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:01, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Mayan_artefactsEdit

Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Mayan_masksEdit

Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if I seem to be picking on you, but I‘ve been doing a little work on uncategorized cats and came across these in succession … the above questions aside, please make sure to identify at least one parent when creating categories. Even if it’s not an ideal location, a general topic area will allow the cat to be found and placed appropriately by users who are most familiar with the structure of the tree(s) concerned.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:36, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Inside view of 1-vault UDDT under construction (8101765467).jpgEdit

Hello, This file doesn't belong to the category "Bolivia". Maybe the picture was taken in this country, but what appears in the picture is not an iconic figure of Bolivia. The country is mentioned in the description and that's fine enough. Thanks, Ldorfman (talk) 15:39, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Ldorfman, sorry for that! I was misled by the Flickr tags. Good that you fixed it. Thanks, EChastain (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
  OK. Fine. Ldorfman (talk) 19:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Actually, Ldorfman, not good i.m.o.. This photo was taken in Bolivia and after your “fix” there was no category left to show that nexus (description is not enough: the category tree is separate). Of course Category:Bolivia should have all its contents diffused as it is too large a concept (nothing to do with iconicity — that kind of concern is for the Bolivia “gallery” not for Category:Bolivia): There is a Category:Toilets by country that suggests what to do. (Already done, now.) -- Tuválkin 11:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Great solution. Thanks. Honestly, I do not recall I understood what was so important and interesting in this toilet. Can you explain? I'm a bit curious. Ldorfman (talk) 21:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
LdorfmanThere's really nothing important about that toilet. There's a German organisation that's uploaded a bunch of toilets, photos of faeces etc. (almost 10,000 of them). See Category:Sustainable Sanitation Alliance and under that note Category:Files created by Sustainable Sanitation Alliance (SuSanA)‎ (2 C, 9986 F). It's a hidden category so you have to have your preferences set to see hidden categories.

Because the Flickr tags are so misleading for these images, some places, schools etc. are filled exclusively with with faeces, toilets, sewage and related images. The common Flickr tags are things like "urine" "schools", "sanitation" and often the name of a place or country, for almost all the images, whether they have anything to do with "urine" or "schools" or the place tagged or not. I'm very annoyed by this. I try to get them out of those categories and put them in "toilets by country" or some category that seems more related like "Sanitation by country". IMO, these are self-serving images by the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance, actually a German governmental organisation, which is promoting itself and has it's own agenda. EChastain (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. Ldorfman (talk) 22:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Reverse osmosisEdit

Sorry, but I don't know use of RO in waste management, do you? Usually, it's used for cleaning water, but not waste water. Ciacho5 (talk) 17:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

A scientist and a craterEdit

Dear colleague,
It seems to me that things (1, 2), named after a scientist, are definitely relevant to this scientist, aren't they? Stas (talk) 19:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Stas000D, I don't think so. If you read Irving Langmuir, it says he was a physicist and a chemist and that, His most noted publication was the famous 1919 article "The Arrangement of Electrons in Atoms and Molecules" He died in 1957 so he couldn't possibly have anything to do with Category:Langmuir probes or Category:Langmuir (crater), developed by Swedish Institute of Space Physics in Sweden and have to do with space and plasma physics, and he wasn't an oceanographer so I don't think he had anything to do with Category:Langmuir circulation. He worked for General Electric and had to to with the development of vacuum tubes. Do you agree with me? EChastain (talk) 20:10, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
He couldn't even know about existence of this crater, which is located on the Moon's farside (firstly photographed in 1959) and named in 1970. But if a scientist has a crater and other things named after him, it is a kind of memorial and evidence of his prominence. I think, such "memorials" should be listed in categories for their eponyms (maybe, in special subcategories). For example, we have special Category:Things named after Nicolaus Copernicus, which is located in Category:Nicolaus Copernicus. Maybe, it would be reasonable to create a similar category for Irving Langmuir? Stas (talk) 20:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Stas000D, I don't thing Langmuir is very prominent today. There's nothing I can find to indicate it. Is there evidence that these are "memorials" named after him? I looked on those articles and there's no mention of him. And Nicolaus Copernicus was born in 1473 and still very famous today. His book was major event in the history of science, triggering the Copernican Revolution, making an important contribution to the Scientific Revolution, according to his article. I don't think the two can be compared at all. Copernicus changed our understanding of the world. Can you find some evidence that Irving Langmuir changed our fundamental understanding of the world and that these "memorials" were named after him? EChastain (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
For all craters such information can be found in Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature (a page for crater Langmuir). For the probes, de-wiki says that they were also named to honor Irving Langmuir. For Langmuir circulation, en-wiki says that it was discovered by Irving Langmuir himself. Of course, Langmuir did not change our fundamental understanding of the world, and his "memorials" are not very numerous, but they do exist. Stas (talk) 21:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Stas000D, sorry, I changed the the Langmuir circulation already. Ok, change back what you want. I was wrong, so I apologise. Best wishes, EChastain (talk) 21:47, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Container CityEdit

