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 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 →


Black Brant VC rename discussion

Hi INeverCry!

So far GDK is not responding. If it's okay with you, if GDK has not responded by the 11th of October 2012, I'll rename the image to "Black Brant VC XQC launch.gif" without the quotes. Marshallsumter (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. INeverCry 16:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Request for opinion.

Hello INeverCry,

Can I afford to ask your opinion on the request to delete this file.

Good evening and thank you in advance,

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 19:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jean-Pol. I think Alberto Fernandez Fernandez is correct in his deletion vote, seeing that the architect died in 1956. If he had been dead for more that 70 years, the file would be a keep according to the FoP entry for Belgium, but as it is, the file should be deleted until 2026 as stated. INeverCry 19:49, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Files restored

INeverCry, thanx! --Roberta F. (talk) 23:01, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. INeverCry 23:03, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


File:Brussels with River Panorama.jpg

Hello. You tagged File:Brussels with River Panorama.jpg as a copyvio. The same uploader uploaded a bunch of other pictures at the same time, some of which have watermarks (from all different sources) and all of which he claims are his own work. That spat of Brussels panoramas has been his only contribution, so I would think the rest of his work might be suspect, should you choose to act on that. Oreo Priest (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Done: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Shahzad777 INeverCry 19:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)


Commons:Deletion requests/File:Heraldica ccffaa.png

Thanks for handling DRs including mine, but in some cases, notably Commons:Deletion requests/File:Heraldica ccffaa.png, I was hoping that information might be forthcoming to allow the files to be kept. Not every DR needs closing after a week - I'd have left this one open a while, especially as the files were in use. {{DR proposed close}} can sometimes also give a warning of deletion that might prompt someone to do more research etc. The deed is done now, but I just want to give this feedback. Thanks, Rd232 (talk) 09:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Rd232. I understand your concern, and I will try to leave ones like the above open a bit longer, but often when I've left DRs like that open, and looked at most of them a week or two later, there were still no comments or apparent interest for the majority of them. The lack of participation in DRs by regular users and even admins is an ongoing problem. If you look thru the last 2 weeks of DRs you'll find many open ones that I nominated, that are simple out of scope or no EXIF files, and nobody's commented on or closed any of them. September 27th, which I went back thru last night, had atleast 50 open simple DRs of mine. In the end, I'm just trying to find a solution that doesn't lead to big backlogs, because people seldom look thru those backlogs, and files would sit there for ages if someone doesn't decide they've had enough time at some point. INeverCry 17:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
I understand lack of participation is a problem, absolutely. And in many cases where there's not much hope of the file(s) being saved, it doesn't matter much to just close it without any input or any warning (especially if the file's not in use). But where there is some hope of more info allowing the file to be saved, and there hasn't been any input, please try using {{DR proposed close}}, at least if the file is in use. At least it should get the attention of the DR nominator, who might choose to put more effort into it; it may also get attention from passersby, if they know the file is about to be deleted. Try it for a while and see if it makes a difference - I think it should help at least a little. Rd232 (talk) 09:38, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like good advice to me. I'll use that tag in future. INeverCry 19:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks. Rd232 (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

According to deletion of Tommy Joe Ratliff picture files which were deleted

The picture was taken by NOH8 Campiagn and it was published to show Mr Ratliff's support toward the campaign. his other photoes were also deleted and all of them were taken at his concerts which were held at public places and didn't have any infringement towards the copyright...but I would be very happy if you help me to find and upload proper photos for his article because we are trying to make this article for him as a contribute to his hard work and we are trying to give him this wikipedia entry as his birthday prize.thanks for your contribution in this.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by PersianGlamDr (talk • contribs) 12:53, October 11, 2012 (UTC)

There are 2 images of him already available here on Commons: File:Tommy Joe Ratliff.jpg and File:TJRHawaii1.jpg. These look like they would be perfect for use in an article. INeverCry 20:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


Hello INeverCry,

I believe you have no problem with this kind of thing. If you do, please tell me, and I'll leave you a note when I do that. All the best, -- Darwin Ahoy! 01:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem at all. Looks good to me. INeverCry 02:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. :) -- Darwin Ahoy! 02:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

May interest you


A recent renaming you performed at my request has been sort-of questioned there, should you wish to participate to the discussion, your intervention would be most welcome.

Regards, Esprit Fugace (talk) 10:47, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've responded there, and done the move. INeverCry 16:20, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Hallo INeverCry, whats the matter for delete of File:T2.jpg? That was my picture and i wrote that on the Deletion requests. Thanks fo an answer. Regards --An-d (talk) 12:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I've restored those 2 files. The problem was that Jona510 had uploaded copyvio files under both the above file names before your upload and the other user's upload. I would suggest that you give your files a more specific and detailed name in future, because names like T2.jpg are so common that several files have been uploaded under that name and deleted in the past, and this may lead to software errors as in this case. INeverCry 16:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! The file will be renamed. Regards --An-d (talk) 17:29, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

See also

See File:FRQC-tete.ogg please. Fête (talk) 20:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 21:00, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Hi! I renamed this file to File:Monza - Zone under surveillance sign.jpg before deletion (my mistake, sorry!) so I think you deleted only the redirect with the old name! Bye! :-) -- Vonvikken (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. INeverCry 22:29, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Bundschueh-Blatz Lehe.jpg

Why did you choose the least practical name, in other words the dialect name for renaming? The Platz, if you can read the streetsign in the image is called "Bundschuh-Platz". The movement it refers to is the w:de:Bundschuh-Bewegung or in English: w:de:Bundschuh-movement, or if you want to have it more exotic: w:uk:Башмак (селянські рухи). With which other image names is "Bundschueh" to be consistent with? --Wuselig (talk) 23:38, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Ask the user who requested to have this re-renamed: User:McZusatz. Thanks. INeverCry 23:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Well looking at the file history the renaming had already been done in the sensible way I explained above. So why did you rename again?--Wuselig (talk) 23:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
See here and here. INeverCry 23:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I have often wondered what good there is in renaming files, if the image descriptions are okay and the images are well categorized. I guess I will keep on wondering. Do we really need job creation programs in a project of volunteers? --Wuselig (talk) 09:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Another rename request

Further to User talk:INeverCry/Archive 2#Ruben Canelo, this is another request for renaming to spare the subject embarrassment. Two more images have been posted at File:Lord Professor Ruben Canelo of Studley.jpg and File:Lord Professor Ruben Canelo of Studley.1.jpg. The uploader claimed on my talk page that the title is a "Lordship of the Manor", an antiquated and insignificant title of which real and bogus examples are sold to the gullible by websites like this. However (a) anyone trying to use such a "manorial title" in this way in real life would be the subject of ridicule, (b) even with a genuine peerage, the form would be "Professor Lord X" rather than "Lord Professor X".

Prof. Canelo is a real person. An article about him was deleted after en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruben Canelo decided that he did not meet the notability requirement. I don't know whether the people trying to post things with this "title" are the man himself (hard to believe he would be so naive), a friend (possibly a child) trying to help or please him, or an enemy trying to ridicule him. Whichever it is, having images with these absurd titles will expose him to ridicule, and I think (if they are kept) the titles should be changed to Ruben Canelo2.jpg and Ruben Canelo3.jpg

