Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:JGHowes

Pocahontas Consolidated Stock Cert questionEdit

Hello- I noted the B&O stock certt, GREAT pic. I own a Pocahontas Consolidated Cert from 1907, cancelled in 1917. I wish to upload the image for an article, HOW do I mark the image to note that its in the Public Domain, much as your B&O cert us nowCoal town guy (talk) 15:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

  Glad to be of help, Coal town guy. As a certificate published in the U.S. in 1907, it's Public Domain same as File:B&O RR common stock.jpg, so all you need to put in the License section is {{PD-US}}, and the template will do the rest. JGHowes talk - 01:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Crested Saguaro Cactus LocationEdit

I believe the location specified for the image at is incorrect. The location specified (32° 16′ 20″ N, 110° 7′ 0″ W) appears to be well east of Saguaro National Park East (Rincon Mountain District). I recognize the "crested" saguaro cactus you have shared in your image as being located outside the entrance to the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum (just outside the southern boundary of Saguaro National Park West). I can forward an image file if you'd like to see what it looked like as of last week (not a whole lot different as might be expected given the cactus' growth rate). I thought you might want to consider changing the information on the location of this cactus to {32.244112, -111.167622} for the benefit of individuals who may want to visit this cactus in the future.

Kind regards,

Robert M. Taylor

  Many thanks for catching that! JGHowes talk - 12:43, 10 May 2015 (UTC)


Aloha! Please inform the user you blocked on his/her talk page. I declined his/her unblock request today. Cheers!   --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Hedwig in Washington, Many thanks for your message. Indeed, the blockee was notified of the block and the reason for it on his talk page here.  JGHowes talk - 22:53, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Wooops. I didn't notice that in all the copyvio chaos and his talk page.   --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
That's certainly understandable! The block was necessary to prevent the blockee's re-uploading of his previously deleted copyvios and obscuring or falsely stating the source to evade re-deletion, as evidenced by ‎File:Jagtar Singh Hawara.jpg JGHowes talk - 23:22, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
He's pretty creative. Nothing good will come from him, that's what my gut tells me. Well, let's decline and move on.   --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:40, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Imagenes del articulo Camargo (Chihuahua)Edit

Hola, las imagenes que yo subí a Wikimedia son de mi autoria, imagenes que tambien subi a mi cuenta de Facebook y Youtube ("File:Lago Colina.png", "File:Reloj Camargo.jpg", "File:Santa Rosalía.jpg") después con esas imagines contribui a el artículo de Camargo. Pero he visto que las has quitado de ahí ¿entonces quiero saber cómo puedo hacer para que las pueda restablecer?--Lalof3 (talk) 04:32, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

  These were deleted because they appeared to be copyright violations. Lago_Colina.png, for example, has copyright notice "2016, © by "Edd Najera". Unless you, yourself, are Edd Najera, you cannot claim it as your "own work" and re-license it as {{cc-by-sa-4.0}} to make it acceptable on Commons. The same applies to Facebook or YouTube images created by someone other than yourself. JGHowes talk - 12:31, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Commons Conference projectEdit


I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around. But since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year. If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.


--Touzrimounir (talk) 22:18, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Rico Rossi Leangria Image deletionEdit

Hey JGHowes, i see you deleted my image. How can i submit proof of ownership of the image to re-upload the file? I don't think it should be removed if its legally my own work and i own the right to distribute it and decide the copyright usage myself. This image is my own photography made with clearance of the prospect to use for wikipedia upload.

Link to File:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by FrankKoch (talk • contribs) 09:55, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

  Thanks for contacting me. Wikipedia Commons is a repository of freely-licensed images, that is, where the copyright owner permits derivative and commercial use of his creation by others. If you are the original photographer and copyright holder and wish to do so, please use this Wikimedia OTRS release generator to send permission to the "OTRS" desk:
Once this is done, let me know and I'll undelete the file with the tag {{OTRS pending}}. — JGHowes talk - 13:41, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion requestsEdit

hi, Mr. JGHowes, I write to you because I noticed that he recently restored a file of a certain portrait of the XVIII Century, in line with the PD license, I would like to take advantage of it if I can afford if she would hear this user from where this user was locked up to be a sock, where half of the following deleted files are in accordance with the PD license, this list includes many portraits and paintings, photographs and so on. PD license, with a valid license, where many files were part of wikipedian projects embedded in various wikipedian historical entries. I can ask her if she could take some time to occupy her, obviously does not pretend to restore them all eheheheheeh :

-- 11:46, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Please keep it!Edit

This is a very important photo, Please keep it, Thank You!

See [1] -- 15:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

One Man's Terrorist Is Another Man's Freedom Fighter. -- 15:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

The photo I uploaded, Actress Ran Wei, is MY photo.Edit

I took it on my iphone 2 years ago at an event Ran Wei was attending. She also gives her permission for the photo to be used, even though I am the owner of it and don't need it. Please undelete this photo. I'd of appreciated if you would of asked me first instead of assuming I didn't have the rights to it. Also under the help it says I can give it a Fair Use doctrine. How would I go about doing that? Ranscapture (talk) 22:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

