Open main menu

This is an archive of older discussion.


Katrina Refrigerator.Edit

I tried to write an article about Katrina Refrigerators, but this article has now been marked for deletion because the term is a local neologism. I've suggested that a new article, Return after Hurricane Katrina, should be written covering the very begining of the recovery effort in the October and November after the storm, including the refrigerators, as well as garbage collection, blue tarps, MRE's, and the zip code system of return. Your opinion on the matter would be greately welcomed.

winstonho0805 (2005 Oct. 17). Metairie, Louisiana.


Take a look, please Image:KEITHR.JPG


Hi. Yes, I'm a pro photographer in Brazil and shot that show. I have a higher resolution copy. Cheers and enjoy the image. 14:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)machocarioca

Another workEdit

Hi again. You can see another one in the article Hanna Schygulla, the famous german movie star whom i've worked with too. This one was in my photo studio.


Machocarioca 15:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)machocarioca


I'd like to solicit your comments on a mud pie I have been playing with.

I notice you've been doing some work with time. I was over on French wikipedia and as you may know, they are heavy into temporal classification schemes for art, ships etc. Anyway, they had a simple prev next button at the top of the page and that seemed neat. I wanted something more but not something like the enormous tables of see also's. I played with timelines but they aren't ready for prime time yet (poor interaction with templates). So I came up with a widget for the Ships by decade categories. Looks like this, but it is heavily parameterized and can be made to look rather different.

< <17th century < −18th century 19th century 20th century−> 21th century> >
< <1840’s < −1850’s 1860’s 1870’s−> 1880’s> >

If you click on one of those you will see the placement on a page. Has to be topmost so that user can repeatedly click in the same position for next decades. Template talk:Show-years-centuries offers examples of different ways it can be made to appear. I went for a diminutive appearance.

It can also be made to go by years, not decades, but for the year categories, they would need more cells for individual years, and probably an intermediate row of cells to fast forward to particular decades.

< <16th century < −17th century 18th century 19th century−> 20th century> >
< <1774 < −1775 1776 1777−> 1778> >

It doesn't seem quite right though for years. the year row ought to have maybe 10 year cells, and several decade cells- maybe resembling a pyramid.

-Mak 16:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. I suppose a full decade would be useful on year pages, but less for design constraints would still be a very good improvement on what we have now. Thanks. -- Infrogmation 15:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Glad you like it. Any friend of Kitten is a friend of mine. -Mak 06:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Commons-l subscriptionEdit

Hello Infrogmation/Archive 2,

as per Commons talk:Administrators, I am asking all admins to subscribe to commons-l, a mailing list for Wikimedia Commons policy and project discussion. Since many admins are only on Commons infrequently, this is a good way to alert people about important happenings. The mailing list is nominally multilingual, but predominantly English.

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 22:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll subscribe. -- Infrogmation 15:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Austin TX 1920 map.jpgEdit

[warning cut]

As noted PD-US from expired copyright. I've tried to make it a bit clearer re the map, but understand that everything published in the USA before 1923 is now public domain by US law, and hence eligable for the PD-US tag. -- Infrogmation 11:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I know that, but you still have to provide a source so that other people can confirm it really was published before 1923. Did you scan these yourself from your own maps? Did you get them from the Perry-Castañeda Library site? Somewhere else? Angr 10:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


This image has been nominated for Commons:Quality Images. If you know of other images that meet the guidelines then please nominate them at Commons:Quality images candidates .. Gnangarra 10:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


Hi, I'm afraid I can't easily fix the bot, because my bot only uses category suggestions from CatScan. I could make it find two "number" categories and rename the lower one "births", the latter one "deaths". But that would be guesswork at best. And what if there's only one "year" category? The safe path would be to remove all "number" categories, though. Waht do you think is the best course of action here? --Magnus Manske 07:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I have seen many images miscategorized; if the bot can't recognize better I think better to remove the number categories. en:Wikipedia has "Cateory:(year) births" already on articles; if there would be a way to import those when seen that would be good. I also notice many bot imported images have supercategories which should never go on individual images, for example "Category:Image source" or "Category:People by nationality". Perhaps the bot could have a list of inappropriate categories not to include on images? If you could either pass these thoughts along, or tell me where I can do so myself, I would appreciate it. Thank you, -- Infrogmation 14:28, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Best maybe you talk to the guy who made the original bot (CommonSense, not CatScan, sorry about that). Here is the tool page with description and link to the creator. Maybe he could enable a "convervative mode" or something... --Magnus Manske 19:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Qulity ImagesEdit

Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! BackLow9HouseOnChevy1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Low9JustAintRight1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.