For background, see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stadleyrc/Archive.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:31, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I am the user who first asked you to remove this title from an image, as referenced in the archive link above. JohnCD is the administrator who speedy-deleted the recreated en:wikipedia article "Lord Professor Ruben Canelo of Studley". The six images uploaded by the two (possibly sockpuppet) users are here: [1]. You will notice that the pictures "Professor Ruben Canelo" and "Lord Professor Ruben Canelo of Studley.1" are identical; I don't know what your policy is about identical images. Also, would it be possible to salt the title "Lord Professor Ruben Canelo of Studley" since this has been a repeated abuse? Thanks for your help. MelanieN (talk) 14:07, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Whoever this is, they're obviously close to the subject, seeing that the images are original close-up shots with him smiling and looking comfortable. I'll ask a couple other people here to advise on this. INeverCry 16:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
INeverCry asked me to look at this. I'm a Checkuser here on Commons. Stnmrtn and Rbncnl are likely socks of Stadleyrc -- I can't confirm that, both because Stadleyrc has not edited on Commons and because his edits are past the 90 day limit, but the WP:EN evidence looks moderately solid, and I can say that Stnmrtn and Rbncnl are likely related to each other. I have blocked both for abusing multiple accounts.
As for the images, we have six images uploaded by a drive-by uploader with no other actions on Commons. WP:EN believes that the subject is not notable. We could simply delete all six, following WP:EN's lead, on the grounds that they are out of scope -- we are not Flickr. Alternately, we could keep a couple of them. Note that of the two identical images, the one with the bad name is much higher resolution. Since I'm very much on the fence, I'll leave it to INC to decide. .     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
I hadn't noticed that two of the images were identical. It's further evidence, if any were needed, that Rbncnl and Stnmrtn are the same. I'd suggest keeping a couple - the Prof. is IMO not far off notability and could get there. JohnCD (talk) 23:04, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
If anything, do rename the files. "Lord Professor" is a misleading and factually incorrect title, and particularly so for someone who does not meet en.wp's notability guideline. -FASTILY (TALK) 08:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
I've moved the two files with inappropriate titles, and I've nominated the low quality duplicate for deletion. As for the others, if anyone feels they should be deleted for lack of notability, they can nominate them. INeverCry 16:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 11:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Condition of archiving Village pump sections

Hi, regarding your edits [2] [3] to change the threshold for archiving, I wonder what you meant by "~99.9% of threads without comments are resolved/garner no further comments within 3 days of the newest timestamp." I'm sorry if I'm missing something, but on Village pump, I saw at least this and this and this, out of 20 sections or so, were commented after more than 6 days. On Village Pump/Copyright, this was after 5 days, and this was after 12 days. To me a bit more than "3" as the threshold seems appropriate. --whym (talk) 20:49, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Whym. I think you meant this message for Fastily. INeverCry 20:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
That is right. Please disregard above. I'm sorry for the confusion! --whym (talk) 21:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


Can you turn up the volume of the file File:Fr-Normandie-Marseille.ogg please ? Fête (talk) 21:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Fête, but I have no technical knowledge or ability at all when it comes to audio files. INeverCry 22:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Double-nominated image

File:Roma Palazzo Civilta Italiana 663.JPG was nominated in two DRs: a batch DR and an individual DR. I !voted "keep" in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Roma Palazzo Civilta Italiana 663.JPG and you agreed, but then proceeded to delete it in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana. -- King of ♠ 23:31, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I've restored it. INeverCry 23:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

File Deletion: Rapid Metrorail Gurgaon Map

File:Rapid MetroGurgaon Route Map.jpg was deleted by you marking that it is a copyright violation from I would like to inform you that I am webmaster for this website also and manage all the resources. I have written permission from Rapid Metro Gurgaon to upload this map on Wikipedia. In case there is any other procedure to upload such pictures, please let me know. Vikramjit R.Rai (talk) 07:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

If permission is sent to OTRS, the file can be restored. INeverCry 15:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Commons:Deletion requests/File:POL Międzyświeć Piekiełko.jpg

So what would be valid reason to delete in this case? D T G (talk) 13:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest simply renaming it if the current name is inaccurate, and adjusting the description if that's inaccurate. Alternatively, if you feel it falls under any of the reasons for deletion detailed in Commons:Deletion policy, you can re-nominate it with the proper reason. INeverCry 16:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

A question will not hurt

I already answered there: "I am an expert in…" statement is missing ⇒ I check the expertise wherever a candidate made some track. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I certainly can't stop you from asking any questions you want. I just think the ones you've been asking don't have anything to do with the role of admins and are out of place in an RFA and as the basis of an RFA vote. See Commons:Administrators#What is an administrator?. INeverCry 20:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Deleted picture is not a copyright violation

Good afternoon, you recently deleted the picture "File:Gene Paul, Mary Ford & Les Paul in the mid-1960s.jpg." The recommendation for deletion said: "We were notified on COM:AN that the original photo was shot by Bruno Bernard (further evidence for that [1]), who died only in 1987. The image might be still copyrighted, but surely Joel Kerr is not the author."

That administrator was indeed correct that Bruno Bernard shot the picture. I apologize for the error as this picture was originally uploaded with several others and the metadata got mixed up. However, Gene Paul hired Bruno Bernard for this photo shoot, and therefore Gene Paul owns the copyright. As I'm sure you know, a professional photographer like Bruno Bernard did not shoot high quality promotional photos for free. Gene Paul holds the copyright for this picture and emailed verification to Wikimedia Commons (permissions-commons at wikimedia dot org) on 8/28/12.

If this is sufficient information to restore the picture, it would be appreciated. If not, can you please advise me on how I can assure Wikimedia Commons that this picture is not a copyright violation? I've tried very hard to do everything by the book but it's a challenging process and I'm not sure what my next step should be, so any advice would be very much appreciated.

If needed, Gene Paul could upload this picture from his own Wikimedia Commons account, if the system would allow it since it was already deleted once.

ps I originally posted this question to your colleague by mistake, who kindly responded: Hi Lovelounge, I've only tagged File:Gene Paul, Mary Ford & Les Paul in the mid-1960s.jpg as likely copyvio, but did not delete it. The deletion was performed by my colleague User:INeverCry. However, I wonder why it is still deleted as here it is said, that it had been undeleted. Anway, I would recommend you to ask INeverCry to undelete it (again), so that the OTRS-ticket can be added. --Túrelio (talk) 20:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.Lovelounge (talk) 17:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

  Restored INeverCry 17:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Good morning, I think there might be some confusion between two pictures which were both deleted. The first one was titled Gene_Paul_at_Atlantic_Records.jpg and was deleted by you on 9/20/12 and was then restored by another admin on 9/26/12. The picture at issue now is a different one titled Gene Paul, Mary Ford & Les Paul in the mid-1960s.jpg which was deleted by you on 10/3/12. Thanks.Lovelounge (talk) 15:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Does that mean the one I restored above should be re-deleted? As for the others, I'm going to need direct links to any other files, and direct comments on exactly what needs to be done with them. INeverCry 18:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion request: Blonde woman in abandoned building02

Hi INeverCry. I see, you deleted this file. But in Category:Abandoned buildings there are 8 more pictures of a "Blond woman in a abandoned building". IMO all these pictures have the same problem and are out of scope. Commons is not Facebook! I don't make another request for each picture because all my requests were rollbacked by the uploader. --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Reverting your speedy noms was inappropriate. The user who did so is currently blocked, so feel free to re-nominate them. INeverCry 17:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  note I would make them deletion requests rather than speedy deletions. INeverCry 22:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC)



You deleted a lot of armorial shields in the Bonaparte house, you would at least prevent the politeness of the people who occupy the amorial for months.

this is the least thing and a matter of courtesy.

all that work lost ...

Copyvio is easy ....--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 11:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what files you're referring to. Can you provide a link or links? INeverCry 18:16, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

hello, of course look please, good evening to you--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 18:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Those deletions stem from the following decision: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Katepanomegas. INeverCry 18:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:Apollo class cruiser

When you delete something on Commons, please also alter any links to it from other Wikis. Now we have broken links to this category from the article pages e.g. en:Apollo class cruiser. Rcbutcher (talk) 00:06, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed those article links. INeverCry 00:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks ! Rcbutcher (talk) 02:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Hallo INeverCry, The same problem with Category:Klausen, South Tyrol. I've fixed it in de, it and ru - but not in the other wikis. Doesn't any bot exist for doing such things automatically? Greetings, --Haneburger (talk) 04:19, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

There does, but I didn't do these right. I'll see about fixing it. INeverCry 17:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


See File:Qc-gweilo.ogv please. Fête (talk) 02:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Done: File:Yue-gweilo.ogv. INeverCry 03:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of multiple files

Hello, INeverCry. What tool do you use to nominate images for deletion in a DRs. I always do it manually and it takes a lot of time. Thank you. Btw, thank you for your great work here. Morning (talk) 01:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's good to see you back as an admin. For mass DRs I use VisualFileChange. INeverCry 01:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

thank you

Very much for your work Best regards - Youreallycan (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. INeverCry 18:10, 22 October 2012 (UTC)


hi my friend:

sorry about my pic's, I will try to upload legal files, and sorry about my English.


