Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:GRuban

Images from videosEdit

Hello GRuban,

I see that some of your recent uploads are derived from videos on youtube. Examples are File:Brianna Wu standing.jpg and File:Carolyn Talcott.jpg. However I could not find a publicly stated release of those image/the content of the videos. Could you expand on the permission for those images?

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 09:44, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The YouTube release is under the Show More section on any YouTube page that has one. I linked to each. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndvOiDTiJb8 for example.
BTW, I notice you are the person who nominated Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Spacekatgal on the grounds that Spacekatgal, also known as w:Brianna Wu is not notable? And then found other photos that she gave to interviewers, and used them as more evidence that she was not their owner? Now we're going to have to track down this rather busy person, who is right now not very happy with the Internet as a whole, and say: "You know those images you gave us? We deleted them. Please give us more, and this time write even more in the description, and send an email to OTRS, and we'll think of a few more hoops for you to jump through soon. Thanks." Next time you read about Wikipedia being hard for article subjects to use, this is what was meant. --GRuban (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I actually came here for the same reason. Thanks for your contributions. Please include a timecode with your still image uploads whenever possible. Helps make the review go faster. czar 03:10, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Noted; however, if you are referring to File:Mishka Henner.jpg, it's the still image that represents the video before the video starts playing, so no timecode. --GRuban (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

can't fix google from WikipediaEdit

btw, this occurs also on bing, with feedback in opposite corner [1]. 198.24.31.118 17:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Brooke Elliott.jpgEdit

  File:Brooke Elliott.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Lady Lotus (talk) 12:36, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Lungerjournalismus.jpgEdit

Hi. I'm trying to license review https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lungerjournalismus.jpg which you write should be licensed under cc-by-sa 3.0. I'm reading https://twitter.com/kaibiermann/status/489212045829894144 and can't see that. My German ability is on the line between terrible and nonexistent, but as best I can read, Kai Biermann says "Use it under CC only with attribution." That's either too vague for us, or it's cc-by. Which could also work, but isn't cc-by-sa 3.0... Ideally, could you ask him to specifiy the license, for example "I release this work under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"? Or I guess we could change the license on the file to cc-by and hope that no stricter reviewer complains... again, if Kai Biermanncould be specific, that would be best. As you can guess, I don't get out to DE much, so if you want to discuss, please catch me at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:GRuban --GRuban (Diskussion) 15:03, 10. Aug. 2015 (CEST)

I think, I more or less copied what wrote, SMSed, or said to me. I do not remember the details, only that he had used the image in a tweet of his before. Please try to contact him avoiding indirect communication. I told him that I wanted to upload it to commons, which he himself was not inclined to do but agreed that I did it, giving the quoted license. --Purodha Blissenbach (Diskussion)
You linked to the details. That twitter link points to what he wrote: "steht unter cc, bei Namensnennung nur zu" That - in my feeble machine aided translation - was what he wrote. I would prefer not to contact him myself. I don't know him, I don't even know who he is, and in addition, I don't speak German. I don't even have a Twitter account. I won't be able to follow his Twitter to wait for his response. So asking me to ask him is ... not as good as your asking him. Also, of course, I have 677 other images in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:License_review_needed to review. Please, feel free to blame me, writing "some annoying volunteer reviewer at Wikimedia Commons wants you to specify the license, could you please tweet 'I release this work under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/'" - except in German, of course. But I'm afraid, for all the above reasons, I can't take it upon myself to do so. Thank you. --GRuban (talk) 13:28, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Kylie Jenner for Nip + Fab.jpgEdit

  File:Kylie Jenner for Nip + Fab.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

NearEMPTiness (talk) 03:23, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Kylie Jenner headshot.jpgEdit

  File:Kylie Jenner headshot.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

NearEMPTiness (talk) 03:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Prove?Edit

Your message was somewhat violent; I'm sure that was not your intention, but to make a demand or "else," well, it is not gentile. What I write about the images I have uploaded to Wiki-Common is true & accurate. Chaos4tu (talk) 10:47, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

This is about Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Chaos4tu, where I wrote "the uploader is basically claiming to be Sterling Saint James. The uploader needs to write to COM:OTRS and prove it."? If so, apologies. I'd be happy to learn an alternate phrasing that would be more gentle and convey the same information. How about "The uploader needs to write to COM:OTRS and verify their identity"? --GRuban (talk) 20:27, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Teo Trandafir.pngEdit

Yes, it's from the video you selected. Thanks.Ionutzmovie (talk) 03:39, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Brooke Elliott.jpgEdit

 
File:Brooke Elliott.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 may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.

