Open main menu

Commons:Deletion requests/File:11thhourmsnbclogo.jpgEdit

Hi, Johan. I closed the request as keep (ineligible for copyright) and you still deleted the image next day. Do you want to restore the image? In your opinion, what should we do now? Taivo (talk) 19:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I did a mass delete for this user. VFC does not show closed deletion requests, so that I missed this one. Anyway, I don't agree with your conclusion. The image is definitely eligible for copyright because of the color gradients that you will see if you take a closer look at the file. Jcb (talk) 20:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

File:FELL'S CAVE ECLAC.pdfEdit

Hi! Last Friday, we have an edit-a-thon with Wikimedia Chile and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean regarding both their history as an organization and the iconic building located in Santiago [1]. We had participation of the architects in charge of the maintenance of the building and lot of them participated writing about the building. It was very sad, and quite embarrassing to be honest, to see with them that you deleted one of the images uploaded by them regarding one of the glyphs present in the building. The glyph is based on the prehistorical image found on Fell's Cave in Pali Aike National Park, and it was engraved on the building as a symbol of the development of Latin America. We chose that glyph because it fell under public domain being based on pre-historical images, being simple drawings and were engraved on a public building; however, you still deleted it only giving a "Copyright violation" mark and not even notifying the uploader. We would appreciate if you can restore the file so we can correct, in case it is needed, the licensing or the information about the glyph. --B1mbo (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

The deleted file seems to be a recent drawing based on an older drawing rather than an old drawing itself, so that the public domain claim is doubtful. Apart from that, the file was uploaded without a license and without any information that could be helpful to determine its copyright situation. I don't know how much experienced volunteers you have around at such an edit-a-thon, but some accompaniment of new users may be good if possible. Jcb (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Certainly, we could have been able to check everything if the file wasn't deleted in a few minutes after being uploaded and the user have received a warning. --B1mbo (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Files uploaded by FarhanfarooEdit

Hi! Looking at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Farhanfaroo, it seems you may have forgotten to delete File:Farhan faroo.jpg. Was that the case? ~nmaia d 06:03, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

No, it was apparently reuploaded from a new account. Deleted again. Thanks for the notification. Jcb (talk) 15:19, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleting all my uploads without warning?Edit

Hello, it appears you have deleted all my uploads without warning? Many of those were maps made by hand which took many hours. Several of them were in featured articles as well. I do not have backups of these maps as I assumed they would not be deleted without any warning. Is there any way to get those maps back? I also uploaded many, many images that were modified from previous images already uploaded, but those too were deleted. Is there a reason there was no warning? Mattximus (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

I just noticed you even deleted some graphs I made by hand as well. Some of these images were prerequisites for featured list/article status as well. Mattximus (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
You took a lot of pictures from an external website. When I visit the source websites, I come accross texts like '© 2019 California Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.'. In other words: you have been mass uploading blatant copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 22:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Can you give a specific example? The ones from Antbase are all indicated with the correct share-alike copyright tag. Also, I don't really care about the ant-images, I'm mostly concerned about all the graphs and maps you deleted that were my own, or modified from previous images. They took a lot of work, and you deleted them without warning. They were also crucial in the featured lists I have nominated and a bot deleted them from there as well. Is there anyway I can get my maps and graphs back? Mattximus (talk) 22:55, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Also I copied the format for images such as this: [2]. I used exactly the same website and exactly the same copyright information. Mattximus (talk) 22:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Look closer, since almost all my non-map uploads have been from ant-base, I don't know what you mean by "you have been mass uploading blatant copyright violations.". Mattximus (talk) 23:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
You uploaded e.g. this file. Directly below the picture you can read: "© 2019 California Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.". Not sure what could be unclear about that. Jcb (talk) 23:08, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
The line underneath says "AntWeb content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License. We encourage use of AntWeb images." Hundreds of other images uploaded by other users such as [3] have uploaded without problem. Mattximus (talk) 23:17, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
If an image has a separate 'all rights reserved' caption, then it's apparently not within their definition of 'AntWeb content'. Jcb (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
I assumed that "AntWeb content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License. We encourage use of AntWeb images." meant that I was free to use antweb images, as hundreds of other images do. At the very least this was non-malicious. I'm still upset that everything was deleted instead of even warning me so I can copy my graphs and maps. Wikicommons should encourage users and help them if they have ambiguity such as this, instead you have just been rude and dismissive. Mattximus (talk) 23:25, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Please stop posting here, I am not going to say everything here and at COM:UDR. Jcb (talk) 23:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Unwarranted deletions without warningEdit