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Osamaalsaadi (talk • contribs) 11:51, October 22, 2012 (UTC)
Hi Osama. You can use Google translate if needed to read the following. The files you've uploaded so far are problematic. I've nominated all except your two personal photos for deletion as copyright violations. You can't take images from the internet and upload them here with no permission from the original photographers. In order to upload images here, they have to be your own photos that you took yourself, usually with EXIF data from your camera, and at higher resolution, or you have to have proof of permission from the original photographer sent to OTRS. I'm not going to block you from editing Commons right now, as long as you don't continue with the same kind of bad uploads you've been doing. INeverCry 19:34, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

From Osama

thank you for understanding, actually I use these pictures to improve Arabic version of Wikipedea. I promises you that I will try to upload my own pictures ONLY.

I have a question: I have some videos of musiciansm, singers etc. can I made the picture from these videos? is it legal?

see? I can understand and write English without GOOGLE TRANSLATER lol

your sincere


If the videos are modern and under copyright, than stills/screenshots from them can't be uploaded. Some youtube videos may be usable though: see Commons:YouTube files. You might also try looking for freely licensed images on flickr of the persons you're interested in, as many photos there are free and can be uploaded to Commons: see Commons:Flickr files/Guide. For the overall guidelines for image uploading, see Commons:Copyright rules. INeverCry 20:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

WLM Chile

Hi, I have noticed that you have deleted several files that were part of WLM Chile. Have you evidence to prove that the Flickr users are not the same people as those who uploaded the images to Wikimedia Commons? If the answer is yes, the rest of the images uploaded by those users should also be deleted.

Notice that the user names on both sites are consistent. Jespinos (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the files you're referring to please? INeverCry 23:47, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
These were deleted because the flickr sources state all rights reserved. INeverCry 01:17, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


What was the source for this image? (Or could you restore it temporarily and renominate for deletion so I can participate?) I'm one of the biggest copyvio hawks and enforcers on, so I doubt I uploaded a copyright violation. (I'm also cautious in terms of the images I transfer here.) Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I've temp restored it. I can't veiw the flickr source, but I see there's an uncropped version here (Image #9 at the bottom). Let me know what you think. INeverCry 02:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
I think it's fine -- the photostream only has photos that appear to have been taken by the user. Though this image is no longer in the photostream, it was flickrreviewed by another user and confirmed to have a valid license as of 2008. As for the low resolution, I bet it is because I cropped it from the larger version you see at (Note that that photo-list was published a year after the image was uploaded here.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Changed to keep. INeverCry 03:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:The New Orleans Bee 1877 March 0040.pdf


Can you please provide a reason why you decided to close this DR as kept? --High Contrast (talk) 13:26, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Per your comment. INeverCry 16:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Commons:Deletion requests/File:POL Międzyświeć Piekiełko.jpg

So what would be valid reason to delete in this case? D T G (talk) 13:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest simply renaming it if the current name is inaccurate, and adjusting the description if that's inaccurate. Alternatively, if you feel it falls under any of the reasons for deletion detailed in Commons:Deletion policy, you can re-nominate it with the proper reason. INeverCry 16:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
I think it falls into: Not educationally useful: Files that add nothing educationally distinct to the collection of images we already hold covering the same subject, especially if they are of poor or mediocre quality.. But I don't know how to re-open deletion request. When I was taking that photo I thought it was a medieval Slavic Gord, but eventually I realized it wasn't there but somewhere else. As I recently went to proper place and took other photos placed here Category:Międzyświeć Gord, I think the File:POL Międzyświeć Piekiełko.jpg is totally rubbish. D T G (talk) 14:20, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Re-nominate it. INeverCry 16:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Rupert Boneham's campaign photo

On October 1st you deleted a campaign photo of Rupert Boneham, Libertarian candidate for Indiana Governor. The photo is licensed for public use and came direct from the campaign website. I believe your deletion was in error. I have re-submitted the photo and sent a Licenses notice to Commons via OTRS. If the photo was submitted in error or violates a terms of use, could you please help me to understand the mistake so I can correct it. IndyEvan (talk) 18:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the file because the source website clearly states "© 2011 Rupert For Governor. All Rights Reserved" at the bottom, so I don't think I was in error to delete it. If you've sent permission to OTRS, and that checks out, the file will be restored. INeverCry 18:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

In the original upload there was a statement about the campaign licensing this photo for Creative Commons. IndyEvan (talk) 19:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

There wasn't any statement like what you're describing. The entire content of the file was:

=={{int:filedesc}}== {{Information |description={{en|1=Rupert Boneham, Libertarian candidate for Governor of Indiana, in front of the Indiana Statehouse.}} |date=2012-06-01 |source= |author=Troy Hill, Rupert Boneham, Rupert For Governor |permission= |other_versions= |other_fields= }} == {{int:license-header}} == {{cc-by-3.0}} [[Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard]] [[Category:Rupert Boneham]]

In any event, licensing statements have to be made directly at the source or through OTRS. INeverCry 19:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


Thanks a lot for Autopatrol given!--F Ceragioli (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 18:44, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


I am very new to Wikipedia Commons, I don't understand what you mean by Free? To be Honest, Many Websites take Photos from The Internet. I dont like people claiming something with a License, This world should Share along and be friendly but that isnt the case. Example : If someone has uploaded a Picture of themself, They are taking the risk of uploading it and somebody else sharing it. Some Websites dont allow you to save a Picture and they should do that. Really, I don't take pictures of Actors. I find a Source of them from a Website. Please explain to me, Thanks. Big Paul99 (talk) 18:50, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

See Commons:Copyright rules. INeverCry 19:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, So I either need to take a Photo myself or get approved by the someone who uploaded it? I don't really see the point on going through so much Hasstle just to upload a Picture on Wikipedia even though no Hasstle would be caused. The Internet is about Sharing, That's the meaning of The Internet. Why look for Facts if you are not allowed to view them? It seems we are allowed to "View" Information on The Internet but not aloud to take a Photo. Some World that we live in... I'll just stick to creating Pages than uploading an Image. Thanks Big Paul99 (talk) 17:37, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

At "Den Kongelige Afstøbningssamling", the note accompanying Chenier's muse claims that Denys Puech died in 1918. I'm fairly certain that they will correct the date soon. Anyways - I'll try to keep my images at hand so I can re-upload in January (I assume that is easier than asking you to undelete). --Palnatoke (talk) 22:41, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually it would be a better idea to ask me to restore the images if/when you have evidence that they're free files. The files are still hosted here, and I and other administrators can still view them, they're basically just hidden. You could also ask to have them restored at com:Undeletion requests if/when you have the needed evidence of their not being copyright violations. INeverCry 22:49, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


Hi, INeverCry. Could you control this edit ? Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 06:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I fixed it. I've blocked the user since he was warned in May about copyvios, but continued uploading them. INeverCry 06:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Jozef Andrzej Kaja 1972.jpg

Hi. You removed the File:Jozef Andrzej Kaja 1972.jpg because "copyright violation: in the description of the photo in draft, are given execution date 1972 years, has caused reasonable doubts about copyright".