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 | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Luxembourgish | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Malti | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

CennoxX (talk) 10:37, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

That was strange. It was properly licensed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo_iIC3hXJI as Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brooke Elliott.jpg determined, what did you have against it? (I see User:Natuur12 deleted it anyway, without any discussion; what was that?) --GRuban (talk) 21:05, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Natuur put it back. Good. --GRuban (talk) 21:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Holly Holm.jpgEdit

  File:Holly Holm.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

howcheng {chat} 16:50, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Withdrawn: thanks. No hard feelings, just doing your job, understood. --GRuban (talk) 19:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect source link for File:Emily O'Brien.jpgEdit

The source you've given for File:Emily O'Brien.jpg is the same as the source you give for File:Ciara Hanna.jpg. It's the correct source video for File:Ciara Hanna.jpg. The correct source for File:Emily O'Brien.jpg is needed. Let me know when you've updated it so I can review it. INeverCry 21:31, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Ack! Thanks, fixed! --GRuban (talk) 22:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I've passed the review and adjusted the license, which is {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} at the source rather than {{cc-by-3.0}}. I did the same for the Ciara Hanna image. INeverCry 22:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Agh. Thanks again. Sorry for the mistakes. I'm normally better than this. :-(. --GRuban (talk) 01:05, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
No worries. Just a couple of minor hiccups. I'm happy to help.   INeverCry 03:06, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Google Knowledge Panel.pngEdit

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

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Josve05a (talk) 02:15, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Please...Edit

... let me point to something that could be a nice PD-mark brainteaser... ;-) Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Public_domain_question_related_to_a_Flickr_sourced_file Kind regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:07, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Heh. Solved it much the way Alexander untied the Gordian knot ... --GRuban (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Emily Ratajkowski.jpgEdit

  File:Emily Ratajkowski.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

217.65.221.174 07:37, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

RE: Check your license review?Edit

Thanks for telling me. When I opened the file I didn't notice the lower border was cut by browser. I totally support the deletion. --Chiyako92 (talk) 12:56, 7 April 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.
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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, czar 13:41, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

re: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:House_of_Abbud.jpgEdit

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:House_of_Abbud.jpg, can you please help. This is not acceptable. Deletion policy is clear about allowing discussion which User:Steinsplitter has prevented. Can you please undo his actions to allow for discussion? 104.245.105.18 15:52, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

No, sorry, I'm not going to unilaterally undo the policy-based actions of an administrator without a really strong reason; just to allow more discussion that you will likely lose is not that reason. As I wrote, even though, I, personally, think we could change the license on the file, that is just because I think we can afford to be nice, it doesn't hurt the Commons. However, I can see the reasons against it, it could set a nasty precedent. Ths thing about a usage license is that it has to be irrevocable, otherwise no one could use it, without being afraid that at any time the owner could withdraw the license. In this case, I think it isn't harmful because the CC-BY that you want to change it to is likely to be good enough for all practical purposes that anyone has already used the file for ... but that's just my opinion. Policy, as interpreted by Steinsplitter, who carries a mop around here, says different. See, the English Wikipedia has a rule that I like, Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy; meaning that the letter of the rules aren't as important as the principles behind them. The Commons does not have that rule; it has to be much more concerned about the letter of the rules here. I'm sorry. --GRuban (talk) 19:24, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Jennifer Rubin.jpgEdit

  File:Jennifer Rubin.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Olivier LPB (talk) 22:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Any comments on ...Edit

this? I am writing it up for the signpost (draft Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/In the media). You uploaded his loathed pictured :-) Cheersm --Milowent (talk) 21:07, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I uploaded his picture because I could only find that one under a free license at the time. I didn't consider it an attack picture, I wouldn't have uploaded it if I did. An IP, claiming to be him (quite possible, it had edited the article and only that article for 2 years) removed it, saying there were plenty in the public domain. I looked, and couldn't find any. I took the IP at his word that it was him and asked him for a released image, explaining as best I could. Nothing. Then Gene Weingarten wrote the column, and someone uploaded a different photo, which I'm perfectly happy with. I hope he likes it better, we're not here to make people sad, as someone once said. --GRuban (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks very much for your comments. May I quote you for the Signpost?--Milowent (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Of course, I thought that was the point of your request. If you want you can link to my user page here; I've found many (and personally taken a very few) pictures for articles, they're mostly on it except the most recent ones. Most are of people, but not all. If you really want, you can link to or quote from my Wiki-bio or an interview Rob Walker, an author, journalist and another article subject, did of me, which are somewhat relevant as the bio was written for and the interview was his condition for my asking him to release a picture for his Wikipedia article. --GRuban (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

File tagging File:The Strokes by Roger Woolman.jpgEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:The Strokes by Roger Woolman.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.

