Last modified on 4 March 2015, at 23:54

User talk:Jameslwoodward


1st half 2011
2nd half 2011
1st half 2012
2nd half 2012
1st half 2013
2nd half 2013
1st half 2014
2nd half 2014
1st half 2015

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikimedia Commons, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Commons itself. The original talk page is located at

My formal name is James L. Woodward, but I prefer to be called "Jim"

Request for undelete /Files uploaded by SammyZimmermannsEdit

Hello James, the pictures were taken by my wife Antje Zimmermanns. I have changed the name of the copyright holder into her name. And in the Exif data you see that the pics were taken by my camera. This one!_Soost.jpg was alrady taken by myself with my samsung s3 camera. . . . . (SammyZimmermanns)

AAP Symbol.pngEdit

I was exploring nominating File:AAP Symbol.png for deletion when I saw that there had been previous deletion discussion and I should contact you first. Commons:Deletion requests/Indian Election Symbols, Party Symbols and Logos was a bulk deletion request which you quite understandably declined as "Procedural close. There are too many issues here to deal with a DR this large." My specific concern is that this file was not the uploader's own work in the first place and has even be replaced by an image which is explicitly "the exact symbol as allocated by Hon. Election Commision of India"; it can't be licenced as claimed. I'm not at all familiar with Commons and anyway I'd be glad of your advice. NebY (talk) 13:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

You say, "this file was not the uploader's own work in the first place" -- how do you know this? The file is widely used, so it cannot be deleted unless it is a copyright violation. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Fair question. I ran this Google image search on the first version and thought I'd spotted uses that predated the first upload. Now that I've gone through them in more detail, I'm not sure that any of those which are exactly the same really do predate the first upload. Sorry - I should withdraw my "in the first place" claim. But the latest version does still seem to be a problem; it's just a rescaling of the second version, and the second version was as described, "previous file was not the exact symbol as allocated by Hon. Election Commision of India so i've uploaded the exact symbol". Should we revert to the first version? I take your point about the wide use of the file and I'm not set on complete deletion at all. NebY (talk) 15:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
None of them are very good quality. Except for the wide use of the current version, I'd be inclined to revert toi the first version simply because it is the best quality and it's hard to see that there is much difference (other than quality) between them. Given the wide use, though, I'd be inclined to leave it alone. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, the only clear difference I see is in the position of the band. Reversion could solve a problem we're having over using that file in the English Wikipedia article on the party itself en:Aam Admi Party following a lengthy discussion Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review/Archive_33#Multiple_non-free_logos_for_same_organisation. Understandably, some think the party should have its symbol iin the article just like other Indian parties. That might be much easier to resolve if we didn't have a copied version here. (This is what set me looking here.) NebY (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Bleu Horses Three Forks Montana 03.jpgEdit

Um, JIm, did you see that the photographer contacted the artist and is getting OTRS permission? Please undelete for a bit until we get this finalized. Montanabw (talk) 14:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

No, I saw that the photographer had added {{OTRS pending}} to the other file when, in fact, no such e-mail has been sent to OTRS. I have removed the OTRS tag from both 02 and 04 and tagged them with {{delete}}, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bleu Horses Three Forks Montana 02.jpg. If Dolan actually sends permission the images can be restored. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Rats and Silva 6612.JPGEdit

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

Yann and I disagree. In order for something to be de minimis it must be possible to remove it from the image without an ordinary user noticing the removal. Since the very point of these images are the copyrighted rats, I don't see how any de minimis argument can be made here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Just to be clearEdit

…tell me: After this, it is your impression that I am a believer in this Nibiru crackpottery or any other form of pseudo-science? Because if it is, then I really need to improve my English skills. -- Tuválkin 23:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

No, not at all. I think we disagree on how much space and credit Commons should give to crackpot theories, but I see nothing in your comments that even begins to suggest that you are a Nibiru believer. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Request for undelete File:Mario Crocco.jpgEdit