You have captured the deversation really well thankyou for sharing Gnangarra 12:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Renaming categoriesEdit


Renaming the Category:American people by occupation is a good idea, but also a tedious job. I made requests to rename categories in this page. Could you transfer them on the proper page ? Thanks. --Juiced lemon 12:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

As there were only a few items in that cat, I already took care of moving them by hand. But thank you for letting me know about the bot request page, which should be very useful for moving or consolodating larger categories. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 12:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Images by yearEdit

It is a list of images related with the year 1901. If you read the description in [1], you will understand it. --Emijrp 17:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Using a 2005 licence plate to illustrate the year 1901, just because state mandated licence plates were mandated that year, is a very poor excuse for an illustration for 1901. Please check the year for images you include in year articles. Sloppiness in an en:Wikipedia article is not an excuse when the acutal year of the images can be found in the image description pages. Do not put images in articles for the wrong year. -- Infrogmation 17:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Time for a Scheme. A Scheme for a TimeEdit

I am not religious about any of the time issues. I am interested in navigation by time and rationalized predictable cat structures. Particular approaches to how the time cats should be structured does not seem particularly important at first glance so I haven't developed any opinions on it at this time. We can do it by dealing with a specific piece of the pie, like years and go bottom up, or we can name it time and go top down. There is no standard now, and a small population here, so being first on the block means we can go top down, proposing a general order and see how it transmorgifies over time.

Your choice. You are in the driver's seat. I'm ok with either approach. -Mak 17:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


There isn´t any mistake, it´s my own photo. Of course it´s nice , I´m a pro, man, what did you expected? Can you understand that photographers also come here? You can see another work of mine at the article about german actress Hanna Schygulla. I don´t have another shoot on Keith.

Regarding to your 'provocative comments' about the photos I upload here, they are absolutely under Wikicommons rules, I simply make mistakes with the tags sometimes, ok? Cheers. 02:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC) machocarioca

Categories by decadeEdit

Hi. I have seen that you have been creating some categories by decade like Category:1920s paintings. By now, all categories about years like Category:1800 are sorting by century. Furthermore, births and deaths categories are sorting by year one. I like this system, althought it is a bit different to English Wikipedia where Paintings, Births, Deaths, and all are sorting by Decades and then by Century. The new templates Template:birthcat, Template:deathcat and Template:paintingcat may be modify for to sort them by decades. A small change and automatically all categories will update. Will you create decades categories? Cheers. --Emijrp 20:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your work filling in year categories. Some decade categories already exist. I think decade categories can be usefull, and I'd prefer you please don't remove links to them when they exist. However, let's discuss on Commons talk:Wikiproject Time where we can discuss the best way to set this up with other interested editiors. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 22:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Katrina damaged photosEdit

I've listed this category at deletion requests, because I'm not sure if its clear if the original photographer retains the copyright of some of the images - where the subject of the original photograph is still visible.--Nilfanion 23:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Yea, sorry for that was a slight misunderstanding of how it works.--Nilfanion 16:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh and I'm concerned about Category:Hurricane Katrina merchandising. That time it is the category and its contents, as the subject seems to be the image on the tshirts.--Nilfanion 16:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments and vigilence. My photos have been attempt to doccument the destruction of Katrina and the social aftermath. I have had no intention of violating any copyrights, but can see that a few of my hundreds of photos may warrent second opinions. I will delete any that seem to be potential problems. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 16:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Just wish some others would comment on COM:DEL, I'm not sure if they should stay or go, but they do need discussion. For what its worth, I feel bad about nominating them, those photos touched me when I found them. You have certainly done a very good job of documenting Katrina's aftermath in your images.--Nilfanion 18:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

image:Marley bob.jpgEdit

Hi, you deleted that image, but it is still in use on the Dutch Wikibooks. Can you please check the history of the image, and try to find out what kind of image it was, and substitute it if it was something like redundant? And please, fix all uses, if you delete an image! A not-logged-in- user:effeietsanders 13:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Car identificationsEdit

Thanks for the feedback. Your the first who give me one for what I do in Commons. It is not much I do of course. I am not quick in writing because I am not a native English speaker. I have many car books, but not all brands so I can identify only cars I know. Very difficult are the newer cars, the one without model change every year. --Adler 71 19:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


Hello Infrogmation,

I'm really sorry about the problem I created uploading your pictures with my name, but it was my firts uploads, and I didn't understand well the GFDL. I thought GFDL was like PD. I'm sorry too to have not answer you before, but I was in holidays. You can delete these pictures if you want, but it can be prejudiciable to the articles that use it. As you are the author of these pictures, you can do what you think better. I apologize one more time.