I can easily explain this. My father (User:Januszkaja) inscribed wrong date by accident. Image could not be created before the year 1972, because this year my grandfather (Jozef Andrzej Kaja) got Order of Polonia Restituta (first on the left on his chest). I found a random error, corrected it, and you removed the image because of some doubts. Could you restore it? Thank you in advance.
jakubkaja (talk) 10:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

At the moment, due to what seems to be a software problem, I'm unable to view the file in question. Without being able to take a look at it, I don't feel comfortable restoring it. You should post this request at com:Undeletion requests. INeverCry 17:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Inappropriate deletion

Please see my comment at User_talk:Leighblackall#File:Leighblackall-2193595519.jpg. John Vandenberg (chat) 06:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

It looks like Funfood and Turelio have handled this. INeverCry 18:58, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

File renaming help

Hello agian. How to deal with renaming request like this and this. Thank you--Morning (talk) 15:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 18:50, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


I have started to undelete images from Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Leonfd1992, due to discussions I have had with the editor in question. The first DR was left open for an entire 2.5 hours, without opportunity for the editor to respond, and provide information which has now been provided. There is no reason to believe that the images (with the exception of 7) are copyvios, and that the images as uploaded are their own works, which they are as per their explanation, and for which there are no copies on the internet (I've checked). I have spent the best part of an hour undeleting some of the photos as per information provided, only to see you have deleted them. Can you please undelete the images you have now re-deleted, and I will continue to undelete the other images. This is biting new editors to the extreme in this case. russavia (talk) 02:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Russavia. Somehow I had the dumb idea that Yann had missed or forgotten to delete those ones. I'll get to work on the restorations. INeverCry 02:27, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
No probs mate, thanks for that. I've dropped Yann a note as well to let him know. Cheers, russavia (talk) 02:54, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Image deletion


I have updated pictures for the article about the swiss company Unimed that you deleted because you considered it to violate copyright. But I specifically said that I own those photos by checking the corresponding checkbox when I was uploading those. So I came back to upload my images again, this time with official authorisation directly from the company. But as the images were deleted once, seems like I can't upload it and submit evidences anymore. What should I do ? Thank you for your answer

Xgozux (talk) 10:38, 26 October 2012 (UTC)xgozux

You should go to OTRS and follow the directions there for emailing permission to Commons for your images. The images can be easily restored once you've done this and the permission has been processed. INeverCry 17:25, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Question re: photo

So far, I've had to tag everything else from this new user because it's been taken either from books or from sites where we don't have any information about the image's copyright status. I doubt whether this File:Robin club.jpg is the user's own work because of his/her other uploads. Don't want to tag it on just my opinion, so wonder what yours is. Thanks, We hope (talk) 19:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree that it look suspicious like the rest. INeverCry 20:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Will tag it then, and will get some PD Buck Owens stuff uploaded. ;) Thanks again! We hope (talk) 20:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
I saved you the trouble. INeverCry 20:31, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for beating me to it! We hope (talk) 20:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Archimedes Image

I nominated an image for deletion on grounds that it was misleading. Nobody contradicted me on that and yet you retained it because it was 'widely used'. Might I ask whether you consider that because it is 'widely used' it must be 'accurate', or does 'wide usage' take precedence over 'accuracy'. Might I also respectfully suggest that if nobody has challenged it before it is because the process of nominating a file for deletion is quite time-consuming to learn and many people simply will not bother. Might I also respectfully ask whether you have any knowledge of this subject. If you don't do you not think it might be a good idea to refer this to someone who does? Sceptic1954 (talk) 21:56, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Can you provide a link to the image in question please? INeverCry 21:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Never mind. Here it is: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Archimedes pi.svg. I'm not an expert obviously, but if you are, can you contact some other knowledgable users who can participate in a discussion, perhaps on the file's talk page, rather than a DR? INeverCry 22:12, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
You hinted at one of my concerns above, ie that the DR might not get the needed attention from people who have the necessary expertise. I would figure that that DR would sit in the backlog for months most likely according to my experience. Also, the image is used in the Archimedes article on WP which is a featured article. Has there been any discussion of the inaccuracy or use of the image there or on any of the other WP articles where it's used? Also, can the image be altered or is there any other image that can replace it? The uploader looks to be innactive, so I wouldn't know who else to ask. INeverCry 22:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Zdenek Zeman Conferenza.PNG

Hello INeverCry! what do you think about File:Zdenek Zeman Conferenza.PNG? It seems to ba a grab from a TV broadcast, and has a very low quality and no metadata. Thank you, --Delfort (talk) 11:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

It looks like a member of the press took that image. None of this user's uploads seem to have EXIF, and they're all internet resolution. None of these show up in a google image search though. I've got someone I can ask about this user's uploads. I'll see what he thinks. INeverCry 18:13, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

DR Question

  • Hi. Can you take a look at this DR?--Rapsar (talk) 15:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi Rapsar. I've asked my friend Gunnex. We'll see what he says. INeverCry 18:32, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Original Barnstar
THANK YOU for all your hard work. Steinsplitter (talk) 16:55, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
A very nice surprise to wake up to! Thanks Steinsplitter! INeverCry 18:20, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

FileIraqiMinister_OfHumanRights1.jpg undeleting

Hi, you had deleted the file name "IraqiMinister_OfHumanRights1.jpg" from the page "Mohammed Shia' Al Sudani" as well as its version in Arabic. I hope you will undelete the file because it is free from copyrights and I have permission to upload it as It belongs to Media Center of Iraqi Ministry of Humanrights which I work there. so I hope also it won't delete again because it is the second time in less than a week it has been deleted.and Thanks.

The source website states copyright all rights reserved, and so the image can't be hosted here without direct permission being sent to COM:OTRS from the website/photographer. INeverCry 17:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


Hi. I just saw that my deletion request for this file is closed. However, the argument put forward by Senator2029 did not get the point: the {{PD-IDGov}} licence tag is only for works published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia according to Article 14 item b of the Indonesia Copyright Law No 19, 2002. This photo was not published by the Indonesian government, but by the newspaper company Jakarta Post. Note that in the tag, all items of Article 4 are shown, but only item b is relevant. And anyway, in the official explanation of the law, news is limited as being in 24 hours after publication time (I'm sorry I couldn't find the English version, but if you understand Indonesian, the official explanation is here). I'm asking you to reopen the deletion debate or delete the file directly. Thank you. Sentausa (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Re-nominate the image for deletion with the above rationale. INeverCry 17:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Elie Fahed.jpg

I'm confused... well, more than normal. The log for File:Elie Fahed.jpg says it was deleted by you, but the file still remains with the original upload date. What is going on? Bgwhite (talk) 05:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I've seen quite a few of these lately. I've restored and re-deleted the file, so now it's fully deleted. INeverCry 05:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
I also made you autopatrolled here. INeverCry 05:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Bgwhite (talk) 20:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Erased Photo

I have seen that you erased the photo of File:RodolfoFelixValdes.jpg wich is a picture I took from the Governors Salon in Hermosillo, México from a public portrait, it is paid with public funds so the image is for public domain use. Please reinstall the picture.--Sergiozaragoza (talk) 00:52, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

This is a signed, modern painted portrait. COM:OTRS permission is needed from the author to host the image on Commons. INeverCry 00:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

File move

Thank you for moving the file of the colonial flag of Sierra Leone as per my request. Regards Ianblair23 (talk) 21:53, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. INeverCry 21:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Image license source

I have marked this image: "File:Illayathalapathy vijay, at thuppakki shooting spot, Oct 2012.jpg" for deletion as it doesn't have any source to validate that it is a free image. The uploader is edit warring and gives an illogical reason in the edit summary. I am not much familiar with commons. Can you look into it. --Anbu121 (talk) 13:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

It looks like my fellow admin Turelio beat me to it. INeverCry 18:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Your refusal of rename requests

Hi. I nominated a bunch of files for renaming which you have refused. Each of these had a file of the exact same name on en:wikipedia (most have now been moved by me) which suggests to me that the filename is too generic, hence all the rename requests such that this problem can be avoided in the future (especially where the commons file is more useful and just plain not visible). Is there any chance you could actually perform these moves given this reasoning? I realise my "suggested" names weren't always the best, they were simply chosen based on the information I could garner from the very ambiguous filenames (well, and descriptions etc). E.g., File:Bangles.JPG is far too ambiguous, regardless of the fact that the name I chose wasn't 100% accurate. "A bunch of bangles.jpg" would be MUCH better.

