Open main menu
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 →


How odd

Please give me an opinion on: [1]? I know it's not done to reopen DN's like that, so I moved the {{delf}} below all and added a note. Did I do the close mechanics correctly? I am convinced the photo is ok, and "at uploader request" is of course not a valid reason to delete - and a photo of a rail station has no reason to be deleted anyway, it's not an autodelete criteria. Same person - another strange comment. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Uploader request is actually a valid reason for deletion in certain situations. See Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#General_reasons #7. Unused files can be speedy deleted within 7 days of upload at the uploader's request. After that it has to be taken to DR. Now and then uploaders want to trim off a few images that have problems with exposure, perspective, etc. Different admins approach older uploads differently. I try not to be too strict with established editors who upload 100s or 1000s of images, because I'd rather lose a couple of uploads they don't feel are up to snuff than piss them off and see them leave altogether and lose out on a lot more. This can lead to errors and disagreement though, so be careful in these instances. I've made a few judgement calls which later turned out to be errors. INeverCry 20:43, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Curiously the uploader put up a second one almost identical to this one (99 & 44/100'S identical)... see here. They seem to have trimmed a few pixels off the bottom of the second one. Perhaps that's why they wanted the other one deleted? They do know how to upload on top of an old file. Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, it's usually something small (to us atleast). It took me a bit of time to get comfortable doing these. Iris Murdoch is my favorite.  
  Thanks! I didn't know you read Russian comfortably; I only had it in grade school and still have to check everything with google translate. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Linda Katehi Janurary 2015.jpg

Hi, INeverry. You recently deleted a file I had taken from an official Flickr account. The file has a compatible license, as far as I can tell. I have a discussion started on my talk page. Can you help me there so that I don't make the same mistake in the future? Thanks. KianaHooper (talk) 22:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't have much more to add than what Fae has said at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Linda Katehi Janurary 2015.jpg. Since this image comes from the subject's Flickr stream, she's not the copyright holder. We would need OTRS permission from the copyright holder, or a linkable statement of a free license, either of which should probably come from a UC Davis source. INeverCry 23:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
I guess I'm confused. For example, if I upload an image of myself to Flickr with a CC-BY-SA license and say that anyone can use it, then some other body uses it and claims a copyright, that I no longer own that photo? Just trying to make sure I don't make this mistake in the future. 13:09, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker). There are two separate issues here, the first with regards to the image, and the second is your question. I'll respond to your question first.
Only the person who owns copyright of the image can release it under a free license. This is generally not the subject of the photo. In the scenario you present, you should not be uploading an image of yourself, that you did not take, to anywhere with a CC-BY-SA licence; only if you have had the copyright legally transferred to you is this legally possible. The simplest rule of thumb is: if you took the photo (i.e. actually pressed the button on the camera) you may release an image under a free licence; if you did not physically take the photo you may not (ownership of an image/photo/negative/etc almost never means you also own the copyright). However, if you know the copyright holder, and they agree to release the image under a free licence, this is permitted, but you should follow the procedures at COM:OTRS.
The situation with regards to this specific file appears to be that it is available under from two sources under two different licences. It is available at [2] dated 11 January with a full copyright claim, and at [3] under a free licence, uploaded 13 January. This creates ambiguity as to which licence is correct and clarification is needed, this should be given through OTRS. I hope this makes things clearer for you. ColonialGrid (talk) 15:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. That's really helpful and makes sense to me now. I hadn't realized that the other place where the image was used had used it before the Flickr upload - I guess I assumed the uploader knew what they were doing, haha.
So at this point, I guess I have some options, right? Either somehow contact the university and ask them to either change the license on their website (not likely to happen), ask them to give permission through OTRS (I guess that's more likely), take my own picture of her and upload it (not likely because she lives thousands of miles away), or move on to something else.
Does that sound about right? Again, I really appreciate your help. I really think that images improve biographies on Wikipedia but it seems like it might be a bit difficult to do unless I take the picture myself. KianaHooper (talk) 19:49, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
I know how you feel: I've been looking for a free pic of Sonequa Martin-Green for a couple years now. INeverCry 21:17, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Block sockpuppet please

Messina once more: Special:Contributions/Gerhard21 --Meraa23are (talk) 11:57, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

  Confirmed, blocked, and tagged; upload sent to DR. INeverCry 12:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

exclusion of some images at portuguese-language articles

i looked that some images of my own authory were excluded from some articles, like "Frota D do Metrô de São Paulo","Frota E do Metrô de São Paulo". why do you did this? you're wanting to get some kind of privilege in the contributions to this wiki? THEY WERE MY OWN WORK!!

I deleted them as likely copyvios per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by GGE12. You're free to file an undeletion request, but you'll have to explain the lack of EXIF on some images and the use of multiple cameras for the others. INeverCry 21:14, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

New status

Thank you for the auto-patrolled status. Get well soon! WQUlrich (talk) 23:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Auto-patrolled User

Thank you for my new status as auto-patrolled user. --FRacco (talk) 01:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Did you forget?

Heya INC... Slip of the finger, or the phone rang... Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Bigsofttechnologies isn't all the way closed, the image is still there, but you wrote delete on the DN. HUGS!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

That image was added to your DR by sockmaster Messina. I've removed and reverted the edits to the DR and image. INeverCry 02:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Zombie Apocalypse

Now the files are rising from the dead, please see "" wherein the file was deleted, but wait... it's alive! Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I've deleted it. It looks like the file was deleted and then very soon after re-uploaded, perhaps by a sock: [4]. INeverCry 02:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Extinction of "File:Gedenktafel Bethlehemkirchplatz (Mitte) Bethlehemkirchplatz.jpg"

I see no reason for deletion (freedom of panorama). A discussion has been held. OTFW (talk) 14:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

  Done I've restored it. INeverCry 22:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Lower Dir photos

Hi Plz restore my photos related to Dir, because there is no copyrigh issue, see My response on Talk page for detail. Thanks

عثمان خان شاہ (talk) 00:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
I would suggest you post an undeletion request. INeverCry 01:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Could it be?

New person with a lot of problem uploads. One edit at en:WP which took out the bio of the football player. I reverted the edit when I saw the mess the page had become. Am wondering if it isn't someone we both know back once more. My second guess is that this is someone else who had a lot of upload problems here. We hope (talk) 01:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Uploads nuked, user blocked. INeverCry 02:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! We hope (talk) 02:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

All copyvio

Thanks for watching this.--Fixertool (talk) 02:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I've nuked the uploads. I was able to block two football image uploading socks because of an obvious connection. This uploader doesn't share it, and there's so many football-related socks and sockmasters, it's difficult to connect them sometimes. INeverCry 03:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Guido Corradi

good evening I am writing to ask her why she would have blocked the following users, since in that file the right d 'author has expired for more than 100 years, to me it does not seem to interpret it as a copyright violation -- 20:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Otto von Cruchman. INeverCry 21:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
ok, but in that 'I do not see the name list corradi, so I have to assume that its blockade applied to the next user, does not make sense, I drive corradi, has no connection with those socks What she responds -- 11:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Aas Mohammad

Please see here. Many thanks again for zapping those images. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Leave me a note here whenever you find socks that're active on Commons, so I can run CU.
  • 01:58, February 21, 2015 INeverCry (talk | contribs | block) blocked Hum Hindustani hain (talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Abusing multiple accounts - User:AASMOHAMMADABBASIACTOR) (unblock | change block)
  • 01:56, February 21, 2015 INeverCry (talk | contribs | block) blocked Hum Tum Ek (talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Abusing multiple accounts - User:AASMOHAMMADABBASIACTOR) (unblock | change block)
  • 01:56, February 21, 2015 INeverCry (talk | contribs | block) blocked Aawaz Do (talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Abusing multiple accounts - User:AASMOHAMMADABBASIACTOR) (unblock | change block)
  • 01:56, February 21, 2015 INeverCry (talk | contribs | block) blocked Aap Or Vo (talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Abusing multiple accounts - User:AASMOHAMMADABBASIACTOR) (unblock | change block)
  • 01:51, February 21, 2015 INeverCry (talk | contribs | block) blocked Zindagi Ban Gaye Ho Tum (talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked, email disabled, cannot edit own talk page) (promotion-only account) (unblock | change block)
INeverCry 02:30, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Undeletion request File:JREtxebarria Fisika Euskaraz.jpg

Yesterday this file was deleted because I uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:JREtxebarria Fisika Euskaraz.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (NC).