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

Ww2censor (talk) 22:38, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Dealt with on User talk:Ww2censor#File tagging File:The Strokes by Roger Woolman.jpg. --GRuban (talk) 15:12, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Mosambik Gürtel mit Krustendomainen und -alter.jpgEdit

Hello GRuban, I found this file, it was reviewed by you. What evidences did you find the map is free? the link provided has no explicit licenses. And the web site seems not free. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:06, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

  • Oh, forget it, there are two links, I just notice it. Sorry. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:15, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

mindy finn.jpgEdit

I am perplexed as to why you are marking my file for deletion less than one day after it was confirmed as valid. What about the effort and time I put in proving myself just days ago? Is this how it works? Anyone can ignore the work of others for their own baseless claim? I have proven myself and ask that you check on what has alreay been provided. I do not need to entertain your pointless and unfounded abuse of the verification system. Do you not respect the findings of others? Why should anyone then respect what you verify? IF you want to raise an issue, do so with people who have already approved this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovialwaffle (talk • contribs) 01:00, 01 November 2016 (UTC)


--Jovialwaffle (talk) 01:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

It wasn't confirmed as valid, the nominator withdrew. Meanwhile, I did some searches for that image, and noticed that it existed on many other sites, the date was wrong, and the resolution was smaller than other versions, as I think I rather clearly described in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mindy Finn.jpg. If you could respond to those points, there, please? --GRuban (talk) 03:01, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


To all the points you raise I can only sigh and say so what. Date was wrong - hardly matters. Resolution - bigger issues to deal with at that moment. On other sites - sure, again, what are we wasting our time on here? Ok, on to wherever else I need to reply and navigate this - ok, I'm taking the high road. I understand the value of proper information and am sure it is a monumental task to sift through all that is posted. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia and know it is run by volunteers but until now never realized the hard work involved. I have irrefutable proof of proper licensing and permission and now just need to figure out how to properly interface to ensure all concerns are adequately addressed. Please excuse me in advance for posting in the wrong places. I am an amateur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovialwaffle (talk • contribs) 18:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, sorry it's so complicated, and thanks for your work. Unfortunately there really are a lot of people on the Internet who are not who they say they are; that makes it complicated. Sending the proof to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org should work eventually, or if you're associated with Finn, asking her to put the proof up on her website might be even easier (the people reading that email are a bit overwhelmed). --GRuban (talk) 02:14, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!Edit

 

Hi GRuban, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

  • Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
  • Please do not tag redirects as {{speedy}}. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
  • Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

Deutsch | English | 한국어 | മലയാളം | Русский | Українська | +/−

--Ruthven (msg) 11:58, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Noyonita Lodh at Ananya.jpgEdit

  File:Noyonita Lodh at Ananya.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 | Български | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Ramaksoud2000 (Talk to me) 00:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)


File tagging File:Jeanne Marie Laskas Peters Township.jpgEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Jeanne Marie Laskas Peters Township.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.

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

-- Marchjuly (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi GRuban. I wasn't able to find anything on any of the links you provided or at ptct7.com which says that the content has been released under a license compatible with COM:L. If I missed it, then my bad. If you are aware of such a statement, then you can you add a link to it to the file's information. If there is no statement online, then I think OTRS verification is going to be necessary per COM:OTRS#If you are NOT the copyright holder. There appears to be a copyright declaration added to the very end of the video and I don't think that public television necessarily means public domain. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:00, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: COM:WHERE LICENSE. I put it right next to the license review tag. Tells you right where to look. --GRuban (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification and I've self-reverted. FWIW, that's kind of hard to figure out and looks like a random link to a general info page. Perhaps it would be better to be a little more specific and use the |permission= in the file's description like I did here to make things clearer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:02, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Upload wizard doesn't make that box editable if you click a license radio button, unfortunately. --GRuban (talk) 13:36, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Maybe then just add it manually after tha fact then? Lots of file licenses are fixed/clarified after they've been uploaded, sometimes years later. So, I think it's OK to do so. Anyway, just a suggestion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:05, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Switching out my photosEdit

Hi George,

Great work you do. Is there any way I could convince you to switch out my photos for something more recent? Lmk. My email is alexia.tsotsis@gmail.com

Thanks!

Alexia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexiatsotsis (talk • contribs) 05:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Probably, depending on what exactly you mean. Add more recent photos to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexia_Tsotsis? From https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Alexia_Tsotsis or some others that haven't been uploaded to Wikimedia Commons yet? Will also respond by email, however is more convenient for you. --GRuban (talk) 14:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecatedEdit

Hello GRuban, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Dafne_FernándezEdit

Robby (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Tasnim imagesEdit

Don't forget to remove the "Tasnimnews review needed" category when you give Tasnim images a good review. It's easy to miss at the bottom of the page. Ww2censor (talk) 23:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! --GRuban (talk) 02:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

File tagging File:Tia Mowry on Sidewalks.jpgEdit

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Sicilianu | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Tia Mowry on Sidewalks.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.

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

Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Picture lydia cachoEdit

Guys, very kind that you think about copy rights. But i send already the necessary paper to commens and you seem to be faster in deleting than reviewing. They need 7 days they told me. Please wait, as i have to Best kai Kai taugenichts (talk) 16:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, we can sometimes be quite slow at reading email. Can you put {{subst:OP}} on the image page? That will mark that you have sent email to OTRS, and will keep the image safe from deletion for 60 days. Thank you for your contribution - it is a very nice image! --GRuban (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

INeverCryEdit

Thanks! The "keep" votes didn't matter; the only thing that matters are other edits to the files, and those still aren't a big deal. There are lots more to get rid of, too; I'm nowhere near done. Nyttend (talk) 18:45, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "GRuban".