Some examples for you: ( names are the new ones, but some still have redirects and it's likely that these names will be used again)

--> The point I'm making is, yes, they are fine - but leaving them so generic simply causes problems. Giving them a definitely-unique name avoids this - seems to me to be a no-brainer =/. (Also, I've performed this task for months now and you're the first person to refuse these requests...) Nikthestunned (talk) 13:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

It's against Commons filemoving policy to changes names to avoid conflicts with images hosted on local wikis. Regardless, I declined the above moves because I think the names really are fine as they are. If others have moved files like this in the past, I disagree with their doing so. INeverCry 17:57, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Template:FoP-Costa Rica

Hello, INeverCry. I've noticed that you closed Commons:Deletion requests/Template:FoP-Costa Rica as deleted, but the template is still there, so I was wondering if there is a confusion about it. --Ralgistalk 14:46, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ralgis. I must have accidentally closed that meaning to close the one below or above it. I've reversed everything I did, and put it back in the Oct 24 DRs. INeverCry 17:50, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Favor, please

Would you please do a Flickrreview for me on File:Sakonnet Light Rhode Island - Peter Bond Image.jpg? Thanks, .     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 18:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)


Thank you for your trust. Bye. --Antonio1952 (talk) 21:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for your contributions. INeverCry 21:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)


Hi, the file that you have restored, File:Ljubljana_Central_Market_2010_bird_eye.jpg contains no description and licensing. Is it possible to restore this information? Otherwise it should be deleted. Thanks a lot. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a bug. I've asked Jim if he's seen this problem before and if he knows how to fix it. Worse comes to worse, the uploader User:Elekhh who is still active and who uploaded this as own work could be asked to redo the info. INeverCry 21:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:La seconde moitié.jpg

I have tried uploading this image as a copyright image in which I believe is fair use (cover art for a book). After filling out all of the required criteria, the upload button would not unlock to let me upload the image, nor did the form state that there was anything wrong with the information I had entered (form seemed to be locked or functioning improperly). This article is about the author of this book, and the image was supplied by the author of the book. If there is a more suitable license to use for this image then please let me know and I will obtain the required information.

Thank you.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Deschenes Regnier (talk • contribs) 14:43, October 31, 2012‎ (UTC)
Fair-use isn't allowed on Commons. The file should be uploaded to a local wiki as fair-use. Here's where you'd do it on, and Hope that helps. INeverCry 21:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
It wont allow me to upload because it is a file that has been previously deleted.
I really don't understand. It might be better if you asked a French-speaking admin like User:PierreSelim or User:Yann. Sorry. INeverCry 22:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Let me rephrase. I followed your link to, selected the 'l'interface montrant pas à pas la démarche' (or upload) link, and selected the La seconde moitié.jpg file from my CPU. The image begins to upload normally but then I get a prompt stating that this image has been removed from Wikipedia and refuses to to re-upload the image.
You might be better off posting this to Commons:Help desk or to the eqivalent page on There could be a software bug causing the problem. There've been many of these going around recently. INeverCry 22:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Admin's Barnstar
16,000 administrative actions! Congrats. Érico Wouters msg 00:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Hola Érico. Muchas gracias. INeverCry 01:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

more Autopatrol

Thank you. Deep bow in your direction. Bdcousineau (talk) 15:39, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 16:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


Thank you. Best Regards!+PrinceWilly 18:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. INeverCry 19:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Your activity

Why are you deleting picture files on other pages?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 15:45, November 1, 2012‎ (UTC)
I don't know what files you're referring to in particular, but they were either copyvios, out of scope, or otherwise not ok to be hosted on Commons if I deleted them. INeverCry 23:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


I think you meant "Kept" in this closure? Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 13:57, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I changed it. INeverCry 16:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Ungame Portal Fished Bully.svg

Hi INeverCry, hope you're well. When you have a moment, could you do me a favor and restore the most recent version of File:Ungame Portal Fished Bully.svg? It looks like relevant DR pertained only to the old versions of the file. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 09:13, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 16:38, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! -FASTILY (TALK) 01:34, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


I am unsure how to tag some images, or even if I should.

I hate asking but I am: help, please? Thundersnow (talk) 07:43, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I would definitely advise you to ask the uploader Daniel Case about these before tagging anything, especially for deletion. INeverCry 16:00, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

MissBananaThenISawTheSpaceshipEPCover.jpg deleted

Hi INeverCry,

My band's photo was deleted. But i still need to promote my band. How to solve copyright violation?

Best regards, Kurt Huang

Hi Kurt. You can send permission for the image in order to have it restored. Just follow the directions at COM:OTRS. INeverCry 16:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Delete request

Hi. There is one more file File:Leon Williams.jpg listed in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Leon Jay Williams.jpg that needs to be deleted. Can you delete it as well please? Cheers.--Wcam (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I've restored and re-deleted that file. It's now fully deleted. INeverCry 16:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


Would you please do a Flickrreview for me on File:2NE1 2012 2.jpg and File:2NE1 2012.jpg. Thanks--Morning (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 16:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


Thank you, I'll try to do the best. --Nachosan (talk) 20:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Pitak (talk) 08:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
You're both welcome, and thanks for your contributions. INeverCry 15:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Christelle Huet-Gomez 20100703 Japan Expo 1.jpg


Since when the subject of a photo has the right to decide for the community if it owes or not being deleted? Even if this photo doesn't please her, that does not give the right to delete the only free media we have. Does she make the effort to send us a beautiful photo of replacement? Okki (talk) 08:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Okki. I must have mistakenly thought this was a personal photo. I've reversed my actions and restored the photo, and I'll let another admin close it. While looking into this, I noticed we have 2 other images of her in Category:Christelle Huet-Gomez. INeverCry 15:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Freud Sofa.JPG

A file you deleted earlier File:Freud Sofa.JPG was apparently copied onto another file. I wanted to let you know: File:Diva de Freud.jpg‎, and I opened up a deletion request, although I think it should probably be deleted without the normal process since it was copied from another image: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Diva de Freud.jpg‎. Thanks. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 01:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 01:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Your deletion request for images used on the Welsh language Wiki

Hi. I've corrected the missing cats, so could you take a look at thispage here, please. If there are other copivos , let me know, please. Thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 10:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I've responded there. INeverCry 18:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
"There"? Where is "there"? Ive responded here and here. I'm very unhappy at your response. I asked you to "If there are other copivos , let me know, please. Thanks." That means my User Talk page. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 20:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


Hi - I uploaded some photos of myself that were my own property and not a copyright violation to my Wikipedia page - BUT I did not realize I had to contact Commons for permission. I am sending the email now. If Commons gives permission, do I re-upload, or re-edit the page? Or do the images just come back? Thanks for your help; I am not an experienced user. Rma2ran (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

If you sent an email to COM:OTRS, and everything checks out, the images will be restored.
INeverCry 04:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Email is sent. Do you have any advice on getting a volunteer to look at it quickly? Again, thanks - I am trying to piece together how this works from Google searches. I'd appreciate any advice from someone experienced like you. Rma2ran (talk) 04:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

You can post a question about your files on the Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard, or you could pick out an OTRS volunteer from Category:Commons OTRS volunteers. You might want to find an English speaker who seems active if you go that route. I personally don't have much involvement with OTRS. I usually just restore the files when one of the OTRS people says permission has been processed and etc. INeverCry 04:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Lily Zhang Photo

Hello, you seem to have deleted the photo of photo of Lily Zhang and offered this reasoning "because: Copyright violation: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from ITTF" for the action. I read through the entirety of the page, including the discussions in regard to ITTF photos, and have found insufficient reasoning for the deletion of the file. The reasons on the page seem to do with the fact that ITTF vaguely gives permission to use photos and this is insufficient for use on Wikimedia Commons. In the case of the Lily Zhang photo however, the photo itself was uploaded by the copyright holder, the International Table Tennis Federation. I know this because I specifically requested that they themselves upload the photo to avoid my having to obtain permission to upload it to the commons for them and to ensure it was not in violation of Wikimedia Commons policy. As they were kind of enough to go through the effort to upload, it seems odd to me that if has been taken down for copyright violation. If they are more reasons why the photo was deleted that I have failed to understand I would greatly appreciate an explanation of what, exactly, is wrong. If on the other hand you deleted the image because you assumed it was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons by someone other than the copyright holder as well as the reasons cited in "Photos from ITTF" template I kindly request you restore the image. Thank you! Racoon42 (talk) 07:11, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