Dear Jim, thank for your concern. 1) The source is the Journal Electroneurobiology ( ). It is a State e-journal licensing its material under Creative Commons (see far down in the Index page, above referred to). 2) The image is in and is unrelated to PD-NASA 3) Also, it has nothing to do with Beanie Baby (and I have no idea of what is this reference) 4) I think we were talking about different images, so let´s me place again the same request. I´m quite unexperienced, so may you help again on this? Cheers, — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk • contribs) 03:09, 2 March 2015‎ (UTC)

  • Hmm. The deleted image at this file name is indeed a Beanie Baby, specifically this one, although not this image. It was uploaded by Señor BCM on 24 March 2014. Señor BCM also uploaded one other image,File:Mario Crocco.png (png not jpg), on 28 October 2012. That is a photo of a man that has been photoshopped badly with a fake nose, mustache, and eyeglasses. It is hard to tell, but I don't think it is the man shown in the image you cite above -- the face is much broader and he is clean shaven.
As for the image you cite above, while I do see a CC-BY license on the page, I think the Journal Electroneurobiology is license laundering. I would be very surprised if they actually have the right to freely sublicense the photograph. Indeed, I would be surprised if they even had the right to use the image themselves. Tracking down copyright holders is time-consuming and I don't think a medical journal would bother. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

License issue File:GILL, James, 504 MM a Critique of Mass Iconology, Seriegrafie auf Büttenpapier (2013).jpgEdit

Hello Jim, thanks for your message! The full license ( to publish this image was given on 01 Dec 2014 by license owner Ted BAUER ( But I can ask him again to contact directly. So please DO NOT DELETE this image!!! License is fully OK, maybe some missunderstanding concerning communication towards Wikipedia.User:Norbert Schott 22:26, 02 March 2015 (UTC)

I assume you mean File:GILL, James, 504 MM a Critique of Mass Iconology, Seriegrafie auf Büttenpapier (2013).jpeg . Discussions of images that have DRs should take place at the DR, not here. I have copied your comment there and responded. Commons:Deletion requests/File:GILL, James, 504 MM a Critique of Mass Iconology, Seriegrafie auf Büttenpapier (2013).jpeg .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:23, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for undelete File:GILL, James, 591 Grace Kelly in Sun (2013).jpgEdit

Hello Jim, would it be possible that you undelete this file? Ted BAUER ( sent the full publishing license on 24 Feb 2015 to The Wikipedia ticket-no. is #2015022410008844. Kind regards, Norbert .User:Norbert Schott 22:29, 02 March 2015 (UTC)

No. Bauer gives no explanation as to why he has the authority to license Gill's painting. He also limits the permission to Wikipedia. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jim, Ted BAUER is the CEO of who is the global license owner of the works of James Gill. What do you need else? The artist will be at the art fair next weekend. As I will also meet the artist there, what would I have to do? Do you need a signed letter from the artist??? Kind regards, Norbert .User:Norbert Schott 09:50, 04 March 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. I'm not sure why a living, active (albeit 82 year old) American artist has a German "global license owner", or even exactly what that means. Does Bauer automatically get a license to all of Gill's works as they are created? Does his license allow him to sublicense works to the world? -- That seems odd, because I think that Bauer makes money by selling reproductions of Gill's work and a CC-BY-SA license here would allow people to create posters and sell them in competition with him.
With that said, however, I would be inclined to accept a statement by and directly from Bauer, through OTRS, that says that he holds a license from Gill that allows him to sublicense Gill's work and that he grants a CC-BY-SA license for (list of works). That statement should not say "for use in Wikipedia" or words to that effect, which the present e-mail has in it. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Second opinionEdit

Hi Jim,

I closed Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Albert Heijn today but I'm afraid that I overlooked some details because the discussion was a real mess so I asked for a second opnion here. Perhaps you want to give a responce there. Natuur12 (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Jameslwoodward".