  Reply: File:Actress Ran Wei.jpg‎ was tagged for deletion as a Copyright Violation, because it is also found elsewhere on the internet, such as: where it was copyrighted in 2015‎ "All rights reserved"
• ‎imdb 
• Amazon, at ‎ .
Upon reviewing the file, which appears to be of professional quality and in view of the fact that it's been on the internet for more than two years before you uploaded it to Commons, it seems unlikely that you are the photographer and copyright owner.‎ Unless you can provide the original digital file with EXIF data verifying your claim of ownership, we cannot accept the file at Commons. This remains the case since the last time you uploaded this image to Commons on December 9, 2015, and your undelete request was denied.
As to Fair Use, that only applies to a deceased person, where it is impossible to take a freely licensed photograph. JGHowes talk - 22:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)‎
This is from an iphone... there is no exif data. I took this in december of 2014 at the asians on film event with an iphone. Here is a screenshot of ALL the pictures: . I really cant believe your telling me my picture isnt mine. And the sites you found it on are sites that are auto populated by programs designed to do that. And I allowed Ran to use it as well, so she can upload it to imdb as well. Ranscapture (talk) 03:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Photos taken with iPhones do have EXIF metadata embedded, as do all digital cameras.‎ For example, see File:St Martins NB covered bridge.jpg — that would be evidence that you are the photographer. It's the uploader's obligation to establish copyright ownership. When the photo was previously deleted in January, 2016, your Undeletion request was denied when you did not respond.‎
In view of the above and your other copyright violations, I don't see a basis for Undeletion. JGHowes talk - 12:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)‎

File:Cathy Gabor.jpgEdit

Hi there,

This file was deleted for being published elsewhere on the web. The uploader is the owner, and I'm walking them through the OTRS process. Just wanted to leave a heads up for you in case you see it reuploaded (with {{OTRS pending}} this time). --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:33, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

File: Feyes.jpgEdit

Hi JGHowes. We're Bucle Buclado. I'm writting you because the 25th of october you deleted a file of ours because of a copyright violation. The name of the file was File:Feyes.jpg and the review said "non for a commercial use", but we've a blog and we don't use the file for any commercial use. Being all for now, we'll wait a reply. Regards,

Bucle Buclado.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bucle Buclado (talk • contribs) 21:17, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  Thank you for writing, Bucle Buclado. Are you the creator of this collage? What Wikipedia article is it intended for? Apparently this collage was derived from images posted to Flickr and a reviewer of the Flickr license for some, specifically and, found that their license did not allow for commercial use by others — such a restriction is not allowable at Commons and that is why a second reviewer nominated it for deletion due to incompatible license.
I see that you've uploaded it again to Commons as File:New feyes.jpg. Generally speaking, re-uploading previously deleted files is frowned upon. Per Commons Scope, files that are just a personal collection and not realistically useful for an educational purpose, or artwork simply uploaded to showcase the artist's skills, are not allowable at Commons and may be deleted, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:New feyes.jpg. JGHowes talk - 23:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 18:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 01:20, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 00:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Raoof Haghighi imageEdit

Re this image by Natalie Holland,_Raoof_Haghighi,_with_his_painting_%22Nothing%22.jpg, Natalie has sent in an e-mail to prove she gives her permission for that image to be used, but somehow the message isn't getting through Johnalexwood (talk) 23:40, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

  I checked, and all we have is her statement giving you "the right for free use of this file and for any purpose", which is insufficient. We need the full {{Cc-zero}} release from Ms Holland. It should be emailed to:
with Ticket#2018042810000068 in the subject line.  JGHowes  talk 00:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Deleted pictureEdit


you deleted the file "Alexander Badrow.jpg". The picture shows Alexander Badrow, who is the mayor of the hanseatic city of Stralsund. We are the press office ("Pressestelle") of said town and want to upload a current picture of the mayor. It would be most pleasant if you could undelete the file as we bought the picture off the photographer and own full rigths. The link you provided for argumentation also claims "Hansestadt Stralsund" as the source of the picture.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pressestelle Stralsund (talk • contribs) 07:40, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
  If you are the copyright holder and wish to donate File:Alexander Badrow.jpg to Wikimedia Commons with a {{cc-by-sa-4.0}} free license, please verify that you are Pressestelle Stralsund by emailing the permission statement on your official letterhead to: . Once this is received, it can be undeleted.  JGHowes  talk 01:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Please chime in here, I need some helpEdit


Hi colleague, I think this edit of your is quite a misunderstanding. It wasn't tagged as derivative, but because this photography of a street-sign seems to be simply "stolen" from elsewhere. If the image wouldn't be copyrightable, then how would the CC license make sense? --Túrelio (talk) 20:13, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

  Hi Túrelio! You're right that the uploader can't apply a cc license to something he got elsewhere. On the other hand, an ordinary street sign consisting solely of plain text is itself not copyrightable, nor does a simple photograph of it meet the threshold of originality required for copyright. Perhaps changing the license to {{PD-ineligible}}?  JGHowes  talk 21:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)



You have removed aforementioned image file because it appears elsewhere ont the web: I have taken this picture myself with my own camera. The picture is displayed on following web page: ; I put it there myself as I am the administrator and webmaster of this website (and President of the Danica Seleskovitch Association). I am the owner of the copyright of this picture and I would like to be able to display it on the French Wikipedia page devoted to Marianne Lederer. I sent this information to no avail to . What can I do? Thanks in advance for your help. --Weisere (talk) 09:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Hi @Weisere:, I see that you sent the email suggested by @Túrelio: to It has been assigned OTRS Ticket#2018062410003185 and OTRS agent @Ganímedes: has replied to you, so further correspondence about licensing this file should be responded to using OTRS Ticket#2018062410003185 in the subject line. Once the proper free license by the copyright holder is confirmed by the OTRS agent, the file can be undeleted and available at Wikimedia Commons for the French Wikipedia as well as all other language Wikipedias. Amitiés,  JGHowes  talk 12:15, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletionEdit

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

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

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

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


Yours sincerely, Ies (talk) 15:07, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "JGHowes".