As stated in the DR, we need unambiguous permission from the ITTF to be sent to COM:OTRS. INeverCry 15:51, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I am afraid I do not know what the DR is, would you mind linking it to me? Also I fail to understand how the organization themselves uploading does not constitute unambiguous permission. 18:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

DR means deletion request. The one we're referring to is linked above. As for permission, we can't depend on implications; we have to have direct permission with a particular free license. See Commons:Licensing and COM:OTRS. INeverCry 05:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Moroccan Boy Portrait by Hussein Bicar.jpg

Hello, I'm writing you concerning the deletion of the photo of "Moroccan Boy Portrait by Hussein Bicar" for the reason of "Media missing permission as of 17 October 2012"...I uploaded the file when I did not have any knowledge of appropriate licensing but I learned a bit about it and then I chose suitable license and permission, and I provided as much details possible on the description page as well as on the discussion page of the file to explain that this portrait is publicly displayed in the Museum of modern art in Cairo opera house in Egypt and for this reason I used the license and permission of {{FoP-Egypt}}...In further proof for my claims, please check this link in which you will find that this portrait by Hussein Bikar was on public display in an exhibit at Cairo opera house If this provides enough clarification I kindly request you restore the image. Thank you. Karimalaa (talk) 10:38, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  Restored INeverCry 18:48, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt action --Karimalaa (talk) 07:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 20:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


Thank you. It's a very cool tool I just discovered... it will make easier to correct my 'unfortunately' frequent mistypes. --Sailko (talk) 08:35, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 20:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Barcelona Interview 2012.jpg

I know you have deleted File:Barcelona Interview 2012.jpg three times now at my request but do you think you could bring it back? They have released the images using the correct licence, Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Talk 18:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

  Restored INeverCry 18:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Talk 20:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome, and good luck with your AFC. INeverCry 20:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Duke of York with Welsh bards

Thank you for renaming the requested file File:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-12697, London, Duke of York with Welsh Bards 1931.jpg (on Oct 18). I have not been coming to Commons recently so did not see it till today.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 20:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

A Ghanaian Registered Voter.jpg

I own the picture in question. I took it and I am the one in it. I am uploading it again.

I explained this on the talk page. Sandister Tei! (talk) 21:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

The source states all rights reserved: INeverCry 21:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm from Wikipedea

hi my friend

I want to tell you that i'm editor in Arabic Wikipedeia, and this is my page:

I use my pictures to developing our articals there, I just want you to help me how and what kind of pictuers I allowed to upload?.

your sincere


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Osamaalsaadi (talk • contribs) 13:56, November 8, 2012‎ (UTC)
You can only upload files that you personally took with your own camera, files that you created yourself without using any copyrighted material, files that are COM:PD, or files that have been released by the author under a free license at the source or through COM:OTRS. See Commons:Licensing. INeverCry 22:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Rachel Nichols and Victor Cruz.jpg

I see that you deleted Rachel Nichols and Victor Cruz.jpg (and related images). I'm not a Commons admin, so I cannot see them, but the uploader claims to have added an OTRS pending template. (There is an open OTRS ticket 2012110810001584)

Did you see it but have reason to delete anyway?--Sphilbrick (talk) 22:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

There was no OTRS pending template on any of these. They were fresh uploads that I patrolled and tagged. The uploader asked about OTRS after I deleted them, and I advised her. The message is still here on my talk under #Question. These images were taken from the internet, and several were screenshots where the subject is holding an ESPN mic. I guess the uploader is saying that she's the reporter in the photos, but I don't see how she could be the copyright holder of ESPN screenshots and ESPN photoshoot pics not taken by her. If the OTRS checks out though, I'd be more than willing to restore them. INeverCry 23:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Ah yes, I see it. Thanks, she thought she had used the template, but she is new, so I think she is simply confused on that point. I agree that one of the images definitely looks like a screenshot, but I can confirm that the email is coming from an ESPN address, not a personal email, so I am inclined to accept it. As for next step, I'll do whatever is easier for you - if you can undelete, I can process the OTRS this evening. If you are uncomfortable with that, or are done for the evening, I can upload the images and process the OTRS request. There's a minor technical issue that she had her producer actually snap the picture with her camera; she has offered to provide a release from the producer, I'm inclined to AGF, but if someone wants the documentation, I can ask her for it.--Sphilbrick (talk) 23:34, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm still iffy on these. If these are screenshots from an ESPN broadcast, does one employee who happens to be the subject really have the right to release them? Atleast 3 or 4 of these images are screenshots with her holding an ESPN mic in the course of a broadcast or interview. Also, all but one of these images is a very low quality grab from random websites. If she's from ESPN, why would she not upload screens directly rather than picking them off the internet like anyone could. I don't know what you mean by "upload the image", but if the OTRS permission is deemed sufficient, you should post a list of the files at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests so that an admin can restore them rather than uploading any new copies. INeverCry 23:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
The one with Dwayne Wade clearly looks like a screenshot. She claims it isn't. Could it be a shot of a monitor? The NFL Sunday certainly looks like a screenshot, but if it isn't it is a poor quality image and other than nice composition, which doesn't overcome the poor focus or whatever, it isn't a great shot. Surely she has access to better shots. The others are clear photos. The one with Obama is, unfortunately, out of focus, but I assume she doesn't have the option to retake that. Would you consider restoring the Obama photo, the Stafford photo, the Victor Cruz and NVA opener, and I'll chat with her regarding the problems with the others? Or would you prefer that I request undeletion?--Sphilbrick (talk) 00:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I think an undeletion request would be better. I might also suggest asking User:Jameslwoodward about these, as he's an admin and OTRS member. I'm still not clear on how this person has the right to release photos that may be the direct property of ESPN INC. INeverCry 00:13, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I see that one of the images came from [here]. I think I'm applying a bit too much AGF. Rescind my request, I will write to her.--Sphilbrick (talk) 00:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for the move/rename :) I have dyslexia and plant names don't work well in spell check :( C T Johansson (talk) 08:26, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. INeverCry 08:43, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


The File:Peshawar Collage.jpg is mentioned in the infobox for Wikipedia article Peshawar but only the caption is visible. Commons appears not to have this file and search leads to one different file (needs copy edit? perhaps not as it is a self-description apparently). If that multiple image is unavailable Peshawar should have another one added.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:07, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The file was recently deleted for having no source. INeverCry 16:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

File:BtoB 2012.jpg

Please review it. Thank you very much--Morning (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

  Done INeverCry 17:07, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Locator kabupaten bantul.png and File:Locator Kabupaten Gunung Kidul.png

Hello INeverCry,

can you explain me, why you deleted File:Locator kabupaten bantul.png and why you kept File:Locator Kabupaten Gunung Kidul.png? The reason for my deletion requests were in both cases the same, also for File:Locator Kabupaten Sleman.png‎ and File:Locator Kabupaten Kulon Progo.png, which were kept by Morning Sunshine. No one of these are used by any project and the red SVG locator maps of the four Yogyakarta regencies have clearly more precise border lines. The only possible reason for keeping these files is that editors in some wikis could prefer magenta instead of red especially for small thumbnail maps.

Sincerely --Topographie (talk) 01:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Deleting superseded images requires consent. There was a keep vote for the one I kept and for the 2 that MS kept. The one I deleted had no opposition which is an implication of consent. INeverCry 02:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
So then please restore File:Locator kabupaten bantul.png. I'm sure that User:John Vandenberg has simply overlooked it. --Topographie (talk) 16:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
You should ask John about it. INeverCry 17:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I did overlook that one. The same argument applies. The SVGs are different; much more detailed, and render to be much larger files. Some wikis have a userbase that have dialup or slow mobile, and will want smaller images if they are sufficiently informative. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks John. I've restored the file and changed the DR to kept. INeverCry 00:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Need your help

Hi Rapsar. Can you take a quick look at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Haytap Logo.jpg and others and comment on that release? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 19:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. According to writing in here, it's "completely" free to use these images in "anywhere" you want.--Rapsar (talk) 19:46, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


Hi! I saw this deletion request. I think the nominator's claim is invalid. Because, as far as I know, the newspaper add in 1944 is pd now and the two dimensional work, namely the photograph of pd, could not be copyrightable. I think the image should be restored. Or did I miss something about the copyright law? Oda Mari (talk) 08:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

This was tagged as {{PD-Self}} which isn't correct. The newspaper add may very well be PD under {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}, but what's the original source of this image itself? I don't believe this is a photo taken by the uploader. The size of the image - 288 × 249 pixels, file size: 31 KB - and the lack of EXIF - makes me think it was found on the internet. INeverCry 17:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I see. Thank you for the clarification. Oda Mari (talk) 09:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Thank you for your message. I am a regular user of Wikipedia in French. Ljubinka (talk) 00:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 00:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Pigeon Breeds (EE)

Full message from

Hallo, you closed the discussion as out of Scope, but I don't get it. So please could someone explain it to me?