Hello,

Without warning, you deleted many files that I uploaded from the USGS and the Aussie Farms Repository, such as this USGS file and this Aussie Farms file despite them having no copyright violation.

The USGS media copyright information can be found here. Note how it says the media is in the public domain.

The Aussie farms information can be found here. Note how it says, "The Aussie Farms Repository is a public repository/gallery for videos, photos, documents and campaign materials (fliers, posters, etc) ... The Repository aims to bring all of this evidence together so that we can all freely view, share, and use it in our efforts towards a common goal." The only way I can interpret that is that the media hosted by the website is in the public domain.

Since there are no copyright violations, please undo those deletions. RockingGeo (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see none of the files I deleted was sourced to the USGS website. Several were sourced to 'all rights reserved' external videos and 'publicly available' is completely different from 'Public Domain'. Jcb (talk) 23:42, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletions of files in public domainEdit

Hi, you seem to have deleted 2 pictures on 7 June 2019 for "copyright violation". Those were two pictures of an official law of the Governement of French Polynesia, that are stricly in the public domain and completely free of rights (see lexpol.cloud.pf) as it was explicitely linked and precised in the description. Could you restored the pictures ? Thank you. CocoricoPolynesien

It's hard to believe that this would not be copyrighted by the composer. Even if the composer would have sold the copyright, is there any evidence that works from the Governement of French Polynesia would be Public Domain? Jcb (talk) 21:40, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
It's specifically written here : http://lexpol.cloud.pf/LexpolMentionsLegales.php. Additionnally, all files published by official authorities of the French Republic (that includes the Governement of French Polynesia) are free of rights per article L.122-5 of the Code on intellectual property... The very music sheet that appears in Law 2016-14 is in the public domain by this article. The document can be used virtually everywhere.
A copyrighted work by a third party cannot enter the Public Domain by being e.g. cited in a government document. International copyright conventions prevent that. Jcb (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
I acknowledged that. It is written in a press article that the composers gave their copyright to the collectivity. I'll come back when I have the proof, thanks for your time ! Edit: I have a pdf file from the website of the Assembly of French Polynesia that says they relinqueshed their copyrights (www.assemblee.pf/Article/Document/4826?docId=1126050) - Page 2, yellow square
Thanks! I have undeleted the files and documented the copyright situation and the description pages. Jcb (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Please undelete File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg which has been suppressed by CommonsDelinkerEdit

@Jcb:

My present request of undelating is related to the today action of 8 juin 2019 by CommonsDelinker over the file ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Fischer) , done with the corresponding link https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgxwCgzHmrsXDbTMxMBgGJGNQFcJB and more

precisely États_extatiques_et_méditatifs_selon_Roland_Fischer.jpg, supprimé sur Commons par Jcb ; motif : No OTRS permission for 30 days .


I understand that my File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg has been suppressed automatically by the robot CommonsDelinker in Commons because OTRS permission was not obtained ""after 30 days"".

Would you please look at my response of may 13th to Arthur Crombez which first asked me to answer to his question regarding this file which he considered as a translated image from the english Roland L. Fischer article.

But my quick answer to his question from " [Ticket#2019050810003241] Re: Demande de Permission OTRS pour le fichier déposé dans COMMONS intitulé File:États extatiques et méd [...] " was not answered later by him even after 30 days.

Let me tell you that this original file is my "personal drawing figure in french" which is not related nor translated from the original english figure in the article Roland L. Fischer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_L._Fischer) that i translated into french in the french Roland

Fischer article ( https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Fischer ).

The purpose of this original drawing in french File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg has been done by myself to illustrate better the french section 2.3 of the Roland Fischer article which is named "Perception de l'hallucination et méditation continuum".