Apologies for that, I reverted my edits, Guess the London images should go in their own subcat which you probably were about to do. Oxyman (talk) 17:45, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


  Hello. You have a new message at Hike395's talk page.

CategorizationEdit

Hello! While working on something else, I browsed your recent edits and found this and a few others like it. Please note that this is problematic and should not be done: Trusting the Flickr tags of the original photo, this is (part of) a school, and categorization to that effect must be added or kept — it surely should not be removed. (Keeping "Category:Rwanda" along with either "Category:Kigali" and "Category:Schools in Rwanda" is COM:OVERCAT and should be avoided, although that’s a separate matter.) -- Tuválkin 11:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I've found the Flickr tags are extremely unreliable, especially when uploaded to the Commons by script.

I've received complaints when I've used them, and I've also been thanked by Fae, whose script uploads them, when I changed the categories to one not named in the Flickr tags. Also, some "places" e.g. towns, schools etc contain no images of the school itself but are exclusively generic images of faeces, toilets, faeces vaults etc. or toilets not representative of the country but rather of a "project" by an aide organisation outside the country with no other parts of the school shown.

Please also note that the category "Rwanda" has the notice at the top: "Please help sort all images into categories as specific as possible, see Commons:Categories for further help." I think human common sense is needed here. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. EChastain (talk) 13:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

p.s. I agree that COM:OVERCAT is to be avoided and I usually do avoid it, but I left it for now in the cat you mention because I was trying to do things slowly so my edits could be evaluated as you have done. So thanks, I'll completely avoid over cat completely from now on because you are right! EChastain (talk) 13:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Could you explain me this edit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:2014_Picunda,_Ubikacja_kucana.jpg&curid=37550660&diff=157770823&oldid=157493136 You twice removed category from my image. This category is good and I do not see reasons to exclude this category. --Halavar (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Halavar, I'm very sorry. Prior discussion indicated places in general were most important for toilets, but I've no dog in this fight. I didn't realise that I changed that cat twice; I never contest reverts of my edits, so I won't change it again. My apologies. EChastain (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

FL 50 Bridge over the Little Withlacoochee RiverEdit

You recently replaced the Category:Rivers of Florida with Category:Withlacoochee River (Central Florida) for three of my images of a Florida State Road 50 bridge over the Little Withlacoochee River. This bridge does not go over the Withlacoochee River (Central Florida) itself, but goes over a tributary to that river, therefore I reverted your edits. ----DanTD (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

ok, sorry for that. EChastain (talk) 23:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
No problem. this bridge is the one where SR 50 goes over the Withlacoochee. Is there any chance you're considering a separate commons category the Little Withlacoochee River? ----DanTD (talk) 01:38, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
DanTD, Category:Little Withlacoochee River. Seems to be about the bridge! EChastain (talk) 15:41, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Then there should be more images related to the river itself. That's why I left it as "Rivers of Florida." Maybe you or someone else wouldn't mind taking a canoe along the Little Withlacoochee and snap some other shots (http://florida.hometownlocator.com/maps/feature-map,ftc,1,fid,285854,n,little%20withlacoochee%20river.cfm). It also goes under bridges for U.S. Route 301 in Florida and Florida State Road 471 and a few local streets. Maybe I can find a few of those myself. ----DanTD (talk) 17:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