Scope part 2 refers to Pages, galleries and categories. The List was no gallery, OK. But it is a page with the purpose to support Commons' aims: "Also allowed are files which embody something of value over and above raw text." (Commons:Project scope)
  • It is useful to earn files for the Commons projects (of pigeon breeds listed in Europe). Without a page providing an overview all efforts this way are useless.
  • It is useful to sort these files and identify a special breed, also to non-english-speakers, which may refer to a lot of breeders in Europe. Even when there are Cats that do not refer to the English name on the EE-List (if said breeders uploading a file even know it). For example: there is the Category:Saxon Fairy Swallow and it refers to the Saxon Wing Pigeon, as mentioned to on the EE-List. It took me a while to get this. But before this I created a new Category:Saxon Wing Pigeon that I have jet to merge back.
  • It is useful to guide readers and authors, who are in need of a File in the right direction, to the right category, to an article in other Wikimedia projects (there are not many, so maybe this way translations can be supported as a plus).
  • So it should be Educationally useful: it classifies collections of images (a.k.a. Categories) of pigeon breeds, that are standardised in Europe. (This is only a miner part, cause there may be 800 breeds and more worldwide). Galleries may be done for smaller groups for their breeds and colours but galleries alone can't give this big overview/the summery said page may provide. (One example for such a gallery may be the Thuringian Colourpigeons with 14 breeds and don't know how much colours (there are more than some hundred colours for pigeon breeds see the F-Numbers. Not every breed has so many colours, some may have only two to five, but there are some with a lot more)
Non-allowable page/gallery/category content are
  1. Excluded educational content:
    • Encyclopedia articles --> no
    • News, general weather reports and the like --> no
    • Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text. Purely textual material such as
      • plain-text versions of recipes --> no
      • lists of instructions --> no
      • poetry --> no
      • fiction --> no
      • quotations --> it refers to the EE.List, yes, but pure quotation? no
      • dictionary definitions --> no, it provides translations that may be also helpful to create translation tables
      • lesson plans or classroom material --> no
    --> the List in mind is no use for Wikipedia, Wikinews, Wikibooks, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, Wikiversity, Wikisource or the like. But it may be also helpful to develop content there especially in the Wikipediaprojects, even if it is unlikely. But hey, aren't we all dreamers?
  2. Private image or other file collections of no wider educational value. --> no
  3. Content that does not advance Commons' aims, including advertising or excessive linking to external domains and anything apparently created and/or uploaded for the purpose of vandalism or attack. Blatant self-promotion is prohibited, but regular Commons contributors are allowed a certain amount of leeway and discreet links to relevant web pages elsewhere are normally permitted.
    • I think the list is useful to Commons' aims as said above.
    • no excessive linking to external domains (linked are only the EE-List of breeds and a Translation Table that are used to create said page or list)
    • no purpose of vandalism or attack
    • no Blatant self-promotion

So please tell me, where is the List of Pigeon Breeds in EE that names said breeds in three to four languages and links to Categories on Commons that provides Images of said breeds out of Scope? I am really lost here. I intended only the best and meant no harm. Was my only fault to link to Categories and not to Files? But this was also only meant for the best, for a better performance, cause of the sheer number of breeds.
Or is it because I am only a Number and Numbers are not worth a proper explanation? I don't want this list hidden in a namespace, because there it is of no use for others when it could provide help in this jungle named WikimediaCommons. And at least I like to work as 09:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Here's a few ideas:
  • Create a List of pigeon breeds modeled on the List of dog breeds, and then list the different languages and links you want at the seperate categories on the list rather than on the list itself.
  • If this doesn't seem optimal to you, perhaps you could adjust the table used in the List of dog breeds to include names in several languages. For technical help on forming the list you could post on Commons:Help desk.
  • You could also contact User:Jameslwoodward and/or User:Túrelio, to see what recommendations they might have.
As for your editing as an IP, I personally prefer creating an account because I see it as a way to establish yourself and build a reputation and trust within the community, here and on other wikis. However, I have no problem with IP editing as long as an IP does good work and doesn't make harmful edits. INeverCry 18:25, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for providing ideas.
  • Seperate Categories are not practical because there would be too much Categories with no file in it.
  • adjust the table: I thought I did just that, I am lost again. Instead of Files I used to link the Category. To its name in the land of origin I added its names in German, French and English as the EE provides it. Other poultry organisations like the American may have other Names that also show up in the WMCommonsCategories. (There is no international poultry organisation as the FCI for dogs; even the EE just began a long way to unite European breeders and standardizations. It all may have started with the German reunion and their troubles to get an united poultry standard again)
  • I had a conversation with User:Túrelio and he temporary restored the list on an discussion page (unidentified breeds), to provide time to discuss the matter with other "pigeonlovers" - but there are not many. Users that used to work with pigeons or poultry are long gone or only sporadicly active.
Túrelio couldn't tell why the List was out of scope, ether. (Or I just didn't get it.)
Problem with establishing a name: you may establish "good friends" along with it. So I like working as an IP - no personal fights, more time for work. and you can't run to the next known Admin and drag her/him into "your fight"; you have to stand up for your ideas all by yourself, even if you have to talk to three different people who oppose you and in a not fluent language -- 20:01, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I would say that the basic reason the list is out of scope is that it contains no images and looks like it belongs on Wikipedia. As you can see with the List of dog breeds, each entry is accompanied by an image. You need to find a way of including images if you want a gallery page here to be in scope. Otherwise you should take the list to local wikis. INeverCry 20:16, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
There are about 500 breeds on it. Thats the reason I put no images on it. A List of pigeon breeds may grow to 800 breeds and more. So is this still handable on a gally? There were massive problems with big heritagemonumentlists on WP. To provide an overview linked Categories should be ok, I solemly hope so. I am thinking with pages not galleries that are also allowed in the projectscope.
I thought of seperate group-lists too. But there are differences with the international associations, too. And the Tumbler-and-Highflier-list would still be massive (more than 200 breeds). and there is the problem with two utility-breed-groups -- 20:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I've had problems on Wikipedia with lists getting unwieldly as well. I would advise you to post this at COM:Village pump. There you'll be able to get advice from more people, and hopefully a solution can be found. INeverCry 20:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
May it qualify for a Category scheme? Even if it is only 3 Categories deep, multilingual and sortable? I even may have to redo the description for EE --> Groups --> Breeds >small>(and Breeds beeing also part of Category:Pigeon breeds by name, Category:Pigeon breeds by country of origin and Category:Pigeon breeds by purpose. For Origin may the SBI be a hint (but not necessarily); for purpose the group, but multipurposes are likely to be (all EE breeds are fancy pigeons but may also be flying, homing or utility pigeons.)) -- 21:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I would advise you to wait and see what the result of Commons:Deletion requests/Verwaltungsgliederung Deutschlands is. The decision there could effect your list and what options you might have regarding it. INeverCry 22:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I do. But I do not twiddle my thumbs while doing so. Ok, both are out of gallery-scope, but totally out of project scope as well? Category scheme may be a solution for the provided problem. Maybe there are more as discussed in Commons:Deletion requests/Verwaltungsgliederung Deutschlands. Sincerely yours -- 13:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
The category scheme idea has been suggested there as well. We'll see what the outcome of the DR is, and perhaps we can apply the same solution/s to your list. INeverCry 17:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


There is no such User: space CSD as "unused user page". You have a chance to summon your wisdom and avoid yet another conflict. If you will not do it, then it would be your decision. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