  • A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:JREtxebarria Fisika Euskaraz.jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (NC), No derivative works (ND), or All Rights Reserved (Copyright), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as BY(CC BY) or BYSA(CC BY-SA) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 00:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

As the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image (, please, could you restore the file, or start an undeletion request. Thanks Ksarasola (talk) 11:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The answer was in the paragraph you posted No derivative works, which means that the Flickr user has not the right to license images which were rephotographed from publications. For example: If I were to take a photograph of Mickey Mouse, that doesn't give me the copyright to Disney's (c) creation. Same here. The Flickr user has photographed the works of others; he/she has no ability to affect/change the copyright from the original creators to him/herself. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
But the Flickr user is the owner of both the original work and the photographed one. I asked them to do it. "Laboral Kutxa" is the same as "Caja Laboral Popular" or "Euskadiko Kutxa" in the poster of the photo. See here, please: Laboral Kutxa Ksarasola (talk) 18:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
The poster in the photo is the issue. Who created the poster? Ellin Beltz (talk) 06:43, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
The poster was created in 1977 by "Caja Laboral Popular" (or "Euskadiko Kutxa" in Basque), as you can see on the lower right corner of the poster. In present days "Caja Laboral Popular" is known as "Laboral Kutxa". I recently asked "Laboral Kutxa" to publish this poster/photograph in their Flckr account. They did it, but not with the suitable license. Because of that, the photograph was deleted from Wikimedia. Then I asked to "Laboral Kutxa" to publish the photograph with the suitable license, and they did it. Now, as the Flickr image has the suitable license (, please, could you restore the file, or start an undeletion request. Thanks! Ksarasola (talk) 17:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
INC might have a different opinion, but I don't think the owner of the original work is necessarily the same thing as the person who holds copyright and I don't see how an organization can be the creator here: there is a photograph on the poster, there is sideways text too small to read on flickr which might be the photographer's name and credit. IMO, what is shown on Flickr is a Derivative Work of a poster, to which they don't have copyright to release. I'm not filing an UNDEL on this; you're welcome to leave them a message. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:26, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Toy car pics

Several of my pictures of toy cars have been deleted. I was under the impression that most toys are not considered derivative, depending on the country of manufacture. So are pictures of Porsche models (one a toy made in Italy, and another a toy made in Hong Kong) deleted because of toy rights as held by different countries, or because they are images of the real car? If because they are images of the real car, I don't think derivative use applies as they are not functional. Of course, this is an ongoing issue in Wikipedia.--Cstevencampbell (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I would suggest asking either Elcobbola, who knows a lot more on this topic than I do, or posting at COM:VP/C or COM:UDEL. INeverCry 23:46, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Cstevencampbell, a starting point would be this essay. The international aspect is complex, as considerations can vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Images on the Commons, however, must be free in both the US and country of origin, which somewhat simplifies matters. "[A]re pictures of Porsche models [...] deleted because of toy rights as held by different countries, or because they are images of the real car?" - They are deleted because the toys are copyrighted to the company that created them. See, for example, the © notice on the bottom of a model you uploaded and the explanation in the aforementioned essay. Эlcobbola talk 18:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
There is no copyright notice on the bottom of this model in question, what then--Cstevencampbell (talk) 00:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


New user has uploaded scads of pdf files which may be pages of a book. However, when you try opening them, they are locked and you're asked whether you want to proceed. I didn't because of the possibility of malware. What to do about these? Thanks! We hope (talk) 02:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Uploads nuked, user blocked. The spam link on every pdf and the weird shit about Snowden, Area 51, and Satan are more than enough for me to see that having this user around is a net negative. INeverCry 03:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I thought the same thing--my big worry was about the pdfs and people possibly getting malware from them. We hope (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Rats and Silva 6617.JPG and others

Please read the related de minimis discussions for the other files in the Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rats and Silva 6619.JPG collection- and make the necessary correction. I am sure you will join me in pressing for a change in the mass-deletion system, so if the nominator make multiple suggestion in one keystroke- the opposer can write one comment to defend them.--ClemRutter (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

This and the topic above seem to be related- in a form of a grudge deletion- I had left comment on the category talk page that covered this batch. I totally fail to see how one editor is allowed to maliciously waste my time- or how the deletion went ahead without a full investigation of what Yanns judgment was on similar files in the batch. I remain irritated. --ClemRutter (talk) 17:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I restored one file where the animal only takes up a small part of the image; I was off on that on that one. In the others, the animal/s take up more of the image space and are more the focus of the images, and so I don't think DM applies with those. If you disagree with my deletions, please file an undeletion request. INeverCry 20:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


User:André R.21 smells like him. At least the image is not valid as the "source" had far less resolution than this.--Denniss (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

  Confirmed, blocked, and tagged. Upload deleted. INeverCry 23:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Preservation is life - Les sons de ma vie.jpg

I think I already added the OTRS for this file. The permission was from who is the artist and photographer. See other works: File:EAR-SPLITTING TIMBRE.jpg. Jee 05:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

There's two separate deleted images in the history of this file that are of completely different subjects. It looks like the OTRS ticket is for the first one, but I can't be sure. You'll have to check with an admin who has OTRS access. INeverCry 06:09, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
There are so many pictures of the same artwork in his site. So I asked for further clarification. Thanks. Jee 06:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, one of these is the inside of a tunnel with purplish horizontal decorative ribbing leading to an escalator, while the other is the outside of a building with one continuous escalator/hallway tunnel going round it, but this tunnel has vertical loops inside it of various colors. Two very different images. INeverCry 06:52, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes; there are (11-27) so many different views of same artwork. Let us wait for a clear reply. :) Jee 07:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
The permission received on 12/22/2014; so what uploaded first (on 17 November 2014) have the permission; not for the new upload. Or we need to wait for the author response? It may difficult for the author too to say as he too can't see deleted content. :) Jee 14:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Got reply from author; this one has the permission. Jee 12:40, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
This is the 1st upload. The 2nd isn't on his site. INeverCry 20:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Permission granted for Jee 17:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@Jkadavoor: I've restored File:Preservation is life - Les sons de ma vie.jpg. Go ahead and add the ticket when you have a chance. INeverCry 20:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
  Done; thanks. Jee 02:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Diario de avisos de Madrid. 4-10-1845.jpg

Hi! I saw you deleted this file, because of "Copyright violation". As far as I know it was an anonymous newspaper crop from 1845, so I think it clearly falls under "public domain" field for Commons, since the protection in Spain is 80 p.m.a (or publication if author is not known) and in the United States all works published before 1923 are free of copyright. When the deletion "happened" the file had the correct "license template" included, I think, although there was a deletion template too (added by a... bot?) Could you restore the file or a formal request is needed? Regards, Strakhov (talk) 10:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I apologize, other users opened the "formal request". Sorry. Strakhov (talk) 12:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Undelete request: Logo_PUCP.png

Hi, selon the same university, this logo is free of use for educational propuses:

This website is protected by current copyright law. All of the copyrighted materials, including its content and visual design, are exclusive property of the PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF PERU. Therefore, the use, modification, reproduction, distribution, transmission or commercialization of this copyrighted material without the express written consent of the University is strictly prohibited, with the exception those rights recognized under fair use law, which allows for honorable uses such as quotations and use for educational purposes.
--Eduzam (talk) 17:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

An "educational purposes" license isn't enough. Commons requires a free license that includes commercial and derivative use. See our licensing guidelines. INeverCry 20:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Zero-project - Celtic dream (Jamendo edition).jpg

All works done by zero-project (the music and the album covers) published at Jamendo service are published under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Especially Celtic dream (Jamendo edition) is published under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. The full license about each file (and the cover particulary) is published in zip file wiht all album music that contains License.txt with this statement:

Track | License URL

01        |
02        |
03        |
04        |
05        |
06        |
artwork   |

You can download it in the frame: Download -> Free download. Be cearful next time. Electron   22:30, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Nobody should have to download any file to find licensing info. I personally will never download any zip or other private file from any source to confirm a license, as this kind of practice could lead in some cases to the downloading of malware, etc. Also, you placed a license review tag on this file and reviewed it yourself. License reviewers are not allowed to review their own uploads. See Commons:License_review#Instructions_for_reviewers: "Reviews by image-reviewers on their own uploads will be considered invalid". As for the image above, you'll have to take it to COM:UDEL. INeverCry 23:58, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
It is a common behavior on You have also the licens put on the site I have produced: (cc) Some Rights Reserved - Attribution CC BY; You can copy, distribute, advertise and play this album as long as you: Give credit to the artist and the link that goes here -> . Did you read this? Electron   00:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I know that you have "hot fingers" and never like to addmit yours mistake; I have no time to disscass with you this obvious metter, so please go here -> [5] Electron   01:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Whats about: "Reviews by image-reviewers on their own uploads will be considered invalid" - it was add post factum. When I start to be a reviever it was possible to review by image-reviewers its own uploads and it wasn't against the rules. The problem is that some of admins like "Speedy Gonzales" shoot first and then ask about the name. And wade further rather than apologize for the mistake and quickly correct their mistake. It has to be helping? I remind you that the admin role is to help. That's what they were elected by community. Electron   13:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion question

Dear, I saw you deleted 00:31, 14 February 2015 INeverCry (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Sai Htee Seng.jpg Why? can you give me a reason, that is my own work. Saosukham (talk) 03:53, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

This was deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sai Htee Seng.jpg as an unused personal image. In order to keep this on Commons, it has to be used on a userpage on Commons or another project. INeverCry 06:01, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your gnomish and hard work on blocking spambots and closing DRs. :) Jianhui67 talkcontribs 04:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope you enjoy being an admin here as I do. Congrats on that.   INeverCry 06:08, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Page protection

Thank you! :) Ruy Pugliesi 01:25, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Very disapointing

I'm extremely disappointed to see your name among the list of attendees to a symposium with a sexist attitude as [ here]. I really can't accept that this title is funny, useful or constructive to any dialog on the subject. To me it seems the next thing to "Hey baby, wanna get horizontal and do some Deletion Nominations?" Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

@Ellin Beltz: Ellin, you're absolutely right. I didn't give it enough thought before signing up. I've removed my name and commented. My original impetus for signing up was both my experience that women editors/admins on Wikipedia and other projects do such a great job, and the high regard I have for Rosie and many of the others who've signed up, but I should've given the whole thing more consideration. I appreciate your coming here to wake me up on this. I'm sorry to be part of anything that's upsetting to you or to other women (but especially to you - I enjoy our friendly relationship so much). INeverCry 23:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm not mad at you personally. I'm just sorry that 100 years after women's sufferage, this sort of situation still happens. A title like "how to pick up more women" is exactly what Wiki is not; it's not social media - it's not a dating site - it's not about how to pick up more chicks, but how to work together in a gender-neutral environment. I really appreciate your comments over there, I'm sorry they're so tone deaf that they don't see it. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)


Could you close my RFA? I withdraw. Thank you. 1989 23:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

I've closed it and archived it. INeverCry 00:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. 1989 00:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of pictures