BotsEdit


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

Dear EChastain
I am very grateful for your voice about the picture File:Tanda-01.jpg
I hope now they will keep the picture
Best wishes and regards
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 17:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Aftabbanoori, you are very welcome. I love all the images of Pakistan. All we ever see where I live are war pictures. I had no idea Pakistan is so beautiful. EChastain (talk) 18:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Category:Go-yang_Flower_FestivalEdit

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:31, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

CategoriesEdit

Sir, what's with the removal of categories ex Siachen?--TripWire (talk) 19:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Before I put images in that category that did not belong there. Those images were unrelated to Category:Siachen Glacier‎ in Pakistan. Are those the ones you mean? EChastain (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Yep the same images, but a map/image showing the Siachen area/from the Siachen area is related to Category:Siachen Glacier‎, no?--TripWire (talk) 20:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
You can put them back if you think they are useful. OK with me. EChastain (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Where in NorwayEdit

I noticed this edit. To know that the mountain is in Norway, I suppose you need to recognize the place. Is that so? Then it could propably be more precisely categorized (by county, municipality, and perhaps more). /Dcastor (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Dcastor, it says on the image summary "Norway pictures:پښتو", so I went by that. Wish I did know the mountains of Norway! Thanks, EChastain (talk) 19:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I notice the file was renamed (rather unhelpfully IMO) from “Picture in Malmø (333)“, which might narrow it down to a district. Since the description is minimal, I might as well bung in the former title as better than nothing. (I’ll change the language tag while I‘m at it.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Odysseus1479 Thanks. Seems like "judgement/discretion" is needed in these situations. EChastain (talk) 11:34, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, my bad. I didn't notice the description tag, since it wasn't in any of my prefered languages. It was I who changed the file name, because there are no such mountains within at least 500 kms from Malmö. And Malmö is not in Norway. I should, of course, have removed the description as well, since it can't be considered reliable when the source is the same user that obviously misnamed the file. I'll remove the desription and category as unconfirmed. /Dcastor (talk) 13:42, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
It’s not uncommon for people to name all their vacation photos after the principal destination, regardless of the individual locations; I thought the numerical sequence might allow reconstruction of their route. Then again, some contributors are simply confused or careless, so it was a rather slender thread on which to hang such a hope.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 17:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

RationalobserverEdit

Hi Mattisse. These questionable edits were brought to my attention. Any harassing of Rationalobserver done on en.wiki is an en.wiki issue, but if you start targeting her here, it'll become a Commons issue. You do a lot of good work here, so please don't bring any of the en.wiki problems over here. Thanks for your time. INeverCry 18:42, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

INeverCry, I'm not Mattisse, whoever that is, though it's true I was blocked on wn.wiki on that basis. I was also thought to be Sue Rangell and others. If you want to block me here, feel free. You must know that Rationalobserver herself has a very chequered history on en.wiki and is assumed to be a sockpuppet. So take you pick who you want to defend here on the Commons, me or Rationalobserver. EChastain (talk) 19:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't want to block you. I would prefer to see you continue editing here without problems. INeverCry 19:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
INeverCry, then please don't suggest that I did something that requires you to hassle me. I didn't. If you threaten me again for no reason, I'll consider it harassment. EChastain (talk) 20:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, you obviously did. Rationalobserver has 200 edits here, and less than 100 uploads. You're nonconstructive editing of her upload out of 25+ million files was targeted and unnecessary. If you bother her again, and continue to bring your en.wiki LTA behavior to Commons, you'll be blocked. INeverCry 21:45, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
INeverCry, you didn't look carefully. That edit was a self-revert. I've edited those categories before. Rationalobserver is a known sock on en.wiki and with her buddy Lightbreather (whose now got an open Arbcom on her there), both harassed me on my talk and other places en.wiki. I was arbitrarily blocked there. Rationalobserver had several SPI's there, but they couldn't figure out who she was so no block. Now she's reformed there. So you're importing a dispute from en.wiki to the Commons?