Therefore I am asking you to undelete this file which is an illustration explaining better the french Roland Fischer article for the french readers of the encyclopedia.

Moreover my File:Lettre de Roland Fischer à Pierre Etevenon en 1973.jpg has previouslly been granted with an OTRS file in the french Roland Fischer article.


Cordially. Pierre Raymond Esteve (alias Pierre Etevenon) . --Pierre Raymond Esteve (talk) 07:35, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

As soon as an OTRS agent processes a valid permission, they will take care of undeletion. Currently the ticket is open, so that somebody will take a look at it some day. Jcb (talk) 10:08, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  Thank you.Jcb pour votre rapide réponse. J'ai recréé ma File:États extatiques et méditatifs selon Roland Fischer.jpg et redemandé une permission OTRS après avoir remis mon illustration dans l'article Roland Fischer en français. Cordialement. --Pierre Raymond Esteve (talk) 18:05, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of empty dr pageEdit

HI Jcb. Can you delete Commons:Deletion requests/2019/01/08? It's basically empty now, with the exception that there is a user's signature there. 大诺史 (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

  Done - Jcb (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

DeletionEdit

Hi why did you delete my file, the "traghetto marmorica" it was photo that o took by my self! Francesco Flora (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Most of your uploads were blatant copyright violations. In such a case we just flush the whole batch to be sure. If between all the copyright violations there was one file that was not a copyright violation, don't be surprised when it's flushed with the copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 15:36, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
For me it does not have any Sense, I don't understand why did you delete photo took from My camera. Plus other photos that are took from other website such as the "Quirino" one where I requested personally to the copyright holder to send an e mail to permission commons to allow me to publish those photo.The only photos that you really had to delete were those schreenshot of some Dream Theater shows.--Francesco Flora (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletions on 1. June, 21:06Edit

Hi Jcb, I am contacting you because of the deletion of some files about the Lahnwanderweg at the aforementioned date. Concerning these files I was in discussion with the German OTRS-Team. I provided them with information about the creator giving me the task to upload them here but could not give them the standard-form because the creator was on a longer hike abroad at this time. Unfortunately the OTRS-team did not react on the information I provided to them. This led me to the assumption that everything was okay. Unfortunately it was not. A few hours after the deletion I wrote an e-mail to the OTRS-team with still no reaction so far. How can we solve this problem? In the meantime the creator filled out a form that should in my opinion answer all questions. Thanks in advance! Asdrubal (talk) 09:36, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

The ticket is currently open. As soon as an OTRS agent has time to process it, they will take care of undeletion if they think the permission is valid. Please be aware that OTRS has a backlog, because we are heavily understaffed. Jcb (talk) 11:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! I sent them the creators document. Let's hope this will work. Asdrubal (talk) 19:34, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
In the meantime everything is allright again. Thanks for the advice! Asdrubal (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Great! Jcb (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Rabbi Chaim Yitzchak Isaac Landa.jpgEdit

Hello. Why did you delete the file? According to what I understood, ORTS has released rights ... דגש חזק (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

The permission in ticket:2019040410008871 was not accepted by the involved OTRS agent. Jcb (talk) 20:37, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

"insect eye" imageEdit

Hi. If you look carefully at the history of the Wikipedia page for Compound eye, you will see that one of the editors removed an image of an Eristalinus in 2008 and replaced it with an entirely different image, but they did not rewrite the caption; [this is the edit]. This image was never identified by anyone as belonging to a fly. No one caught this error until now. Please don't revert the change I made to the image file. Thanks, Dyanega (talk) 00:24, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

You are breaking the code so that the page generates several error messages. Please be aware that it's your responsibility to check the result of your edit. If you break something, your edit is likely to be reverted, regardless of the further contents of that edit. Jcb (talk) 05:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

User contributions Abu QuatadahEdit

Hi,

Why you have deleted all calligraphic files?— Bukhari (Talk!) 01:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

No permission, also no license and no source. Jcb (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
He is creating his own pics from application and is my friend on telegram.— Bukhari (Talk!) 00:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Please ask him to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 10:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

DeletingEdit

Dear Jcb!