Can you not delete my pictures? Porn is legal here in Canada. Chipperdude15

@Chipperdude15: The issue here is that these two photos were attributed to "Jeff Thomas - (". Jeff Thomas is a professional photographer, and the two portraits you uploaded were obviously professional quality portraits. All his photos in his Flickr stream are copyright - All Rights Reserved. We would need OTRS permission from Jeff Thomas to host the two files you uploaded here on Commons under an acceptable free license. INeverCry 03:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I wrote a story about a historical house that my family owned and uploaded pictures of my Great Grandparents and grandparents that are deceased. I own the photos that I uploaded to Wikipedia. Can you help me out and let me know what I need to do to put the pictures back on my page permanently? Do I need to copy write the photos of my family? Thanks in advance. ArchyHaddock

Something to check, please

Thanks in advance. --Fixertool (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done Uploads nuked, user warned. INeverCry 03:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Campari Building

Hello. Regarding this multiple files deletion: the architect Mario Botta is alive, ok, but the Campari building was included in Wiki Loves Monument in Italy 2013 (List of 2013 monuments on Probably the files were missing the template {{Monumento italiano}} and the correct code (0152091442) included in that list. Is it possible to undelete those files? Many thanks in advance. --Kiado (talk) 15:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Those were full-frame images of a modern work of original architecture in Italy. They were deleted per Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Italy. INeverCry 19:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I see. My doubts were just due to the fact that the Campari Building was included in the lists of photographable monuments for WLM 2013 ((List of 2013 monuments on - monument code 0152091442). I thought that a specific authorization was obtained for that building, and that including the code in the file description was enough (ok, the WLM 2013 code was missing on those files, but the authorization is still there and valid). But now I am not sure if the no-FOP issue is still applying for monuments included in that list. FYI, I asked User:Jaqen (it-sysop) for support on this. Thanks. --Kiado (talk) 23:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
What's needed would be permission from the architect or architects who designed this building, usually through OTRS, as they own the copyright, and that copyright is fully protected under Italian law. Hopefully Italy will follow Russia sometime soon and change their copyright law to allow freedom of panorama for buildings. INeverCry 23:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)


{{You've got mail}} 1989 16:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I've replied. INeverCry 20:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Green Valley photo

I see that File:GreenValleyRanchPool.JPG was deleted as a copyvio. If it's the file I think, it was one that I took while I was there for a conference. If you have a moment, could you see if the metadata matches File:Kora Temple dining hall balcony.JPG or File:RockyReachDam.jpg, and if it was taken in September 2008? If so, it's not a copyvio. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done I've restored it. INeverCry 19:36, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the review! :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)


Did you see when I added the comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ilpla mõisa peahoone (2014).JPG? There actually was no time for a response before your deletion. --Didym (talk) 02:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I explained my deletion badly. My concern was that the uploader, Ulv795, edited last on Feb 24, and before that in Nov 2014, so they may not edit here again for weeks or months, as they're not a regular contributor. They may also not be familiar with how DR works since they only have 38 edits here in 3 years. I didn't want to take a chance that their personal info would sit around for an extended length of time. INeverCry 02:23, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, that sounds reasonable. I nevertheless restored the file, uploaded a version without the metadata and deleted the original version again. --Didym (talk) 02:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Slender Man graffiti

Why was it a copyright violation? The guy who drew the picture actually posted on my talk page to thank me for adding it. the photo originally came from Flikr. Serendipodous (talk) 07:31, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

The file referred to is File:Slender Man graffitti.jpg. The photo was deleted per doubt regarding the copyright of the artwork in it. Since the artist who created it is supposedly a minor, I would think the father would be the copyright holder, if that post on your talk is enough to legally establish authorship. That's questionable. I would suggest you post an undeletion request since this is a pretty complicated case and there are other editors and admins there who are more knowledgeable regarding copyright questions like this than I am. INeverCry 07:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Yao beina

Can you explain what does it means? I never seen this kind of nomination before. It means that any picture can be deleted just because of low quality and abscence of EXIF? --Алый Король (talk) 14:56, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

In this case we have an image of an Asian singer performing. It looks very much to me like a TV or video screenshot. In general, low quality and lack of EXIF is often a factor in an image ending up deleted, but usually there are other factors that point to copyright violation such as the subject/s, place/s in the images, the history of the uploader, the availability of the image at other sources on the internet, etc. INeverCry 21:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for your invaluable contributions here! OSX (talkcontributions) 01:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that, and for all the great work you do here. INeverCry 01:45, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi INeverCry,

I found it somewhat curious to see you delete a picture of Bonhöffer, while providing a link to a website that specifically states that the copyright on the photographs "spätestens erlöschen in 2015": escheate in 2015 at the latest. Were you aware of that? Gunmhoine (talk) 02:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Какой образ вы спрашиваете о? INeverCry 04:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Help me

Please help me out.This image Arvind_Iyer.jpg was sourced from and the home page on this website has a Creative Commons release note.Can you help me ensure that it has the right tag.Why has it been nominated for deletion.thank you (Chriswilkins (talk) 04:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC))

I've cleaned up File:Arvind Iyer.jpg and reviewed the license. INeverCry 05:13, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of File:West_Valley_Fault_Line_Carmona_Estates.jpg

Please clarify violation. Thanks Schadow1 (talk) 07:16, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

The watermark and labeling at top and bottom left state "Image © 2015 CNES/Astrium". You state that you're Ervin Malicdem the illustrator. We would need OTRS permission from the copyright holder of the base image CNES/Astrium. It may also be necessary for you to confirm your identity and copyright permission for the illustration. INeverCry 09:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
It is a gearth save image option and it allows such use. Schadow1 (talk) 10:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Arvind Iyer.jpg

Hi, I suppose you intended to delete it? Regards, Yann (talk) 08:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

@Yann: I was asked about this file a few posts above this. I've re-closed the DR as keep due to the source info given which seems legitimate. Have a look though, and give me a second opinion on it. INeverCry 09:30, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, fine. Yann (talk) 09:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

File:« Limites » du Sahara et du Sahel.jpg and File:Principales zones de production de cacao en Afrique de l’Ouest.jpg

Hi, I see you deleted my picture "File:« Limites » du Sahara et du Sahel.jpg" and "File:Principales zones de production de cacao en Afrique de l’Ouest.jpg" for copyright violation. It is not, I see you can't read French, so what the hell do you give your advice on what is legal or not. The picture language is French. You just didn't read the legal status on the source page ! I request you undo what you did. --Loup Solitaire 81 (talk) 11:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

You can't assume good faith and be rude at the same time. Take your request to COM:UDEL. INeverCry 18:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

File : File:Orthodox Cathedral Tirana.jpg

The file was deleted based on No-FoP in Albania . I will assume good faith here , however let me be very clear , the photo is not a Panorama , and even if so according to the law of Albania as per text : ' "It is allowed without the author’s approval and without payment or remuneration the reproduction, broadcasting or the communication to the public by wire of a picture of an architectonic work'Bold text',' . I would appreciate if you would re install it , or otherwise i will be forced to involve other administrators , because this deletion is unmerited . Gjirokastra15 (talk) 14:57, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't respond to threats. Involve whoever you want to. INeverCry 18:57, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

David Manzur

Hello, my name is Felipe Achury, I'm the assistant of David Manzur, colombian painter. David and I requested to update the information on him on wikipedia to Mrs. Marcela Franco Lozano. As we were new in all this, we received advise of one of the administrators regarding copyright issues. He was very kind and told us how to avoid any copyright infringement, that's why David Manzur sent an email yesterday authorizing Mrs.Marcela Franco Lozano to upload pictures of his work, since the primary and only source of images of his work to different colombian and foreign media is his studio. The Email was sent from his personal Gmail account to the following email address: Moreover, he did make clear that only Mrs. Marcela Franco Lozano was authorized to upload any pictures of his works of art. We do hope to receive your advise on how to solve this, because our only goal is to create proper Wikipedia and Wikimedia articles on his art. We know that you have expressed your views to Mrs. Marcela Franco Lozano, and having in mind that maybe you didn't know about the Email authorizing her actions, you would be absolutely right.

We blame our inexperience for all the mistakes that have been done, but we want you to know that Mrs. Marcela Franco Lozano does not intent to do anything wrong and, as I said, our main purpose is to create proper articles on David Manzur.

I thank you in advance for everything, and I do hope that once Wikipedia and Wikimedia know about David Manzur authorization to Mrs. Marcela Franco Lozano, she could have your guidance and advise to finish the work we have trusted her to do. Please excuse my english. My mother tongue is spanish. Good night.