If this is ok Commons policy for you to do that, then I won't edit here anymore. EChastain (talk) 01:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

 
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Commons. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.
See the block log for the reason that you have been blocked and the name of the administrator who blocked you.

العربية | Azərbaycanca | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Zazaki | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | jbobau | 한국어 | Kurdî | Македонски | മലയാളം | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Русский | Sicilianu | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

INeverCry 02:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Your last account Parabolooidal was blocked for 3 months on August 14, 2014, for edit-warring after warnings and you created this account on October 12, 2014, which is block evasion. The Parabolooidal acct had an earlier block for vandalism as well. To this is added your ban on en.wiki as an LTA sockmaster with many of those same accts registered here (Parabolooidal and EChastain are confirmed by en.wiki CU as socks of Mattisse). And now you use this acct to harass someone you've had problems with on en.wiki. Vandalism, edit-warring, block-evasion, and other continued disruptive behavior are unacceptable. INeverCry 03:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 15:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Per your requestEdit

Per your request, I have amended your block to allow you to appeal the recent block of your account with the use of {{Unblock}} here on your talk page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

billinghurst, could you explain how to use {{Unblock}}? I can't get the reasons to show up.

Also, is being blocked on en.wiki a reason for being indefinitely blocked here on the Commons with no talk page access, email disabled, and put in a sockpuppeteer account created on the same day I was indefinitely blocked, along with a bunch of other users indeffed on the same day as me (9 July 2015)? I have over 51,000 edits on the Commons over a range of topics with no problems that I know of. Thanks, EChastain (talk) 15:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

unblock request - please help with template - I've put my reason here but it doesn't show upEdit

Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "I have over 51,000 edits on the Commons with no problems. I'm accused of being Mattisse, but he hasn't edited on the Commons since 2011. The day INeverCry indefinitely blocked me on July 9, 2015, she also indefinitely blocked Mattisse and other editors, and created a category on the Commons "Sockpuppets of Mattisse" and put me and other editors in it. See her contributions on 9 July.[1] As well, there's a category "Sockpuppets of Matisse" which I'm in on my user talk page here. She also said on my talk page "your ban on en.wiki as an LTA sockmaster with many of those same accts registered here (Parabolooidal and EChastain are confirmed by en.wiki CU as socks of Mattisse)". This is not true. I'm not globally banned. I'm indefinitely blocked on en.wiki and not as a LTA sockmaster. And a checkuser was not done there. INeverCry was wrong to say that. The SPI en.wiki said my account is technically and behaviourally "very likely" to be past accounts and blocked me on that basis. I was not blocked as a "sock master" of anyone. See: [2]. I'm not that account. And another user there who knew Mattisse disagreed I was Mattisse.[3] What should I do? I'm fearful that I can't explain all this in my unblock request. Thanks"
Decline reason: "Bogus cry for help, just like you did on enwiki with many (MANY!) accounts. IMHO you need to find another playground. Facebook maybe? Or twitter your fears. Oh, and of course you are a sock, the SPI clearly established that, see Sockpuppet investigation on enwiki."
Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Português | Русский | Simple English | Svenska | 中文(臺灣) | +/−