I would like to ask you why you've deleted my photos of Peter Kocák, Ján Bartko and of the church in Malá Tŕňa. You wrote, that there was not any OTRS permission for 30 days. That is not true. I worte an OTRS permission and sent it to Wikimedia Commons e-mail. (you can see a copy of it here) I know that in the EXIF there is wirtten, that author of the photo is PeterHalko, but that I am. I am Peter Haľko. But if it is problem to have a nickname on Commons, tell me about it and I will create a new profile with my true name in.

Yours sincerely
Peter Haľko a. k. a --Petinoh (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

An OTRS volunteer responded 30 days ago, asking you to specify a license. We did not receive any answer to that, so that the files were deleted 30 days after our response. Jcb (talk) 14:12, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Überprüfe dein Tun! - Honi soit qui mal y penseEdit

Dein Bild zum Löschantrag ist leider nicht Nachvollziehbar. Bitte helfe der Welt deine Sichtweise zu verstehen. Danke und liebe Grüße vom - --Lupus in Saxonia (talk) 18:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see this has been resolved in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 22:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

COM:ANEdit

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Português | Русский | Sicilianu | Svenska | +/−


 
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators noticeboard#m:Requests for comment/Admin role on Commons (inventing or changing unilaterally the community policies). Not my thread, just notifying. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 19:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC). Thank you.

File:Alberta Highway 3.svgEdit

Can you please undelete File:Alberta Highway 3.svg and compare that with File:Alberta Highway 4.svg? If the latter is appropriate, then then former is as well. If it's not appropriate, then Category:Alberta Highway shields needs to be emptied. The only difference between the two files is the number.

Also, I'd dispute the "Recreation of content deleted per community consensus" tag as I see no discussion of the file, let alone "community consensus". Thank you for your consideration. Imzadi 1979  03:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I am confused. Something must have gone wrong in the cache of whatever. I am absolutely sure that the version I saw was the same file as what I deleted a day before, a file that was absolutely not PD-ineligible. But looking at the deleted versions, I see that the file you uploaded is quite different from the deleted file and that this one is simple enough for PD. I have restored the file. Jcb (talk) 10:09, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

2 pictures from 1 World warEdit

Hello, I think the two pictures (File:Women working a factory in David Stempel AG in 1918 during world war one.jpg, File:David Stempel AG Sonderproduktion Erster Weltkrieg 1918.jpg) were in the categorys Category:David Stempel AG and Category:Editathon 100 Jahre Frauenwahlrecht HMF-Bildspende and are a donation of pictures from the w:Historical Museum, Frankfurt as well as the other pictures in the Category:David Stempel AG. Also, the authors have not received any notification to do anything about OTRS here. Please look again. Thank you --2003:DE:742:D8AE:919:7ABF:95C:4BC2 04:26, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

We never received any permission at OTRS. Donations are fine, but we must have a proper registration of the donation and the copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 10:17, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Undeletion requestEdit

You deleted File:Jaxson hayes.jpg back in March for good reason. I'd like to have it undeleted, mark it as a crop of File:DIG14403-007 (45265473635).jpg, and license it under {{PD-USGov}} as the original was taken by Jay Godwin, an employee of the LBJ Library, run by the National Archives and Records Administration. BigrTex (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

  Done - Jcb (talk) 20:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Wapen van LuxemburgEdit

Goeiemiddag Jcb, sal dit nie beter wees om geskrapte wapens van lande soos dié van Luxemburg met bestaande alternatiewe te vervang nie? Dit skep net onnodige werk vir ander gebruikers! Ek het dit nou vir die Afrikaanse Wikipedia gedoen. Groete. --   SpesBona 10:35, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Het is goed om te weten dat we hier veel te weinig actieve admins hebben. Het is daardoor doorgaans niet haalbaar om dit soort aanvullende handelingen te doen bij het behandelen van een nominatie. Bedankt in elk geval voor het oplossen hiervan op AF wiki. Jcb (talk) 15:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Aan die einde was dit net 'n verskil van "a" as 'n hoof- of 'n kleinletter, sien bv. hier. Myns insiens kon dit maklik deur die CommonsDelinker gedoen word. Hoe fiks ons dit nou, nadat al die skakels egter verwyder is? Groete. --   SpesBona 21:05, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Je kunt de verwijderingen opsporen door op de 'delinker log' link te klikken, bijvoorbeeld hier. Jcb (talk) 21:18, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