MzII is McZusatz's alternate acct, and he blanked the page and requested speedy deletion. INeverCry 16:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


Hello INeverCry

I've uploaded 2 pic (File:Fadhilmaliky.JPG) and (File:F maliky 2.JPG) I take it by my camera, I hope it's OK with you, if there is any problem with them please warning me pefore you delete them.

your sincere Osamaalsaadi (talk) 07:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Osama. I don't see anything wrong with these. I'm headed to bed now though, so I'll look at them again in the morning and see about making a category for this gentleman and etc. INeverCry 08:11, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I fixed these up a bit, improved the description, etc, re-named them, and created Category:Fadel al-Maliki. INeverCry 17:31, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

it is very kind of you INeverCry, thank you very much.Osamaalsaadi (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. These are both great images; I hope you have more like this. If I can help you with anything else, let me know. INeverCry 22:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Images from "Griddle" Wiki

I am the most recent author of the 'Griddle' wiki and found that a number of images of mine (and by that I mean, of my own creation, public domain, freely provided etc...) were deleted by you in September for no obvious reason. I am re-adding them to the Wiki, but if you have any questions or concerns regarding these images please contact me to discuss. It is unclear to me why any of this content was edited or removed by you, but I would appreciate communication with me before further modifications or deletions associated with this or any other wiki's I generate.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyungbluth (talk • contribs) 20:41, November 14, 2012‎ (UTC)
Those files were tagged by another user for having no permission for hosting on Commons. This was most likely because they're of professional-looking quality with no EXIF, etc. After about 3 weeks in the no permission category, I deleted them. This is a standard procedure here. Since I deleted them, I'll let another administrator review your undeletion requests. I would advise you to wait for a response to those undeletion requests before uploading them as new files, otherwise they might just end up getting deleted again. I would think you might have to send an email to COM:OTRS to provide proof that these are your work. Anyways, as I said, another admin will respond to your undeletion requests soon. INeverCry 05:28, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Regarding deletion request

Hi. I requested that a picture of me be deleted. Apparently, that isn't going to happen. I was wondering if there is, at the very least, a way that the file could be modified so that my name isn't attached to it. I really don't have any problem with the picture itself being on Wikipedia. I just would like my name removed. Thanks. Andrew Parodi (talk) 05:05, 15 November 2012 (UTC) (File in question: )

Hi Andrew. After looking at this file again, I realized that the claim of permission from the photographer is actually insufficient, as there's no direct evidence that he's given permission for the use of this file under the particular license you've stated. I think we'll need COM:OTRS permission from the photographer to keep this image on Commons. It probably goes without saying that if you don't want it here as you requested, than you can simply not have the photographer provide permission, or you can have him contact OTRS saying he doesn't want it released under a free license. It's up to you. If no permission is sent within a week or two, the file will be deleted. INeverCry 05:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Modern Dance split.jpg


Could you explain why you closed the DR as Kept, and then a "Missing permission" tag? On a pure formal process, this is a bad idea: I think an image should not be deleted without a new DR if there was a previous DR closed as Kept. Yann (talk) 15:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I closed the DR purely based on the fact that an uploader request to delete a file isn't in itself a valid reason to delete a file that's used in several articles and released under an irrevocable license. After taking a closer look, I noticed that there's really no proof that the photographer has released this image. All we have is an assertion from the uploader that the photographer has released it, which I think is obviously not enough. I don't feel another DR is needed because the file was first DRed by the uploader with an invalid reason, and because the need for permission from the photographer is clear. INeverCry 16:49, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Delete of File:Carlos Bilarbo Salvador.JPG

That file was under the licence CC-SA-BY 3.0. All the page was extracted info of Wikipedia, and modificated, so, was under the CC license, 'cause was a derivated work. Why you have deleted the file? --Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage?   03:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

This file is a scanned magazine page featuring a story on Carlos Salvador Bilardo. You can see the title and page number, and the image of Bilardo is a professional photo of him coaching that isn't hosted here on Commons. INeverCry 03:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but that is the reason because the image is a derivated work. All the text was taked from Wikipedia (even the template:Cita requerida!!). That was adapted, and now that page are under CC-SA-BY, is a derivated work! All of them, the text and the image. --Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage?   17:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Derivatives of copyrighted text/images aren't allowed on Commons. INeverCry 18:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Pictures deleted by you

Hi, I refer to three pictures which I uploaded about two weeks ago to use them in the German article "Nobis Printen". You deleted the pictures ("Josef Nobis junior Nobis Printen Aachen" ; "Josef Nobis_Nobis Printen Aachen" ; "Michael Nobis_Nobis Printen Aachen") because of a missing media permission. Unfortunately, I never received a message before, that a permission is needed. We now sent an e-mail to with the respective permissions. As I am a new author, could you tell me what I need to do next? Is there any further action required to get the pictures back to Commons? Thank you a lot for your help! Kind regards, --Magdalena Baumgard (talk) 13:56, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

You actually did receive direct notification on your talk page of the lack of permission for these 3 files. Now that you've emailed OTRS, it's only a matter of time before they process the email, and if everything checks out, they'll restore the images. If you have any questions about this process, you can post them at the Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. INeverCry 16:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I just noticed that I need to have a look to my user page in Wikimedia commons, too and not only Wikipedia. Sorry again and thank you for your reply!--Magdalena Baumgard (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

thanks for helping me make my user page better!

Archinia (talk) 19:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

That's the first time I've ever been thanked for deleting someone's userpage! ;) If you'd ever like me to help you with a little design for your userpage, something like what I have with mine, let me know. Until then, I don't know if I'm deserving of such a nice present. INeverCry 19:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar!

Thanks for the barnstar, INeverCry! It really means a lot to me! Michael Barera (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Well-deserved. Last time I worked on those Nara images, we were at about 40%, so you've really done alot of work on these. I'm a big fan of giving people recognition for their contributions, especially when they're on this scale. INeverCry 20:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Wait, if I'm reading that right, we're up to 50% now, huh? That's pretty good! Michael Barera (talk) 00:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Palaeomaps and OTRS

Per the deletion requests that you took care of (posted for on 36ophiuchi's talk page), I have contacted Ron Blakey and obtained a proper release statement for all the images that were deleted, as well as others that were missed. I will try to get this corrected through OTRS this weekend. – Maky « talk » 11:39, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Prapor Kraljevine Jugoslavije.jpg

Hi, shouldn't this image be tagged with OTRS-pending instead of deleted, per what is written at the talk page of the deletion request? --Eleassar (t/p) 00:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps I should've kept that one, but since it's not in use, we can wait for the OTRS and restore it if/when it comes through, as there's no point of restoring it now just to wait on OTRS that may or may not be sufficient. INeverCry 00:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I've verified it in the OTRS database (#2012111410005738) and everything is ok with the permission. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I've restored it and changed the DR to kept. INeverCry 17:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. --Eleassar (t/p) 17:05, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hiller tract against Paragraph 175.jpg

Yes, 70 years p.m.a. is false. But the text is very simple, also the design. There is no Commons:Threshold of originality. Not in Germany, and not in US. License should be Template:PD-text or eventually Template:PD-ineligible. Please restore. --Fg68at de:Disk 06:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure about this. I suggest you post an undeletion request. INeverCry 19:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

licensing of Painting

I appreciate if you can review this file that I uploaded because it has been marked for deletion. I believe I have chosen the most suitable license for this file, it is publicly displayed in The museum of Modern Egyptian Art in Gezira, Cairo. And it falls exactly in the category license of “freedom of panorama” in Egypt. The museum does not have an official website which makes it very hard to substantiate my claim, however, the closest I could get was this link below in which you'll find mention of the said museum and that it holds works for "Ahmad Sabri : the pioneer of Egyptian portrait art." your help is highly appreciated.

Add caption here

--Karimalaa (talk) 13:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the no license tag, but you should replace that 2nd FoP Egypt tag in the license section with your own license, as you took the photo. Something like {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}. INeverCry 19:33, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Done, Thank you very much for your co-operation.--Karimalaa (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. INeverCry 00:50, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "INeverCry/Archive 2".