Hi Felipe. The OTRS member who handles the email will take care of it from here. INeverCry 06:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

File:TOPIO 1.0.jpg

Hi INeverCry, you have deleted this file although it was not nominated for deletion. It was just mentioned in a comment by me in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by HarryTrung. May I ask you to undelete it? Thanks, Robert Weemeyer (talk) 07:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 08:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi INC :-)! The OTRS system is looking for trusted volunteers. I would like to invite you to look over what OTRS involves and consider seeking approval at the volunteering page. Best regards --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Now that I'm CU again, I don't really have enough time for OTRS work. INeverCry 22:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vitoria - Graffiti & Murals 1104 02.JPG

Hi, Are you sure about this? I thought there is FoP in Spain for this? Regards, Yann (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

The nomination statement was carefully prepared and clearly addresses FoP in Spain. -- (talk) 14:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Do you happen to have a good response to this? Even though it's for me, I don't know what to say. 1989 23:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I would direct them to ask about it at COM:VP or COM:HD. INeverCry 00:19, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for the advice. 1989 00:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Almost there

INeverCry, when you closed this request, I think you forgot this one. José Luiz disc 00:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 01:07, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi, although usages still show up in WhatLinksHere, this template is unused as the only place /lang pages might normally be transcluded in are /layout pages. After making dummy edits to all remaining /[langcode] pages of the template, at least no templatespace usage shows up anymore, maybe that's convincing …    FDMS  4    21:16, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 21:55, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Enseñanza de la Lectura.jpeg

Quisiera saber porque eliminaste mi archivo si estoy contribuyendo a una página web que necesita esa foto me gustaría que te comunicaras conmigo y me explicaras porque lo hiciste o que lo decicieras, conociendo las reglas de subir un archivo. Gracias. --Santiago Martínez ∞∞ (talk) 01:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

This was deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Enseñanza de la Lectura.jpeg. I see from the history of the image that you tried to tag it for deletion yourself earlier. This is a small, relatively low quality, shot of a girl reading that doesn't really indicate where she is, etc. Anyways, I don't speak Spanish, so you might want to file an undeletion request if you disagree with the deletion. INeverCry 04:28, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


Heya INC! Congrats for always being the first lol. Now, I should build a clone of you. :D Jianhui67 talkcontribs 05:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

It's good to see you and Green Giant up near the top. The rest are grizzled veterans... As for cloning me, I wonder if they'd let me delete my clone's nominations and vice versa? We'd probably run out of images and pages...   INeverCry 07:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Do you ever go to sleep? :P   Oppose cloning you, because there wouldn't be much left for the rest of us to do. Green Giant (talk) 08:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I used to have some insomnia. At that time I was the #1 most active admin here and at by log actions... INeverCry 08:56, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't know how you and Fastily do it but even a concerted effort on my part rarely brings me up to 20% of your admin actions. I figure the only way you do it is by literally being online 24-7, so I have an image of you sat at your computer, your eyes filled with red lines, and your eyelids being held up with match-sticks! Green Giant (talk) 17:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
That image really isn't that far from the truth some days... INeverCry 22:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
LOL. Congrats for beating me to a copyvio deletion.   Jianhui67 talkcontribs 08:08, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Ahahaha you clashed with me again. xD Jianhui67 talkcontribs 09:49, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm off to bed in a minute, so you'll have the run of the place. INeverCry 09:53, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

My artwork was deleted

Hello, my name is Mac Camacho, and my Wikipedia username is drcamachoent. I started creating artwork using InkScape about two years ago, you can find me on or in google scholar under my full name Macario Camacho. I am an otolaryngologist and enjoy educating patients. I believe in creative commons and the ability to make my artwork open source. I was originally unaware that I was not supposed to upload my artwork with my name on it. I apologize for that. I am planning to upload the artwork without my signature. In the comments section where it states why the artwork was deleted, it reads that it is unlikely to be my original work because it is throughout the internet. My belief is that people have uploaded the artwork and have used it for their presentations. That is actually the goal of my artwork so that others can use it. I would like to undo at least the photos that do not have my signature. Some of these works took me over 20 hours to make, and I would like to continue to share them as that is the spirit of creative commons. I also use the "sleep

surgery" website on a daily basis in clinic, and without the images, it is hard to do so.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Drcamachoent (talk • contribs) 07:13, March 10, 2015‎ (UTC)
If you need any files temporarily restored, you can post an undeletion request. You could also send an email to OTRS regarding your authorship of the deleted files. INeverCry 07:52, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion request/File:Arina rupakheti at Thamel.jpg

Hi I would like to request you to close the topic. I appreciate your help. Its an unauthorised file. Please help me.-Rowdy srezan (talk) 12:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 18:44, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


Could you reestablish Nive_sings.jpg. It was not a copyright problem. It was uploaded by the photographer herself. I am aware that it appears in a Greenlandic newspaper. I know that we were not fully clear about writing that in the description. — Fnielsen (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Due to previous publication, OTRS permission from the copyright holder is required. INeverCry 00:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Mistake rollback

My bad. 1989 00:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Was gonna undo myself, but my oh my, you are fast. 1989 01:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Why did you delete this file File:يار محمد عليزی.jpg

Hi Why did you delete this يار محمد عليزی.jpg file? The flicker copy rights were changed. --Khangul (talk) 23:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC) still shows a non-commercial license, which is unacceptable for Commons. See COM:L for acceptable free licenses. INeverCry 00:12, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

You you== a question ==

I've made a rename, but I'm hesitating now. Is a symbol "@" allowed in names? Wieralee (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

He uses it a lot in file names. I've seen it used by others here and there. I'm not aware of any problems with this usage. INeverCry 23:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Take a look at the fascinating MediaWiki:Titleblacklist and its talk page. Att is a legitimate, innocent character you can use. However, I’d advice against using it as a surogate for "a", just like zero is a legitimate characeter in a filename and yet when user instead of "o" the result is, i.m.h.o., unacceptable. I restrict the use of "@" in my filenames to semantic equivalents of "at" (like this File:سلالم@ⴷⵣⴰⵢⴻⵔ.jpg, meaning "stairs “at”/in Algeria"), especially in languages where the replaced word is a mnemonic of "@", such as Portuguese "à" (="at the"); this allows for spaceless filenames that mean "something in/on/at whatever". Another possible use of "@" in filenames is its (obsolete) iberian meaning of arroba: Maybe to name a photo of well charged donkey. -- Tuválkin 05:59, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your decision to retain File:Usda shipping chart composit.png. I appreciate the time and effort that you put into the review process and working to make the commons a great repository of media.

  Bfpage |leave a message  12:13, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


Here is what Magog the Ogre and I said :

Hello. I'm the owner of this file. In august 2013, I went to Musée Grévin Montréal and I took this picture. Why do you say that this file is copyright violation ? Eliedion (talk) 12:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
@Eliedion: very sorry, I totally misread the history on this one. I've restored it. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
So is it possible to restore it ? Thank you very much Eliedion (talk) 19:34, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
I've restored your upload, but I've left the drastic crop by Judor92 deleted. I think a better crop can be done, and uploaded as a separate file. INeverCry 19:42, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Eliedion (talk) 20:25, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what happened

I don't know what happened all over your page history, but I did not do whatever appeared there a little while ago. What ever would have caused that to occur?

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:10, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what you're referring to. INeverCry 21:14, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

keke palmer


why have you delete this file,   and who is the owner

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Judor92 (talk • contribs) 21:23, March 13, 2015‎ (UTC)

My pictures is removed

Hello sir how are you i hope you'll fine.

l'm Ali form Iraq so may be i can't talk easily by English but i will try to make you understand the point.

i'm new in Wikipedia and Wikimedia so may i uploading some pictures that have copyrights without understanding what the right permission of each one such photo for this dead person :

but there are pictures taken by my Nokia N8 and they removed also how can i restored them ? my best regard .--Qudees (talk) 22:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

You can post an undeletion request listing what files are your own creations. In regard to your copyvio uploads, you may want to review COM:CB, COM:L, and COM:FOP#Iraq to help avoid uploading more of these. INeverCry 22:51, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Free image

I wanted to upload a free image of actor Allu Arjun but failed to do so in the recent past. I found an image of him at flickr uploaded yesterday with the license cc-by-sa-2.0. Can i upload it? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

  • (talk page stalker) I would say no, as that image appears to be Flickr washed. It's low resolution, has no EXIF, and has been available at other websites (such as here) for a much longer time than on Flickr - where it was only uploaded yesterday. ColonialGrid (talk) 05:29, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion. I shall refrain from uploading it. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Pool jumping.jpg

Ellin Beltz suggested I ask you for assistance, perhaps because you closed the prior DR on the copyvio issue. See [6]]. The DR which Ellin closed with deletion included this file, but all the other files were deleted for apparent copyvio on the argument that they were photos of the uploader and therefore, it was argued, could not be "own work." (See the 2nd request under Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Shustov.)

From the prior DR, that would not appear to be the case with this photo, but, of course, I cannot tell. Would you mind looking at this file? The page was in use on ru.wikiversity, apparently, from the delinker log, so it would ordinarily be within scope. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 18:23, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