El Comandante Hasta ∞ 18:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


First i want to apologize that last time i don´t answered in the right style, as it were on my talk page, as you start there with talk. Then i allready changed a description at one of your Images. Maybe you ad something to it, as primer style, hot rod style or else what fit. Than i want to congratulate you to the big quantity and quality of your photos. Of course most i have seen were about a sad subject. --Adler 71 16:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

No need to apologize. Thanks for your work. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 02:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Admin newsEdit


If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) P.S.: Pardon if this is a repeat (bot debugging...)

Request for commentEdit

hello Infrogmation,

I see you had dealings once with a user called who has a penchant for deleting and removing categories. I have asked the user to stop doing this and left a message on the sysop noticeboard concerning this issue[2]. Maybe you could give in some input on this issue? Thanks alot, sincerely Gryffindor 21:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Record labelsEdit


“Record labels” is a special term for brands regarding audio records. A brand is some sort of intangible product, that you can trade; do not confuse it with a company. So, Category:Record labels is a category for brands, like Columbia Records which is owned by Sony BMG.

There are currently some pictures in this category, but we can expect that many of them will be moved to specific subcategories, like Category:Columbia Records. The Category:Record labels is not a category for pictures of Gramophones records; this is a category about any media files regarding record labels, including audio ads.

If a picture shows a label record sticked on a Gramophone record, you can categorize it either in one precise category, either in two categories, according to the two different topics Label records and Gramophone records. Then, you must assume that pictures are in proper galleries or categories, and strictly categorize these pages according to their own topics. --Juiced lemon 17:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. -- Infrogmation

South FloridaEdit

Are you here right now or just come home from a visit? Cary "Bastiqe" Bass demandez 18:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I just got back. I have some relatives I visit from time to time. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


Please have a look at the Logs of Image:JosephineBakerBurlesque.JPG. I am utterly confused about what is going on: a whole gaggle of administrators are all over it without properly explaining what is going on.
19:32, 2 February 2007 I uploaded that figure; artist is Walery, no shadow of a doubt about that, source is properly identified. Later on I decided that the original version, uploaded by Maksim on 14:25, 25 March 2006 (and deleted on 21:38, 20 January 2007 by Fred Chess) was actually better than mine, so I reverted to that. If you look carefully at Maxim's old version it actually shows Walery's signature in the lower right corner, so there is no doubt that that version comes from Walery as well. So much for that: I am not going to touch that one again. Fernande 09:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It looks to me like an earlier version was uploaded without proper attribution, and as copyright status could not be determined, it was deleted. As it was reuploaded with proper attribution and explanation of copyright status appropriate for Commons, as far as I can tell it should be fine now. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Florida picsEdit

I noticed you uploaded some pics of Micanopy and Fort Walton Beach. Now that's a drive! Might you have more, perchance, from there or other parts of the state? I'm trying to get photos for the historic places here, and any that other folks can get, well, I won't have to get myself. Though I do like the roadtrippin', doncha know. :)

Btw, hope things go well-er for New Orleans, and yourself there. -Ebyabe 18:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Linking to temporary filesEdit

Hello and thank you for your contributions to the Commons. I noticed that you recently reverted my change to Image:1910 Nebraska bank.jpg. I had removed a link to a temporary file because it is useless to link to temporary files. The offending URL itself includes the word "temp" indicating that the URL will be no good after a while. Visiting the URL will show the message "Temporary file open error. Display failed."

If the link was to a web page that was around for a while and then was removed, I wouldn't have removed the link. But the link in question was rendered useless shortly after it was added, the uploader should have realized that it would be a useless link, and the link will never be useful in the future. This is why I removed it. Remember the dot 06:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


Image deletion warning Image:StBernardCircleFood8May06.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

--G.dallorto 12:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually I'm trying to understand myself what should stay and what should go in Commons, concerings posters. I have not a strong opinion about it. Perhaps in this case the "freedom of panorama" clause could be invoked. But if you have an edited version without the poster, since the subject you were portraying was the supermarket, I think there should be no problem. Should you anser, please use the "discussion" page of the image. Best wishes. --G.dallorto 19:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Copyright information for Image:PyramidDatePalms.jpgEdit