User:OgreBot/Uploads_by_new_users/2019_May_23_06:00#Gorvzavodru_(145_edits)Edit

Hi. Was removed File:Ri 1.png which was nominated to delete by you. Also is the queue to delete of dozens other images there. BTW is note there that user:Gorvzavodru "has DR notices", but he have not it. These images have licence templates "cc-by-sa-4.0". Also, there is PermissionOTRS 2019051710003466 for book with these images. I self can't add the OTRS templates to images, because then shows the warning that it must do only OTRS member. Please, restore this file and remove other from the deletion queue. --Vladis13 (talk) 05:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

The permission was not yet accepted by the OTRS agent. They sent a follow up message, but we never received any response. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I contacted the user which uploaded the files, and he contacted the author of the book and illustrations. They said that all OTRS permissions were obtained. Also, the pages of images have license templates "cc-by-sa-4.0". Do I need to do something? --Vladis13 (talk) 16:31, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
They need to respond to our 23 May message. Jcb (talk) 22:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

BilderEdit

Hallo Jcb, ich bitte um Auskunft. Warum hast Du meine Bilder in Wyny Ecu-Wikipedia gelöscht? „Das Bild Wyny-2609.jpg wurde am 15. Juni 2019 um 01:55:35 Uhr von Jcb gelöscht.“ In Deiner Begründung steht: Urheberrechtsverletzung, „auto­matisch gesichtet.“ Der erstellte Wikipedia-Beitrag be­steht unbeanstandet seit 2017, also seit gut 2 Jahren. Meine Erklärung ist: Ich hatte in Commons für das Bild wyny-2609 (Nr. der Fotografin) den richtigen Untertitel (Europid XI, 1998, Holz § Acryl, H 100 cm) einfügen wollen und bei diesem Versuch löschte sich dieses Bild. Mehrere Tage später sollten weitere Bilder eingefügt werden, darunter auch das Bild wyny-2609, aber jetzt gingen alle Bilder verloren. Da gleichzeitig geschehen könnte meine selbstverursachte Löschung und das neue Hochladen im direkten Zusam­menhang stehen. Der Automat sah das gelöschte Bild wyny-2609 als das bereits Vorhandene und das gleiche Bild wyny-2609 als Plagiat an. Die von mir vor 36 Jahren erfundene Kunstfigur ist bei der VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn urheber­rechtlich geschützt. „This File is Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International“ (frei verfügbar) Den neuartigen Figurentyp erfand ich bereits im Jahr 1983. Plagia­te mache ich nicht. Die Fotos wurden extra für Wikipedia hergestellt und bisher nicht veröf­fentlicht. Ich möchte Dich bitten, diese Bilder wiederherzustellen. Danke und mit freundlichen Grüßen --Werner wyny (talk) 03:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Please contact OTRS to provide evidence of permission. Jcb (talk) 16:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

FileEdit

Hi! About this file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_HABLE%C3%81NY_%C3%A9rkez%C3%A9se_P%C3%A1rizsba,_1867.jpg I have the source of the picture, but the author is unknown. --Heringcápa (talk) 06:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Given the age of the image, this is good enough. Jcb (talk) 16:18, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

File: Old Sikh Gurdwara in Shanghai.jpgEdit

sir , I have source of image which is given in file itself as well, when you open source , image appears at no. 2 in image slot of source as there are 3 overlapping images on source. More over this is image of old building more than 100 years old. I do not know who shot this picture but certainly as per its age it should be in public domain .

https://archive.shine.cn/feature/art-and-culture/Sikhs-A-piece-of-history-that-remains-fragmentary/shdaily.shtml Guglani (talk) 13:02, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

For China, yes. For other countries, please be careful, the rules differ from country to country. In many countries copyright expires 70 years after the death of the photographer. Jcb (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Files: Mahmud-Ali Kalimatov (2019-06-26).jpg, Anton Vaino (2019-06-26).jpg and othersEdit