I originally kept this at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pool jumping.jpg. This particular image is a screenshot from In the screenshot (at 2:41 in the video), Shustov is in the pool and his grandson is jumping into the pool. As can be seen/heard from the video, the camera's being held by a woman, likely Shustov's daughter/the boys mother. I stand by the keep. INeverCry 19:31, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Shustov is in the image, so he cannot be the photographer. He has claimed that he shot this with a self timer, but that is impossible to believe both because the child is in motion and because it may come from a video. I think this is just another example of his lying, which is well established both here and in a California court. I see no reason to restore it without a license from the actual photographer and I'm not at all sure it is in scope -- Shustov is well known for putting his images in various places and then claiming "in use". For me, it is just a personal image and therefore out of scope. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict with below) Thanks, INeverCry, your response is appreciated and useful and I expect no further comment from you. From what you say, this image may fall under bystander selfie guidelines, which I am working on for presentation to the community, or the mother would need to be contacted for a release, it would depend on details. In the first case, there is a license issue as claimed by Jim and some others. In the second case, I am contacting Shustov for more information and OTRS may be needed. Because the bystander selfie issue has dogged this wiki for years, I'm working on resolving it permanently; WMF legal opinion has already been issued that the subject owns copyright in an ordinary bystander selfie, but Commons has never developed a settled policy.
It is unfortunate it is thought necessary to make claims about "lying." The court case Jim refers to should never have been mentioned on-wiki, it's a privacy violation (I blanked it), it's old, and the court did not find what he claims as "well-established," and it is irrelevant here.
While Shustov is a naive user, almost eighty years old, he was also, here, faced with what looked to him like harassment, and the claims of "lying" added to that. As is common with naive users, he did not take it well. However, Shustov did not claim, as far as I've seen, what Jim claims he said. He clumsily gave an argument that others have made in similar situations. (However, I haven't seen everything.) The basic charge of "lying" as "well established" is apparently based on Shustov's claim of "own work," which is common with bystander selfies. That claim would probably be sustained in court, contrary to what Jim has been saying. Bottom line, there is a general issue here that should be decided by the Commons community, not raggedly and in quite different ways by different administrators. I am still compiling research, preparing to present something very clear to the Community, not some half-baked, oversimplified, and ungrounded personal opinion.
The image was in use and Commons policy on that is clear and necessary, for Commons not to be a controller of content on the other wikis. However, that is trumped by copyvio, and rather than dispute the many pages that have been deleted on this particular copyvio argument, I'm seeking to resolve the basic issue first; then, if appropriate, all those pages could be undeleted at once, with one request. I may, however, make a single request first, to test the water. Or I will pay attention to advice from experienced users. Thanks again. --Abd (talk) 21:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
@Jim I've linked the video above. If he claimed this was on a timer, than he's absolutely lying. You can hear the woman holding the camera talking to him throughout, and even see her feet at the end of the video. It sounds like it's his daughter the way she speaks to him and the boy. I would still support restoration if this was in legit use, as it's obviously a family/home video, and the camera was very likely given to the daughter by Shustov for the particular purpose of filming them. INeverCry 20:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, INeverCry. I've read through most of the discussions and saw Shustov raise a hypothetical argument about self-timers. I think his point was, essentially, "what's the difference?" I've been corresponding with him extensively and confronted him on this argument, saying it could be misleading. However, a clumsy argument does not a copyvio make. On this point, "own work," many users are confused, and, I'm finding, so are at least a few Commons administrators, firmly stating things about copyright, that are denied by experts. Shustov's naive understanding was probably closer to legal truth in the real world than the abstract and oversimplified interpretation that was being used to delete his work. But this will all be covered in what I bring to the community, and I trust that the community will sort it.
If the files cannot be hosted here, then I will advise Shustov about local policies, and he may upload files to local wikis, as he has started doing in a few cases. However, it is superior if files are hosted centrally, that's part of the mission of Commons, if it can be done. I understand -- fully -- that Commons cannot host non-free files, but local wikis can under appropriate policies, I've been dealing with this for years. So we need to know, to avoid future disruption. --Abd (talk) 21:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
You can't have it both ways. Either Shustov is a naive 80 year old, unfamiliar with computers, needing help, or he is a sophisticated structural engineer whose work deserves to be on Wikiversity. And, by the way, as someone in the same age bracket myself, I find your use of age as an excuse for his poor performance insulting.
As far as his lying goes, it is certainly relevant. Commons depends a great deal on the honesty of its users. That is true not only of the copyright status of uploaded images, but also of the image descriptions themselves. If a user says that an image was taken at such and such a place, or of a certain person, there is often no way to verify that independently unless another user happens to go to the place or know the person. Aside from the court case, Shustov has lied about using a self timer on a variety of images, including cases where it was perfectly obvious that that would have been impossible. His lying makes everything he says suspect and, for the most part, makes all of his images valueless -- how can we believe any of his image descriptions? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:55, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Deleting images


Today I have uploaded around 2,000 images from Flickr that are now contained within Category:Photographs by NZ Car Freak. I have just spoken to the author on Flickr, and he has asked that some files of his private vehicle be deleted because he did not wish for those to be on Wikimedia. Are you able to facilitate this please? I understand that the licesning is irrevocable, but I emailed the Flickr user to relicense and he did, so I think a courtesy deletion of just those files below would be the right thing to do. It is just a handful of images out of the 2,000 uploaded, specifically:

Cheers and thanks in advance! OSX (talkcontributions) 22:51, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 23:15, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks so much for that! OSX (talkcontributions) 06:33, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
I've realised I missed a few that did not come up in the search results:
Cheers, OSX (talkcontributions) 12:27, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
  Done INeverCry 19:20, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

File restoration required

Hello, I am Ethically Yours and one of the OTRS agents. I came across the permission statement for the file File:Colegio Nacional de Buenos Aires - aula (03) escritorio y pizarrón.jpg. It was deleted by Alan as the email had not yet been reviewed at that time, but since he's busy in real life, I hope you can get the work done. Thank you. Ethically Yours (talk) 15:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Done. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

DST map

Can I get permission to edit File:DaylightSaving-World-Subdivisions.png, I want to update Chile and Nagorno-Karabakh which both abolished DST. --Leftcry (talk) 08:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Same question, I prepared changes in Tocantins (no more DST) and Mato Grosso (fully DST), both valid since 2013, see File talk. I have now also added the 2 other changes and uploaded it. Alternatively, if you grant upload rights to Leftcry, pls Lefty include my 2 changes too :) --Cubitus (talk) 19:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I've unprotected it. INeverCry 20:09, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Sock puppets

Hello INeverCry,

I noted you blocked the user accounts User:Nobelpeopleuploader and User:Oldnewnew. The user sure seems to be a "regular" and has been previously blocked on enwp. I have not yet blocked Oldnewnew on dawp (he has several other accounts blocked there). Are the two accounts confirmed sock puppets ? --Pugilist (talk) 17:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes. See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Nobelpeopleuploader. INeverCry 20:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


{{You've got mail}} 1989 16:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Replied. INeverCry 20:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Wifotoki, Exxcaliburxxe, and OzieeCAR copyvios


Regarding Commons:Deletion requests/File:TJIIinterior.jpg do you think it is best if we delete the remaining images from users: Special:ListFiles/Wifotoki, Special:ListFiles/Exxcaliburxxe, and Special:ListFiles/OzieeCAR? It is quite obvious that this user's images are copyvios to me (they are the same person, with two of those accounts linked to sock puppetry at Cheers, OSX (talkcontributions) 05:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done and did some other related deletions/blocks. How about this guy? Looks ducky on that Mitsubishi Magna article. We'll see what CUs come up with. INeverCry 06:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that. CtrlXctrlV is the same person I suspect. However, this is a new "fresh start" account, and frankly I have had no issues with CtrlXctrlV at This user under a new alias is now a valued editor and has been for months (and very easy to deal with). These accounts that you have today blocked are pretty much all old sock puppets from the time we had the issues at The only exception is OzieeCAR, a newer account from this year.
I have sternly warned CtrlXctrlV that uploading any future copyright violations is unacceptable and that there is a real risk of blocking next time. I trust that this is enough to keep him at bay. I was not intending on taking up a formal complaint because of the otherwise valued content contributions. Cheers! OSX (talkcontributions) 07:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Deletion Explanation

I would like to know what is the reason for deletion of this file [7] since all of the parts of file are my own photos. I will upload the same file since it was not justified move.--MirkoS18 (talk) 13:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@MirkoS18: I've restored File:ТРПИЊА.jpg and only left the first revision deleted. My apologies; I hadn't meant to delete the whole thing; that was my mistake. INeverCry 18:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you (: .Sorry if I sounded a bit rude this morning. I wrote my message on first notice, on my short break. Thank you once again and have a good time.--MirkoS18 (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Erroneous challenge of File:Rootstrikers logo lg.png

  1. Could you please explain why you think File:Rootstrikers logo lg.png "is copyrighted and not published under a free license", especially since the source today (2014-03-19) as when it was created clearly says, "All Rootstrikers Content is licensed as Creative Commons Attribution 3.0"?
  2. What do I need to do in the future to avoid this kind of problem?

Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I've fixed it up. My apologies; I didn't look into it close enough. INeverCry 19:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Has the Wikimedia Foundation been sued over copyright violation? If they haven't, I suspect they will be sued if the Wikimedia's enemies can find a way to claim violation. In any event, I would expect that Wikimedia's official policies with minimal enforcement might not provide adequate defense, especially given the threat of a w:Strategic lawsuit against public participation, described in Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig. The work you are doing in this regard, though personally upsetting to virtually anyone associated with anything for which the copyright was challenged, could provide essential defense in such a lawsuit. DavidMCEddy (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Debo aclarar, respecto a la imagen del escudo de FSB, que no viola derechos de autor, ni ocasiona problema alguno, porque yo lo subí y se encontraría en la misma situación que cualquier emblema de alguna institución, partido o país del mundo, que se encuentra en wikimedia; ya que tendríamos que eliminar los símbolos de todas ellas, y ninguna tendría derecho a mantener sus símbolos, los cuales son empleados en toda circunstancia, inclusive, fuera de wikimedia. Antes que nada, mil disculpas por responder tan tarde a esta objeción--Sergio Portugal Joffre (talk) 01:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Something to check

Thanks in advance --Fixertool (talk) 05:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Looks like a family archive/collection. INeverCry 05:07, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. So I guess I've failed here. Please, remove the template if necessary. I apologize for any inconvenience. Thank you. --Fixertool (talk) 11:22, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Someone, like Klaus Dolle in this case, can own copies of images without being the copyright holder. INeverCry 17:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Figure of Durga at Halebid in Karnataka - 1856.jpg

I am surprised by your deletion of this file. I uploaded pic long time back. Some new user uploads a pic this year. He marks my pic as duplicate. You've kept his pic and deleted mine. How far is your action justified? --Muzammil (talk) 10:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

The older version is of lower quality. If I were him, I might've overwritten your old version instead of filing a DR, but the result is the same. We don't usually keep inferior duplicates. If you disagree with my deletion, you can file an undeletion request. INeverCry 17:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Gipsyska

Could you please close this request as kept (user provided authorship confirmation on radio station web site)? JavaScript hanged with error message for me. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 17:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


I wanted to upload an image of Allu Arjun from Flickr but refrained myself from doing so as it appeared to be Flickr washed. Later i observed this file and thus sent a mail requesting permission from Behindwoods by filling this template for uploading this file. I have a few doubts which i request you to clarify.