EChastain (talk) 18:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Reason

I have over 51,000 edits on the Commons with no problems. I'm accused of being Mattisse, but he hasn't edited on the Commons since 2011. The day INeverCry indefinitely blocked me on July 9, 2015, she also indefinitely blocked Mattisse and other editors, and created a category on the Commons "Sockpuppets of Mattisse" and put me and other editors in it. See her contributions on 9 July.[4] As well, there's a category "Sockpuppets of Matisse" which I'm in on my user talk page here. She also said on my talk page "your ban on en.wiki as an LTA sockmaster with many of those same accts registered here (Parabolooidal and EChastain are confirmed by en.wiki CU as socks of Mattisse)". This is not true. I'm not globally banned. I'm indefinitely blocked on en.wiki and not as a LTA sockmaster. And a checkuser was not done there. INeverCry was wrong to say that. The SPI en.wiki said my account is technically and behaviourally "very likely" to be past accounts and blocked me on that basis. I was not blocked as a "sock master" of anyone. See: [5]. I'm not that account. And another user there who knew Mattisse disagreed I was Mattisse.[6] EChastain (talk) 18:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Please see Blocked on Commons as globally banned when I'm not on meta. Thanks, EChastain (talk) 20:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Reguyla, Green Giant, BillinghurstEdit

Reguyla or Green Giant, would you be willing to help me format this unblock request? EChastain (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Being blocked on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily mean a block on Commons. I have only had a cursory look at the ENWP SPI and it seems to me that the conclusion of the checkuser was that you are most likely to be a sockpuppet of Matisse. Although the original account hasn't edited here since 2011, that doesn't mean the person behind the account has not edited here. You've made 50,000+ edits in nine months which combined with your Revision of File:Grand_Canyon_autumn_STS61A-48-91.jpg suggest that you probably weren't a newbie when you started editing with this account. Mostly however, I cannot help noting the above conversation where INC suggests you may have some beef with another user that has been imported from ENWP. On the other hand you appear to have been editing constructively on Commons, so I'm going to refrain from deciding whether to unblock you or not until more admins have had a look. Green Giant (talk) 20:44, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Green Giant, the editor you suggest I had a "beef" with, Rationalobserver, was thought to be a sock on en.wiki because she started hassling other editors and posting on policy pages a few days after registering.

Rationalobserver was first thought to be a sock of Jazzerino 19 December 2014[7]

She was blocked as a sock. Then, under mysterious circumstances, she was unblocked by the same admin that blocked me. [8]

Then Rationalobserver was thought to be a sock of LTA. SandyGeorgia (the same editor who said I was Mattisse) said Rationalobserver was a LTA sock, among other comments: "Having looked at more edits now, RO created the account on August 31, within the first month was editing project pages with a specific focus on plagiarism and paraphrasing project pages, and this first edit within a month to FAC is quite atypical of any new FAC reviewer-- in fact, it is atypical for experienced FAC reviewers. This is an editor who appears to know FAC better than frequent FAC reviewers, on their first post. And going after Victoria like this is typical of ILT. See[9]"

On 22 February 2015, Rationalobserver hassled me on my en.wiki talk along with Lightbreather, an editor who is now indefinitely banned from en.wiki per Arbcom,[10] for various disruptive behaviours, including filing SPI's against editors who opposed her on gun control. Lightbreather was convinced that I was Sue Rangell, though I've never edited a gun control article, and she filed an SPI oh me which failed. SandyGeorgia said to Lightbreather: "To explain the (realistic) concern that Lightbreather raised about EChastain's first edit being to Mogollon Rim, I think that a good case could be made here for WP:MEAT (some of Sue Rangell's first edits indicate the possibility that Mattisse and Rangell could be acquainted-- if not IRL, then via email) ". So this is the type of speculation and behavioural evidence that goes to determining a sock on en.wiki.