Is there any indication in which country the stereopticon card was published, by whom, a more specific date, etc? Saying that the card was published in the 19th century is not necessarily enough information to justify tagging the image with PD-old. It could have been published, for example, by a young photographer in 1899 who lived until 1970; then the photographer would not be dead for 70 years. --Iamunknown 02:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall some of the details off hand and I'll have to check to see if that was in the portion of my possessions that survived the unpleasantness of 2005. Most of my stereocards were published in the USA, but not all; some have publisher or printer information, others do not. By USA law old printed items with no assertion of copyright are public domain. I uploaded it to en:Wikipedia in 2002; I did not transfer it to Commons. If you think a narrower assertion of copyright status is preferable, feel free to make such a change. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 02:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Also of relevence is the fact, if you didn't know, that the meaning of the tag "PD-old" was changed radically on en:Wikipedia without modifying images already so tagged under the earlier meaning. (I objected to this repeatedly at the time.) Some years ago it had the simple meaning of "relevent copyright expired", without regard to identification of creater and their death date. I presume whoever copied the image from en: to Commons just copied the tag from there without bothering to note whatever the meaning of the tag was there at the time it was applied. (Also without bothering to credit the source.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 02:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I admit I only have a rudimentary knowledge of copyright law. Do you know of a legal or court citation that indicates that By USA law old printed items with no assertion of copyright are public domain? I would certainly like to see it. Maybe a new license tag could be developed. --Iamunknown 02:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
See Commons:Licencing, United States section. "Anything published before March 1, 1989 with no copyright notice ("©", "Copyright" or "Copr.") plus the year of publication (may be omitted in some cases) plus the copyright owner (or pseudonym) is in the public domain." (Includes material more recent than I'd thought!) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 15:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Bermuda CruiseEdit

I'm not entirely sure what the basis for the free status of Image:BermudaFromShip1929.jpg is. If the person claiming to grant free copyright status owns the original negatives, or is the heir of the person who took the photo, or has been assigned rights by the heir of the person who took the photo, then there's no problem. But if the person claiming to grant free copyright status merely owns one particular photographic print (which could be among many prints made from the same negative, for all anyone knows), then it's far from clear to me that that person is necessarily the real legal copyright-holder. AnonMoos

The photos in that set were by my direct ancestors who are now dead, and I inherited the photos. I strongly doubt that more than one print was ever made. Does that answer your question? Do you have suggestions as to better way to present the information on the image page? Thanks, -- Infrogmation 01:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, but the semi-enigmatic phrase "Inherited ancestors photo" didn't really convey any specific concrete source info to my mind (certainly not the fact that you were personally involved). It would be better to show a little more egotism   and say "Photo taken by and/or of User:Inforgmation's ancestors, inherited by User:Inforgmation" or whatever. By the way, is the guy in Image:BermudaFromShip1929.jpg wearing blackface or primitve sunscreen or something else? I can't really figure it out. AnonMoos 02:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that's just shadows. See Category:Tourism in Bermuda for more if you havn't already. The ones I uploaded are pretty good for amateur snapshots of the 1920s (they must have had something better than a cheap brownie), but that neither was a professional photographer certainly shows on some of them. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 02:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
For that to be a shadow, I think that there would have had to be a conveniently-placed oval object on the direct line between the center of his face and the sun. But I guess it could be a worn place on the photograph. Anyway, I think you really should include more specific source info. AnonMoos 02:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Do you think my change of the description of the one linked above is adiquate? -- Infrogmation 02:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Sure -- except now it sounds like you inherited the ancestors, not the photos!   AnonMoos 04:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Oops, comma added. I'm trying for wording clear but short. -- Infrogmation 13:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:CBGB_club_facade.jpgEdit

I used Commons helper, which called the wikisense tool; i wasnt the original uploader, i was just transferring the image from en.wp so i could mark a similar image on pt.wp as {{NowCommons}}. If those categories are not correctly attributed, feel free to remove them. -- Waldir 03:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Category Automobiles by decadeEdit

Hello Infrogmation, for me and also for other people, I think, this would make searching faster: I would like to put the following line in every year automobiles Category like here for example in the Category:1960 automobiles.