First, that template states that the copyright holder, in this case, should send the declaration of consent to whereas this template states that the consent should be sent to So, when Behindwoods sends the email to the first email address, can i upload the file at Wikimedia commons or i should do it at Wikipedia.

Second, how can i know whether Behindwoods sent the declaration of consent to OTRS if the website's team does not send me a mail acknowledging me about the same? Will OTRS send me a mail about the same? How can i know whether an OTRS ticket has been generated? Should i register at OTRS or i will get a mail?

Third, after adding an OTRS pending template (if i upload it), the file gets deleted after thirty days i believe. But, if OTRS ticket is delayed, the file will be deleted. After the ticket is validated and archived, how will the file uploaded by me be undeleted?

I know that i am asking too many things. But i was blocked several times for uploading non free content, including by you. Slowly i am learning to upload free files and uploaded a few from Bollywood Hungama. I don't want to make a mistake. Please do not dismiss this message as some useless query. It is an important one and will be a learning experience for me. For further reference, i am hereby attaching the text in the email i sent to requesting permission :

To the team of,
I am writing to you on behalf of the Wikipedia project <>, an endeavour to build a fully-fledged multilingual encyclopaedia in an entirely open manner, to ask for permission to use your copyrighted material.
Your organisation has on its website content which would undoubtedly enhance communication with our target audience; in order to do so, I should like to ask for your authorisation to use such content, namely the photograph located at -, under the terms of Wikipedia's licence.
Wikipedia licenses all its content under the licence developed for purposes of free documentation by the Creative Commons, the text of which can be found at <>. It should be borne in mind that if you choose to allow Wikipedia to use the stated [photograph, illustration, etc], it will remain copyrighted to you; however, the said licence stipulates that third parties must be permitted to reuse the licensed work so long that they retain the licence of this work and any derivatives from it. Consequently, you may wish to consider carefully whether you are prepared to compromise some of your rights granted to you by copyright law by licensing your work as suggested.
That said, allow me to reiterate that your material will be used to the noble end of providing a free collection of knowledge for everyone; naturally enough, only if you agree. If that is the case, please copy the form at <> into the e-mail by which you grant us permission to use your content, and make any necessary amendments before sending the e-mail to our email response team ("OTRS") at
We shall greatly appreciate it.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
I look forward to your reply.
Yours Faithfully,
Pavan Jandhyala

Please do reply soon. Thank you. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

You should probably ask about this at the OTRS noticeboard. INeverCry 18:55, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I've asked about the same in the noticeboard. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 00:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Imagen 044.jpg

Thanks, INeverCry. I've renamed the file in order to make its name a little bit more accurate. Categories were OK, per your edition. Thanks again :-) --Discasto talk | contr. | analysis 11:51, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


Doctor Kitteh sez: "Have a listen to some files from this cat-e-gory, with a warm cuppa. Cheers!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Ellin. I'm still feeding the multicolored stray I've shown you. She's pregnant for the third time, and I expect new kittens within the next couple weeks. We've been thinking of taking in a couple of the kittens, if we can find/catch them, and trapping the mother later and having her spayed so that she doesn't have to go through more pregnancies. All of her earlier kittens have ended up disappearing, hopefully to good homes, but who knows? She hides them all over. We have at least three adult male cats around who are always chasing after her, so the spaying would end that... I hate the idea of trapping her, but what can you do? INeverCry 20:39, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Spaying sounds like a great idea, she's had plenty of kitties now!! Is there a stray-neuter programme by you which would absorb the cost? Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:46, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
They'll do it for free at the Humane Society, I've just got to go and get a trap, trap her, bring her to them, and they take care of it. It'll be a bit though, as she's got to drop this latest litter first and get them off of milk. Maybe a month or so. We'll see. INeverCry 18:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Images in use

Please stop deleting images which are in use, as you did at [8]. Thanks, Nemo 11:29, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I really think it was inappropriate for you to delete all those images given that the majority of the people in that discussion Opposed blocking them. The WMFoffice has blocked that account globally as a sock of Russavia, but that did not, IMO, give you the authority to delete the images. Reguyla (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I was not aware of that discussion. Sorry INeverCry if my message looked like forum shopping, I only meant what I wrote without reference to other discussions. --Nemo 20:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi, This is DLindsley again? The "english" stlye is the same, maybe the user agent too. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:17, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah it's him... I've increased the block length and removed talk. INeverCry 18:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

User rights

Thank you :-) --g (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Gracias, por el cambio de grupo y la confianza

petrohs (gracias) 02:49, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

A week

Hiya INC: I may be around less for the next week. We just lost a dear elderly friend, not unexpected - but her partner needs support. I'll be around as often as I can. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

@Ellin Beltz: Thomas Hardy:

 Our well-beloved is prisoner in the cell
        Of Time no more.

That's much more important. I'll hold up the fort here. INeverCry 00:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
What a beautiful poem, it well describes her. The last five years had been a long struggle and I am glad she gets to go on the next adventure. Thanks for holding down the fort, I was idly glancing and saw Category:Cipta Media Bersama. Google translate said that means Copyright Media Company. Variable styles, not much in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hardy is one of the very few writers who was both a great novelist and a great poet, D. H. Lawrence and Victor Hugo being others. Sir Walter Scott and Herman Melville might justify the claim too. Some might even chime in with Goethe on the strength of Werther, Elective Affinities, and Wilhelm Meister. I know nothing of modernists and post modernists, etc. Another Hardy poem I recommend is A Trampwoman's Tragedy, one of the best poems in English. As for Category:Cipta Media Bersama, it's in Category:Wikimedia Indonesia... INeverCry 18:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for change my user group :). Gracias por cambiar mis permisos de usuario al grupo de Autoverificados, --Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage?   23:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for changed my rights to autopatrollers. DonSimon (talk) 09:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Suppression des Affiches Printemps Musical des Alizés


En tant qu'assistant de communication de l'association Essaouira Mogador , elle même créatrice de l'événement: Printemps Musical des Alizés. Les affiches que j'ai importé dans commons wikipédia appartiennent à l’association dans laquel j'ai le but de crées un wikipédia pour en informer le public. Je ne comprends pas mon erreur au niveau de l'importation des fichiers. En sachant que les seuls propriétaire de ces affiches est l'association pour laquel je travail. Pourrais je avoir plus d'information, par rapport à la suppression de mon travail?

Cordialement --Kaddourkarim (talk) 12:15, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

OTRS/fr. INeverCry 17:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Another Russavia sock

Hi INC, User:Pan American-Grace is another sock of Russavia (see categories of uploads such as: File:Panthera leo massaica mating.jpg; and this request [9]). ColonialGrid (talk) 15:29, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

  Done Thanks for letting me know. INeverCry 18:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
See Special:Contributions/ too. Jee 07:21, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Fireworks Magazine 2009 - Stormy Atmosphere Colorblind review.JPG

Good day,
I received a notification this morning, that one of the files added to my article ( Fireworks Magazine 2009 - Stormy Atmosphere Colorblind review.JPG ) was marked by you as a possible copyright violation. Well, my article is about an Israeli band Stormy Atmosphere, which exists since 2002, and to my humble opinion, does deserve to be noted in Wikipedia. Unfortunately my article was declined because there were not enough proof for the band to be aknowledged out of Israeli borderline
(a dozen websites and online magazines were not enough surprisingly)...
So I've done my research and found out that when the band released their first album "Colorblind", a famous British music magazine "Fireworks" reviewed the release. Unfortunately, as I understood from the chat with one of contacts from magazine official website, there is no online copy of the magazine from back then. So I contacted the band via their official Facebook page, explained the situation, and a picture of the magazine page with a review was sent to me, so I could add it to my article.
I believe it explains the issue and the picture won't be deleted, but should you need any further explanation, you're more than welcome to contact me. If there is also a possibility that you could help me with the whole article, I would be much obliged :) the link to the draft is:
Thank you in advance for your time and concideration,
Silverray123 (talk) 05:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

In this case it would be the magazine publisher that would own the copyright to the page not the band themselves. As for, I don't personally do much there besides a few image replacements initiated by scripts I'm using here, or by renaming files in use there. Good luck with the article though. I hope you're able to get it passed. Is there an article on about this band? If not, you might want to start there if you speak/write Hebrew. INeverCry 20:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi, I'm posting this because I've found that you are an active administrator on Commons. There must be some problems with Template:Assessments that lead to its incorrect rendering, as on this page File:Gentau Pic du Midi Ossau.jpg, but I don't know how to fix them on my own. Please help with this. Thanks. Quenhitran (talk) 09:08, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm active, but I'm a caveman when it comes to templates and other technical stuff. INeverCry 19:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Photo deletion

Hi, recently you deleted two photos I uploaded, even though they had claimed only some rights (attribution and non-commercial use), is there something I dont understand regarding these licences?Mrwho00tm (talk) 10:44, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Non-commercial licenses are prohibited on Commons. Licenses have to allow for commercial and derivative use here. You can refer to COM:L for licensing guidelines. INeverCry 19:55, 29 March 2015 (UTC)



I saw that you blocked Rockman1880 as a vandalisme only account but I believe that he/she is just someone who tried to cover up a mistake and didn't know how to correct it and than he went beserk. Perhaps he/she deserves a second change? This account doesn't fit the pattern of a vandalisme only account. It was more stupidity than vandalisme if you ask me. Natuur12 (talk) 20:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm busy dealing with Russavia socks at the moment, so I'll leave it up to you. If you do unblock Rockman1880, you'll have to tell him to find something other than open proxy webhosting to edit from. INeverCry 21:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I'll leave him blocked in that case. And keep up the good work :). Natuur12 (talk) 21:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