So how did INeverCry pick one edit out of my over 51,000 edits to hassle me about?[11] An edit that was a self-revert? Because Rationalobserver, who is known on en.wiki for never dropping a grudge, had to have contacted her off wiki. I don't believe there's any other way INeverCry could have picked that specific edit. And that had to be the worst edit I made. If INeverCry had other evidence, she would have used it. You saw that I edited in that area in the example you gave: File:Grand Canyon autumn STS61A-48-91.jpg. INeverCry said (above): "To this is added your ban on en.wiki as an LTA sockmaster". No, it was Rationalobserver who was thought to be a sock of LTA.[12]

Is that one edit that Rationalobserver complained about to INeverCry worth my total ban from the Commons? If so, I will go, but I think the evidence is very poor. Thanks for responding. EChastain (talk) 02:42, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, a checkuser was not done on en.wiki. It was all behavioural evidence provided by SandyGeorgia.[13] EChastain (talk) 03:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Hedwig in Washington, a checkuser was not done on en.wiki. EChastain (talk) 03:14, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

No, but a sockpuppet investigation. Result:   It looks like a duck to me --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:17, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hedwig in Washington, INeverCry said I was LTA sockmaster. It was Rationalobserver, the one I had a beef with, who was said to be an LTA sock. Please allow another admin to review, as you are connected with INeverCry who was blocked and dessopped. EChastain (talk) 03:31, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Hedwig in Washington It should also be noted that 6 months before they had "evidence" that EChastain was Sue Rangell and a lot of it was the same evidence by the same people and not surprisingly it was the same admin that decided both that he wasn't Sue Rangell and was possibly Matisse. Also, do we care what happens on ENWP here? This editor has done a lot of edits in the last few months and all apparently improved the project. I don't really think it should matter here what some Checkuser in ENWP thinks is an account of a banned editor because they "read the tea leaves" and "spoke to the bones"! Reguyla (talk) 03:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "I would like an unbiased admin to review the evidence please. Hedwig in Washington worked with INeverCry (who said I was an LTA sockmaster) to block me. Rationalobserver, the editor who complained of my one edit to INeverCry, was blocked as an LTA sock, then later unblocked with no reason given (see above). EChastain (talk) 03:31, 25 July 2015 (UTC)"
Decline reason: "per [14] and [15] Discussions w/o establishing faulty CU. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 21:48, 29 August 2015 (UTC)"
Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Português | Русский | Simple English | Svenska | 中文(臺灣) | +/−