Show previous year automobiles or next year automobiles

Please let me know, if you like the Idea or not. --Adler 71 14:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, good idea. Thanks, -- Infrogmation 14:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for yor OK. I did it. --Adler 71 19:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your work in categorizing automobile images. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

license for fotos made by othersEdit

Hello Infrogmation,

  1. I don’t know if I can upload pictures made by relatives who already died, but not 70 years ago, for example my grandfather. What must I wright for this license?
  2. Also I read, that a living Person, like my father, can email his permision for his fotos. How does this license and email look like? the preceding unsigned comment is by Adler 71 (talk • contribs)
If your grandfather was the photographer and copyright holder, and you inherited it and there are no conflicting claims (from other relatives etc), you can licence the photo as it is your property. For uploading someone else's photos with their permission, I assume any sort of notice that the photographer/copyright holder gives permission to upload said photos under such free licence as you mutually agree, would be OK. You might wish to ask on the talk page of Commons:Licensing for more detailed suggestions. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 00:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much Infrogmation, and I am so sory that I forgot to say please and to sign. --Adler 71 06:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

9268 photosEdit

Hello Infrogmation,

I recognized that you uploaded a real lot of photos, so I checked out the Gallery. I was amazed, when I found out that you have uploaded 9268 photos. But as I checked, I found that some of the early uploaded photos has PD tag needs updating like Image:StLouisWorldFairBirdsEye.jpg for example. I tell you this, just in case you didn’t recognized it.

Good luck, you will surely reach the 10000 photos. --Adler 71 17:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

american actorsEdit

Image:JosephineBakerBurlesque.JPG sory for delete. I want clean a Category:Actors from the United States and i am making a categories for every actors. And i am thinking about separate some actors. What you thing about making a category Category:Dead actors from the United States ? Is this a good name ? Or living ... if dead is wrong :). --Pmgpmg 20:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

A category specifically for dead members of a profession sounds a bit strange. -- Infrogmation

IP addressEdit

just block this, it is the server address of a school, tens of thousands of students use it so theres no way warnings will do any good. --Benjamint444 01:44, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

  • the same address was blocked from editing the english wikipedia about a year ago for vandalism --Benjamint444 01:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:GoldenrodPlymouthFury.jpg YearEdit

For the record, that Plymouth Fury you've got a photo of is strictly a 1971. ---- (User:DanTD/DanTD) 12:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


Why did you replace the welcome template for its code, in my talk page? I'd prefer keeping it the way it was, since it takes up less space... or is there a guideline recommending not to do so? --Waldir 14:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought perhaps the template had been put on your page improperly, and some useful links might not have been apparent to you. Please feel free to change it back or remove it if you wish. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 23:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


I was wondering, as I though you were an experienced user of Commons, was there something wrong with our upload templates that you forgot to add the licenses to the images? Siebrand 14:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The info is in the box, and the licence is in the pull down tab; after I upload the first of a series of images I usually copy and paste the licence. I guess sometimes I forget to pull down the licencing tab or mistakenly think I've already copied it. Sorry. -- Infrogmation 14:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks for the fixes. Siebrand 14:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Hm, I was assuming it was always my own carelessness, but I just now observed a case where I pulled down the box to select a licence but the image uploaded without the licence. Whether some occasional problem with wiki or the browser on this end I can't say at present. -- Infrogmation 13:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


Hello Infrogmation/Archive 2, at the Geocoding project we have noticed that you uploaded a number of pictures from one of the less covered regions on earth. Maybe you could consider adding coordinates to some of your images. They will show up on the WikiMiniAtlas and the Google Earth Commons-layer. You can find instructions on how to add coordinates to your images at Commons:Geocoding. Thank you in advance! The Geocoding team --EugeneZelenko 14:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Need reply fromEdit

User:Shame On You

yes that's me. what is the right tag please? there are so many of them... looks like all the same. Shame On You 19:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I replied on your talk page. Thank you, -- Infrogmation 20:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


About this: sorry ... I beg your pardon ... (excuse me, I don't tell anymore but I don't speak English ... :)) --「Twice28.0 · contributi · talk」 14:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Infrogmation 21:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


Bonjour , vous venez de m'envoyer un message concernant la licence d'hyneria. Je ne comprend pas pourquoi cette image est tolérée sur la wikipedia anglophone et pas sur la wikipedia francophone. Si vous pouvez me répondre... Merci. Volcan 5 juillet 2007 à 17:04

En en:Wikipedia "screenshot", non licence libre, non GFDL. Wikimedia Commons n'accepte pas le "fair use". Commons:À propos des licences Merci. -- Infrogmation 15:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


I have a question. How can I upload moving gif photos? Runewiki77 17:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The answer to the question you asked is Special:Upload. How you can create them is an entirely different question, which you may want to ask at Commons:Graphics village pump.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 15:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


This is an archive of older discussion.

Return to the user page of "Infrogmation/Archive 2".