  Thank you very much for promoting me to an Autopatroller! Dontreader (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey INeverCry, thank you very much for having changed my status to autopatroller! Best, --Deansfa (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

bb Polo

Dear INeverCry

You speedily deleted in good faith the following files, as requested by user:OSX II:

However, these files have been copied from a genuinely creative commons licenced Hungarian blog. In the right column, in the 14th box from the top it shows the CC BY 2.5 HU licence under the header "Licenc". Could you please check this and re-install the photographs. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 04:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

These all have "Processed By eBay with ImageMagick, R1.0.1.M2b" in the EXIF, which is why they were deleted. Is that where the blog got them from? INeverCry 06:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, this metadata suggests that the uploader did not have the authority to license the files as CC-BY-2.5. "Processed By eBay with ImageMagick" is the tag the eBay applies to images uploaded to their website for listings. OSX II (talk) 08:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


Thnx, best regards, --C3r4 (talk) 06:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Deleted photo

Hi, you've recently deleted the following file: The creator/copyright holder actually agreed to publish that photo under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" (unported) and the GNU Free Documentation License version 1.3 (with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). The permission letter was sent to on 03/25. Can you please restore the file or let me know what other steps i need to take to alleviate any copyright violation concerns? Thank you. --Ildar2013 (talk) 14:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

If permission has been sent to OTRS, one of their agents/members will handle getting the file restored once they've confirmed the permission. You can ask about progress at the OTRS noticeboard. INeverCry 20:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


Hiya... [10] seems unclear on concept of copyright, has some of those images, footballers and etc. Please take a look and see what you think? P.S. the funeral is Tuesday and life should be back to "normal" by the weekend. Thanks!! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ellin. I'll take a look this evening as I have a doctors appointment in just a little bit. INeverCry 20:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm back. I don't feel any different though. I thought they we're going to cure me this time...   Anyways, I don't see much to be concerned with in that user's uploads on the surface; a lot of them have passed Flickr reviews, have OTRS, or are from sources like The soccer player images are low quality but have EXIF from a Samsung model. But I only took a quick look really. He's blocked on for socking which of course raises red flags, so if you have time, you may want to look into that, and then see how you want to proceed here. INeverCry 22:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Pre-emptive protection of "User:Russavia"

Is protecting User:Russavia really necessary? I don't see any sockpuppetry-related disturbances. As far as I'm aware, Russavia hasn't touched the User:Russavia page since the WMF locked him out of his account. The protection appears pre-emptive – a prevention against an imaginary future threat. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Jee 14:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not taking about Category:Sockpuppets_of_Russavia, Jkadavoor. Russavia hasn't disrupted the User:Russavia page. Russavia has been globally banned since January, yet he hasn't once touched User:Russavia yet. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 15:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
How you assume a page protection is to prevent disruption from that user alone. It can be from any other IPs like this or that. May be INC has other reasons too. Jee 15:55, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
"[P]revent sock editing [by Russavia]". With a log entry like that, how could I presume otherwise? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 15:59, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
"prevent sock editing" only and see related protection "(anonymous users only, account creation blocked) (Abusing multiple accounts)" :) Jee 16:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC) There is some deleted contibutions too by that IPs that you can't see now. Jee 16:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC) BTW it seems a custom and I see no reason for an exception here. Jee 16:21, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Imagine a world where @Colin:, @Slaunger:, @Jkadavoor: and @INeverCry: gathered to drink beer(alcohol-free) and talk nice things about Russavia. That they are doing --The_Photographer (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Hmm; I had said some really nice words recently: "I personally DO like Russavia, even though failed to tolerate with his behavior." :) Jee 16:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
For that comment, surely you will win a fabulous degree with fabulous paper threads handmade by WMF. You can use it to presume in holiday gatherings with your friends and family --The_Photographer (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@The_Photographer: You're being obnoxious. Please stop. I came here in order to have a discussion with INeverCry, not to listen to obnoxiousness. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Michael. I did the protection for two reasons. One was that he used proxy IPs to try and un-socktag Ukravia and a few other socks and he's used 100+ socks in less than two months so far. The other reason is that I just last night tagged all 110 of his socks, and tagged his userpage with {{Sockpuppeteer}}. @The Photographer: When you next talk to Russavia, can you please ask him not to use his user agent strings to make disgusting personal attacks against Philippe or anyone else, as he has with several of his socks? That kind of behavior is completely unnecessary. I can understand his still wanting to contribute, though that's against his ban, but those gross personal attacks are very inappropriate. I really don't think that you or Beria or anyone else would approve of these nasty attacks if you could see them as I have to when checkusering some of his socks. You should know that I do what I do regarding Russavia and his sockpuppetry because I really do feel it's my duty as a trusted admin and CU to do my best to stop all socking on Commons, no matter who the sockmaster is. If I didn't, I feel as though I'd be playing favorites, which would be dishonest IMO. If I passed up any sock of any sockmaster here, I really feel that that would be unfair to the community. I try my best to do what I think is right. INeverCry 19:59, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Obviously Russavia has not acted in good shape, ie, has acted irrationally. However, if your you let me, I'd like to ask you a question. Forget the Russavia case. How would you feel if you're locked globally without any explanation? and How would you feel if after a while you you realized that this was done on purpose and in bad shape ?, I wish you could answer that, it's sometimes easy to go straight to judge, however, is difficult getting into someone else's shoes, this is a good practice I recommend you do.
I honestly feel very discouraged with WMF and you will observe that simply have not uploaded more pictures. I also feel unmotivated with users who defend these abusive behaviors by WMF, even more than with WMF itself.
In the above question I do not know how you'd feel, however, I feel something like the death of a friend. We're talking about years of dedication to a project that used us, who took advantage of us by an economic benefit in creating projects with questionable results in order to obtain indirect profits. Mediawiki has ceased to be a community project and that is the first step to what lies ahead.
I honestly do not know what to do, when I'm down the street I see things to photograph and upload to Wikipedia, however, I stop and think of all the damage that WMF has made to the community with their disrespect and internal corruption that only seeks Money, however, apparently I think I found something that everyone knew. Projects that benefit the community directly, are abandoned because they can not get indirect economic benefit to them, but other projects with zero metrics are supported because they provide a platform for propaganda and indirect enrichment to set the seed of corruption in other .
When people are betrayed and attacked after giving their best to the community, they react the wrong way. They react like impotence, by a system that is larger and takes advantage of the weakness of the other. --The_Photographer (talk) 20:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Be careful with that word "community". There are perhaps a couple of dozen people who give a s**t about Russavia one way or the other, yet thousands of people active on this and other Wikimedia websites. How would I feel if the owners of a picture-sharing website asked me never to contribute again without explaining why? -- I'd go find something else to do with my life. You really need to get a grip on how pathetic this continued-sock-puppetry is and perhaps when you are older will realise life is full of ups and downs that are way way more rewarding/devastating than an account on a free picture website. -- Colin (talk) 22:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Colin, everybody knows what you think and maybe a lot of people interested in and share your opinion, but I'm not one of them. I wrote a heartfelt message, not directed at you. I once had a friend named Colin, however, that friend decided to take the wrong path. I probably am not an old man but I have enough height to not denigrate others because they are younger than me or because they have a pathetic life, who am I to judge others?m --The_Photographer (talk) 23:00, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • This community has had a series of discussions on the "globally banned user" issue, and is obviously divided, consensus has yet to be found as far as I have seen in any of them. It does not help to claim that someone on one side is one of a "couple of dozen people" who care, while identifying one's own position as that of "thousands." If that were so, there would be no problem. INeverCry, this problem is not likely to just go away. It is going to be necessary to actually seek consensus. That requires respect for all positions, and it will take patience, or it will be elusive. I have stated a suggestion elsewhere, but it is the seeking of consensus that could resolve this. As part of this, it may be necessary to first establish civility policy, not by banning uncivil users, but by firmly guiding them (us!). That is going to take administrative consensus. It's work that has been put off and neglected for too long. --Abd (talk) 22:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Abd, if you took care to read what other say, rather than start today's half-hour sermon, you'd realise that I was one of the couple of dozen who care "one way or the other" and don't include myself among the thousands who don't actually "give a s**t". The difference is crucial -- the "what to do with Russavia" problem is vastly over-discussed by, em, users who aren't actually part of the Commons community. Like you and Michael and some others. Or people who have blocks, bans and other issues with various MediaWiki projects, like you and Michael, and some others. Notice the pattern? Why don't you leave INeverCry to do his job as he sees it, rather than lecture us all on a daily basis about policy and community. The problem simply goes away when Russavia get's a life. -- Colin (talk) 07:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
This is INeverCry's talk page, and I write here with his sufferance, and it is a collective duty of the community to advise its servants. All of us, at best, are servants of the community. I thank INeverCry for engaging in this, it's his choice and wisdom to do so. --Abd (talk) 18:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Colin is correct that I misread his comment; I interpreted it within a misapplication of the context. The point we might agree on is that the full community has not expressed itself on this matter, there has yet to be a wide enough discussion.
If it is not to become a train wreck, it would need facilitation. Such discussions, if they are to actually find consensus without harm, need preparation. Standard organizations have known that for centuries, there are committee meetings that prepare issues for efficient and full consideration by the full membership, and there is protective process. We rarely do that.
What might start this is simply a recognition of the problem, lack of consensus on how to handle global bans. The problem is not Russavia, he is just the occasion bringing it up. --Abd (talk) 18:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
This particular position seems strange to me. The WMF entrusts the electing of administrators, checkusers, oversighters, and bureaucrats here, and hence the day to day governing of Commons to the community, who are volunteers, and yet we need consensus to put any trust in the WMF and the few actions it takes directly? In any event, WMF bans apply to all WMF projects, not just Commons, so I think a wider discussion on Meta with the participation of WMF staff would be more appropriate than an isolated discussion here. INeverCry 23:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
INeverCry, you display a view of overall organizational structure that is not uncommon, but it is not consensus. Discussion of what? The bans? Yes, if the community is going to advise the WMF, it's better done at meta. But this discussion, here, or at least my "position," is about what we do, as the community, and if we don't have consensus, we have something else. My position is that wikis function best when consensus is sought and found and expressed. Is that a strange position? --Abd (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Abd, please meditate your own comment: "What I pointed out was that a blocking admin who says "Can't explain," should be respected, but not assumed to be correct or incorrect. Rather, if there is a claim that the reason must remain confidential, the wiki has users who are chosen for reliability on that. These are not ordinary administrators, this would be the oversighters, most of all, and checkusers are chosen for discretion, and also bureaucrats. Those users have private communication channels, and can be emailed." There are a lot of evidences for this user's ongoing disruptions that I've (may be others too) mailed to crats, CUs, OTRS admins and IRC ops. At least one crat publicly acknowledged it. Please respect the trust that this community has on them. (No time to comment further as I'm leaving for Easter vacations. Have a nice Easter to all.) Jee 02:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
What I wrote was based on a case where Russavia indef blocked Michaeldsuarez and gave no reason. I wrote, about this, that the block should not have been immediately reversed, that doing so was wheel-warring. The block was immediately reversed, and was then reversed back. I wrote that Russavia should have submitted his reasoning privately to one or more functionaries. In fact, Russavia did that, to a 'crat. And eventually the block was reduced by the 'crat to two minutes, for time served. (I.e., the block was not "bad," but also not to stand.) Jkadavoor was one, then, who proclaimed that all blocks must be explained on-wiki. He does not understand my position. I have not written that the WMF bans should be undone, because unexplained. I don't think that. And this is not the issue here. We do not have the power, as Commons, to undo a WMF global ban. We do have the power to decide if it is to be enforced using Community-granted tools, or not, and the WMF has not asserted authority over this. We have not made that decision, as a community, and the lack of consensus is clearly causing on-going disruption. Hence, for the welfare of the communinty and wiki, we should seek consensus and not just keep arguing and acting from our own positions. This is standard wiki-tradition. --Abd (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