@Echastain: What does that supposed to mean, Hedwig in Washington worked with INeverCry? Mostly everybody around here had contact to INC. SO 90% of the admins are biased? That's humbug. i WON'T review your block again, as my mind seems to be made up, so I think wouldn't be a fair procedure.
@Reguyla: No, I usually don't care what enwiki does. But I will use what they have in order to save our CUs time and effort. You are a sysop like me, just unblock if you think it was an unjust block by me. I am totally fine with that. I don't like tea btw, I only read coffee grounds   Best, --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I appreicate that you think I am a sysop but I'm not. If I was I would consider unblocking but I do think in this case because of the ENWP CU it should be discussed. I have yet to be convinced that the ENWP decision was even correct and in addition I have yet to see anyone who has provided evidence or links to show that this editor isn't doing positive edits here on this project. I never learned to read the grounds, bad eyesight myself, the leaves are much bigger and easier to read. :-) Reguyla (talk) 02:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Oops, my bad :-) I think we should leave the discussion on the admin notice board for now. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:54, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment This "user" was not blocked due to an en.Wiki ban. They were blocked for continuing to stalk me as they did on Wikipedia: ([16]). If this person is Matisse, there is no use trying to work with them. If they aren't Matisse, then they are some other serial sockmaster whose primary reason for being here is to harass and bother people. The "good" edits are a cover for their real interest, which is drama and stalking. Rationalobserver (talk) 19:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
    • I already responded to this comment elsewhere but I also wanting to add that adding a link to a discussion starring Chillum is hardly compelling. They have a long history of both erratic behavior and incompetence as an admin. They are not a great example to show "proof". I would also note that its not really beneficial to add the same statement to multiple discussions. I already agreed they need to leave you alone, but its still not worth a ban. I also question the validity that someone is doing tens of thousands of edits to hide a dozen to target one user. That really doesn't make sense. Reguyla (talk) 11:52, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Not one user, just one user at a time. They have had multiple targets and multiple accounts. And if you think Chillum discredits the whole point, here's Dennis Brown saying the same thing to them: ([17]). Rationalobserver (talk) 15:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Right! So what in that statement by Dennis saying "...this is best dropped and we all get back to actually editing. Otherwise, it begins to look very personal and preachy, and to put it bluntly, I'm tired of all the chest thumping. She is unblocked. If she does something to deserve blocking, she will be blocked again. Otherwise, we all deserve a second or third chance and if people keep preaching about the past and trying to drive a wedge in between the editor and that fair chance, it reflects poorly on them, and will not be overlooked. Give it a break, give it time, go write articles. That is why we are here. It doesn't require we agree, only that we pull back long enough to see what happens." is different than what I have been saying? A block is one thing, a ban is something completely different. You say they should be blocked for harassing you and I agreed, but we aren't talking about a block we are talking about a ban on very weak and circumstantial evidence. And for what its worth if this was someone who did 20 edits I wouldn't worry about it, but its someone who has done over 50, 000 so IMO if we are going to allow admins on projects to Sock, own articles, use the admin tools to get their way through blocking people they don't agree with, personal attacks, manipulation of policy, abuse of edit filters, violations of the policies like involved, hounding and harassment , etc. etc. than we should be extending those same courtesies to highish edit count editors. Otherwise we are just a bunch of hypocrits. We still haven't proven its them. Have the WMF projects really gotten to the point where all we need to do is draft up an accusation with some links and accuse an editor of being someone that edits in the same topics? Because these projects have been around long enough we can certainly find reasons to block a lot of people. I'll be honest, I am pretty shocked and appalled at how so many people are willing to use circumstantial evidence to ban an editor where 2 different SPI's were submitted against them accusing them of being 2 different people but somehow the second one is accepted on another project with limited info from one editor but the same closing admin. There are so many questionable details to this its staggering how so many people are just lining up to keep them banned. Its really, really disappointing to see in this project. Reguyla (talk) 16:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
An indef block is not the same thing as a ban. And FTR, Mike V said: The account is technically very Likely to past accounts. The behavioral evidence is compelling as well. I have blocked and tagged the account. Mike V • Talk 00:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC), which indicates that technical evidence and behavioral evidence both suggest this user is Matisse. Also, you make some good points about accusing and blocking people without more evidence, but that's precisely what this user supported for me. They've made dozens of baseless accusations against me in efforts to shame and discredit me, continuing until just a few days ago. I.e., they've been doing this to me for 6 months, and here you argue that it's unfair to accuse someone without evidence. SandyGeorgia had lots of personal experience with Mattise, and they also think this user is them. Reguyla, how do you know EChastain anyway? Are you a friend, or are you neutral? Rationalobserver (talk) 20:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
An indef block is functionally the same as a ban. There literally is no difference except symantics. Believe me I know. Also, someone also stated that the Checkuser came up negative. So the only evidence is comparing edits and showing links, not CU data. I don't know this user at all. I literally never heard of them before last week but I have a problem watching an editor get railroaded without proof simply because one admin feels like it. Reguyla (talk) 20:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Wow. You've put in an incredible amount of effort to save someone you don't know from an indef. Did you see that Mike V said, "The account is technically very Likely to past accounts". That's not a negative CU report, that's a likely. Rationalobserver (talk) 21:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
"someone also stated that the Checkuser came up negative". That was probably EChastain, since Mike V was the actual CU who blocked them, and they said: The account is technically very Likely to past accounts. So where's the diff where somebody other than EChastain said the CU came up negative? Rationalobserver (talk) 21:27, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Its because I know how it feels to get the shaft on these project and I am sensitive to that and there is so much wrong with this ban its staggering. I also care about improving the project and I don't want to see a positive editor with 50, 000 edits get banned/indef blocked based on a decision by a single admin with no evidence and based on assumptions and guesses. And again, likely doesn't mean it is, it means it might be and they cannot prove it either way. So why block if they cannot prove it? Wouldn't it be better to AGF and let them edit? Guess not! Reguyla (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
But EChastain has advocated for the exact same treatment for me. They tried to get me blocked and to convince all my friends that I am a sock, which they are still doing six months later. Rationalobserver (talk) 21:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Since I got pinged about this I will comment again. My opinion has not changed. No proof has been given that this is Mattise. The decision on ENWP was basically just a checkuser guessing that it might be and several admitted there was no proof. We should not be in the habit if banning people with 51000 edits without some kind of reliable proof other than some admins guesswork. Also, in response to Hedwig's comment about the request for unblock should have been done a long time ago, so what, people have lives that do not revolve around commons or the wiki's. Show me some policy where it says you have to request unblock in X amount of time? This block is just a typical overreaction based on a culture where admins are allowed to do whatever they want, because they have all the power and the rest of us poor editors have to do whatever they say. They do what they want, whenever they want, with no proof and no repercussions. Its another perfect example of a corrupt culture where people are given unlimited control with no checks and balances and no oversight. And we wonder why editing is down, editors are leaving, few new editors are joining and the WMF has to spend exponentially more money every year just to keep these sites alive. Because we as a community and as a culture continue to allow actions like this with no proof. I can't do anything about it but I wanted it on record that I think this and its corresponding decision on ENWP are abusive and extremely poorly done. We are better than that...or so I thought. Reguyla (talk) 21:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Girl's_rightsEdit