Hi! You added a template stating that some media files, I recently uploaded, does not have sufficient information on its copyright status. At the same time, during the download, I indicated the licenses under which they are distributed, adding templates that the images are taken from the websites of the President and the Government] of Russia. The sites themselves also indicate the license under which the media files are distributed (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0). In addition, after your message, I also added a Cc-by-4.0 license to the images. If the cause is still there, could you tell me what is wrong? Mr Savva (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The standard license template is indeed what was needed. Jcb (talk) 14:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Tegan Marie.jpgEdit

Hi Johan, I uploaded the file and was in contact with the copyright holder. I know for sure that they sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with the release. Is there any chance that you can tell me if this email was ever received from the OTRS team or if there was simply an issue within the process? You can also sent me an email if appropriate. Or is that not the correct address? --Heubergen (talk) 17:14, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

We did receive a message, but it didn't come from the author. We responded to the ticket a month ago, but we never received any answer. Jcb (talk) 17:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Removal of a report on COM:ANUEdit

I know it's futile, but for the record I'm stating it anyway. I'm not stalking you. I have no time for that. I was going over Rodrigo.Argenton's history to determine if he only clashes with Jeff G. and an IBAN might be sensible or if other measures would be better.

As I did that, I came across various users he interacted with, mostly not problematic. And one of those interactions was [4]. As I searched for the title, I strangely found nothing.

Odd. Why notify someone of a report that doesn't exist?

So I checked the page history, in case it had been accidentally removed. And errr, yeah, that. [5]. Based on your response to the notification on your talk page, that wasn't an accident.

Instead of going to edit war over a batch edit that could have been pretty serious if Elisfkc had continued, Rodrigo asked for a reversal of those edits. Maybe Rodrigo should have waited a bit longer before posting on ANU, or simply should have posted on AN instead. But abuse of noticeboard? And how do you justify the rollback of a complaint against you and blocking the user who complains? Is there a piece of history I'm missing? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 19:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The user was blocked over this and not a single admin (or other user) has stated to disagree with the block. This was an ongoing abuse that ended after my intervention. Case closed for me. Jcb (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

OTRS confirmation possible reason for deletion?Edit

You say "if they did buy the rights, they will be able to provide the documentation to OTRS." So we expect them to notice the deletion and contact OTRS? I don't think that is good procedure. Nobody said anything on the nominations page about why they could not be assumed to have bought the rights. Do we act in the same way when other institutions release images as "own work"? --LPfi (talk) 20:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, we do. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of permissions by GLAMs are mistaken, many institutions think that they are the copyright holder because they have a copy of a work in their archive, which is not true of course. Jcb (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
OK. I still think the case is different with a commercial entity – archives have lot of material donated by owners of the copies, while the resort probably has only photos by their own photographers (in this case probably temporary work-for-hire photographers) and by themselves. I think it is unlikely they got the images from the net, especially if copies cannot be found there. --LPfi (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
In almost all cases where professional photographers are hired to take pictures, they grant a usage right to their client, which is completely different from a transfer of rights, although this two things are often confused. Jcb (talk) 17:12, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
That might of course be so also in this case. I think however, that the user should have been notified by e-mail and given enough time to answer (I did in fact e-mail them, but have got no answer (yet?)). They cannot be supposed to watch their Commons user page. --LPfi (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
That's not how it works and it's not reasonable to expect that, especially when you take into account that we are heavily understaffed. Jcb (talk) 19:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

The Complete Lojban LanguageEdit

Hi Jcb, You should not delete such files and template without a regular deletion request. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Yann: Please take care that the template gets recognized as a license template, you did an incomplete job. The files are in Category:Files with no machine-readable license. Jcb (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  Done There may be a cache issue. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Jcb (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

COM:AN/UEdit

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Português | Русский | Sicilianu | Svenska | +/−


 
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Jcb. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:39, 1 July 2019 (UTC). Thank you.