@INeverCry: Thanks for the reply. The page history of "User:Ukravia" doesn't show any strange activities, but you might've been talking about the talk page, as the the patrol log displays activity for that day. I'm not sure if that talk page should've been deleted. It might've been useful to keep that page and its history visible as a sort of public record, as its disappearance only makes people like me more curious and ask more questions. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 00:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I have to be honest, if Russavia doesn't want to stop there is little we can do about it. All we can do is expend resources and waste time chasing his accounts and undoing all his edits. I do not agree that he is a net negative and I do not agree that all his positive content needs to be deleted. I don't know why the WMF took the extremely rare measure of globally blocking him but I can't help feel like it as to do with his editing and use of multiple accounts at Wikipedia and his Pricasso prank on Jimbo. IMO, as long as the edits themselves are positive then they should be left. If the images or edits wouldn't be deleted for someone else then they should be left and if the WMF wants to play whack a mole let them do it. If its an obvious sock or vandalism then it should be treated accordingly. I can state as someone with experience there is literally no technical fix that cannot be circumvented and clearly Russavia knows how to do that. Continuing to accuse them, insult them and delete their content is only going to make an already frustrated editor bitter and embolden them to continue. Believe me I have been there. If the user gets the impression that their is no reason to even try and be positive, then all they will do is negative and they can continue doing that for a very long time, even indefinitely. Reguyla (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
w:en:User:Scibaby. Blocked in 2007 by an admin involved in conflict with him. Enforcing this became a major focus of a former arbitrator and checkuser; at one point large chunks of the internet were range-blocked to stop Scibaby. Suspected sockpuppets: 218. Confirmed sockpuppets: 984. Last SSP report: September, 2014. w:en:Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Scibaby gives some history. Read between the lines: Scibaby was never banned. Scibaby was harmless, his supposedly disruptive edits were easily reverted, he was, when blocked, a naive and clueless editor. But being blocked by admins clearly biased against his point of view, he had a challenge to meet. So when Scibaby has some spare time, he has a ready game of w:en:Whac-a-mole to play. This can go on for a very long time. Russavia, in fact, is playing a much higher energy game. It may or may not continue. Reguyla is correct, though. Response that disrespects Russavia will probably encourage him to continue. Human psychology. --Abd (talk) 19:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
And that is, as you stated yourself, an inexperienced editor. Now compare that too Russavia, someone with some technical prowess who was an admin and has shown a high degree of ingenuity when it comes to creating accounts and adding content. I would much rather ignore the potential that its him (or anyone else) as long as they are uploading good usable content and contributing positively. The checkuser tool is garbage and everyone with experience with it knows using its results is more art than science so innocent people are blocked, range blocks are common and non of it is going to prevent Russavia from editing if he chooses too. I'm not even commenting on whether his actions are right or wrong, only that it would require devoting a large amount of time "playing a game". I would ask everyone to consider not giving Russavia an excuse to "escalate" because so far the vast majority of his edits have been positive, I would hate to see what he could do if he applies himself to really do harm and I don't think we are far from getting to that point. Reguyla (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
In May - June 2011, I "evaded a block" on for a very short time, to test something of long-term value, documented at wikiversity:en:User:Abd/Wikipedia/List_of_self-reverted_edits. (My standing community ban was based on that activity.) I was focused on a particular test, but I noticed this: it was much more fun to edit as a block evader than as a regular editor. I also found that I got more accomplished, because my edits had become the focus of a faction and everything was scrutinized with hostile eyes. With only one account did I conceal my identity, at the conclusion of the test. Again, it was all much easier than editing under my account had been. I was somewhat sophisticated technically. I did not use most of what I knew, I did not take precautions to avoid checkuser identification, for example, and did not use open proxies. If I had wanted to continue, I could easily have done so, and I could have made my work difficult to detect, or could have continued in open defiance. Either, whichever I chose.
Russavia has two motivations here: one is to stick it to the WMF, for treating them as they did, and the other is to continue to contribute positively to Commons (which fits with the first part). He also may enjoy the disruption caused, since half of it shows support for him, and the other half is from people he might disrespect, so he is enraging his enemies. I.e., he's trolling. His behavior is not at all unusual or unpredictable. This affair is a form of w:en:police riot (without the negative POV expressed in that Wikipedia article); that is, the response intended to maintain or restore order, causes more disorder. Real police often do not enforce laws, especially status offenses, where doing so would cause disruption, it's within their discretion, frequently. A police officer who insists on the letter of the law may be reprimanded by his or her supervision. The function of the police is to protect the public, not to make sure that everything is "legal." The law is a means to that end, not the goal. --Abd (talk) 20:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Yeah my block on ENWP has long since become more about keeping me out and some admins proving a point so I can't criticize the for their abusiveness than protecting the encyclopedia and there are tens of thousands of other blocks that fall into that same category. The only reason I don't bother with fighting it anymore is I have realized that the majority of the admins and many of the editors there at ENWP are no longer interested in contributing to an encyclopedia so I split off the content I was interested in and I have been building my own military Wiki at Wikia. It is by the way, the only wiki on Wikia that links to commons images, hence a main reason I also started participating here and at Wikidata where I would like to see also be used. When the processes and policies of a wiki prevent improvements to the encyclopedia...ignore them (IAR), and I intend to do just that and have been and anyone who blocks or extends blocks (including mine) at ENWP for making positive contributions isn't there to build an encyclopedia. They are there to build an empire and make statements. No where in the terms of service does it nullify the principle of IAR and I see absolutely no reason why the same shouldn't apply here. So I say again, as long as the contributions are positive and contribute to building the project, then I don't really care who does them, banned, blocked, IP or editor. Because I am here to add content and build up the project. If they are generating vandalism or disruption then they should be dealt with accordingly. We do not live in a black and white word so there is no reason to treat commons like a black and white world. There is plenty of room for gray here. Reguyla (talk) 20:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Just to make it clear, my comment was not made here to attack Wikipedia or Wikipedians. One might notice from that WV page that it's just documentation, and the admins who acted wrt my block evasion are not criticized. They did X [diff or log], that's all. Mostly, they were following policy. (Not always.) My position has long been that the community has the right to ban, and that blocks should normally be respected and handled through due process. Problem is that the process can break down and sometimes protective policy is ignored, that's all. The WMF also has the right to ban. That does not necessarily make it right to push the button. Sometimes yes, sometimes no, and who is the judge? From my point of view, it's neither right nor wrong; but it has consequences. --Abd (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

That blocking

Hello, I come about that blocking you made a few days ago

19:39, 26 March 2015 (talk) 19:39, 26 April 2015 (unblock | change block) INeverCry (talk | contribs | block) anon. only, account creation disabled Abusing multiple accounts

I will unblock this IP address. It is an address shared by an entire training center in Poland. I am actually a bit responsible of the whole situation. I had been asked to train a group of students to create accounts and uploads images on Commons. From distance (Skype). It was supposed to be a small group. It turned out to be... 30 people speaking Polish (I am French) and though I tried to track their user name account created to "clean up behind them", I could not collect all names. And clearly... it went wrong. I collected the IP address afterward.

Normally a second session will be planned later on. I think I am going to prepare them a bunch of freely licensed images in a dropbox and ask them to upload only those. I should be able to better track uploaded images during the session and at worse... the images won't be copyright violations :(

This said, I take the opportunity to ask you where I should ask for a "non block" for 24 hours on a shared IP so that more students can create accounts during the training session ?


Anthere (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I would suggest identifying the accounts as students with a short note on the user pages. INeverCry 15:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "INeverCry/Archive 16".