BethNaught (talk) 20:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Makran Coastal Highway. Gwadar-Karachi.jpgEdit

 
File:Makran Coastal Highway. Gwadar-Karachi.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Gunnex (talk) 08:02, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Karim_AbadEdit

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 18:47, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Kareemabad_townEdit

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Cathedral_Peak_(Pakistan)Edit

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 23:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:SkurduEdit

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 23:03, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Kohe Kirana.jpgEdit

 
File:Kohe Kirana.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.

Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски | svenska | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Richard Harvey (talk) 11:19, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

File tagging File:Govt. College GT Road Jhelum.jpgEdit

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Govt. College GT Road Jhelum.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Govt. College GT Road Jhelum.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Gunnex (talk) 19:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Khanpur Dam 1.jpgEdit

 
File:Khanpur Dam 1.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 | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | 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)‎ | +/−

Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Khanpur Dam 2.jpgEdit

 
File:Khanpur Dam 2.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 | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | 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)‎ | +/−

Stefan2 (talk) 21:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Payatas_Dumpsite,_Metro_Manila,_PhilippinesEdit

Ianlopez1115 (talk) 06:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Huang_Daopo_memorial_tombEdit

Fayhoo (talk) 09:08, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Jalkhadh_to_Lulusar_Lake_roadEdit

   FDMS  4    17:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:311 with body of Soldat - Small.jpgEdit

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:311 with body of Soldat - Small.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 18:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Bodie_State_Historical_ParkEdit

King of ♠ 23:18, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletionEdit

 
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

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

Please 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 | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | 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)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Яй (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:Dragons_Blood_TreeEdit

El Grafo (talk) 16:16, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Category:Hari_parbatEdit

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Danyore_RiverEdit

Rupert Pupkin (talk) 23:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Jamia_Masjid_(Pakistan)Edit

HyperGaruda (talk) 09:44, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Drain_trapsEdit

DMacks (talk) 14:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Dagri_BanglaEdit

Kalbbes (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Category:Foster_Falls,_TennesseeEdit

Themightyquill (talk) 11:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "EChastain".