Радовельський храм.jpgEdit

Hello, Jcb! Excuse for troubling. You deleted this file. And I communicated with the copyright holder. They gave me permission. And I sent it to the address permissions-uk@wikimedia.org. Can I download this file again? Or what can I do to use it? Thank you in advance.--Slavkamira (talk)

As soon as an OTRS agent handles the ticket and concludes that the permission is valid, they will take care of undeletion. Please be aware that this may take some time, because OTRS has a backlog. Jcb (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Jcb, Thank you for the clarification! Slavkamira (talk)

File:SHV Logo (2003-2013).svgEdit

Hey. Why did you deleted this file? It has since yesterday a „CC-by-sa 4.0“ license. See: de:Datei:Schweizerischer Handball-Verband logo.svg and OTRS: 2019063010002289. I only forgot to change the templates to the commons style, maybe this is because you didn't see the license. --Malo95 (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

The permission was invisible because of the syntax errors. Restored and fixed. Jcb (talk) 15:58, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

undelete this file File:موقع منطقة سبع أبكار.jpgEdit

Hello

File:موقع منطقة سبع أبكار.jpg

undelete it, it is the shapefile of openstreetmap which is free source,

--Abu aamir (talk) 21:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

It's not only such a shape file. Please ask the author to contact OTRS. Jcb (talk) 22:20, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

there is no author, I downloaded the shapefile of openstreetmap and then opened it then I added some texts and a polygon. you could have inquired before deleting the file --Abu aamir (talk) 06:59, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Re: WarningEdit

Please look at your edits. If you disagree with what I said, you could've explained why, but instead you removed my message. I'll be reverting now, please don't do this again.--Kai3952 (talk) 23:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I just realized that you are an admin. I wasn't sure if you received "this message", as you haven't replied.--Kai3952 (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Why ?Edit

I've just noticed you deleted File:2006 WC- Swiss gymnast.jpg (and maybe other files I've uploaded from the same Flickr account). I don't understand why you've done that, not why there was no DR... Those files come from the Flickr account of Claudia Applebe, from whom we'd already had a photograph with an OTRS validated authorization, so I would say there is no reason to doubt what she's stating on her own Flickr account ! I also wonder why I wasn't warned on my pdd. Regards. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Please don't upload files that have Public Domain Mark at Flickr. This is not a valid license, it's actually not a license at all. Jcb (talk) 17:22, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
I just don't get it : there are good reasons to believe this Flickr account is valid, so why can't we just consider these illustrations are PD because the author determined them as PD ? I also don't understand why UploadWizard allows such uploads if it's not valid. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
UploadWizard allows such things to help us detecting these files. If the system disallows them, people start making up all kind of things to get the files uploaded. Please see Template:Flickr-public domain mark about why Public Domain Mark is unacceptable. Jcb (talk) 18:28, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
What I understand of it is that PD mark "requires a specific reason why this image is in the public domain". So I don't understand why it cannot be accepted for the files I'm talking about, since it comes from a Flickr account where the author herself has determined her pictures (those specific pictures) are in public domain. If we considered that this photographer is trustworthy for other files (those with OTRS authorization and those with Commons licenses on her Flickr account like this one), there should be a solution to determine that the PD tag is valid for her pictures. But I don't see the adapted solution here for such a case. Couldn't we consider them as PD-self ? --
(talk page stalker) (not by choice: looks like I forgot to remove this talk page from my watchlist again.. Won't forget this time) @TwoWings: please ask the Flickr user to switch to CC0 for public domain. (alternatively CC-BY or CC-BY-SA are also acceptable) - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

undelete requestEdit

The documents I've uploaded, containing extracts from 1906 newspapers piblished in Russian Empire, tagged "Russian Empire" (free to publish), were deleted, which I believe has no reason. Please give a reason or undelete the files.

Thanks

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alx90865 (talk • contribs) 08:40, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) (and after this I'm unwatching again) @Alx90865: make a request at COM:UR. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:17, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

File:بذل المجهود.png is a free file please undelete it.Edit

File:بذل المجهود.png whas a screensoht a took from the free file on wikisource so please undelete the file. عبد الله الصيدلي (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

So between all the copyright violations there was a file that was not a copyright violation? Well, that's your own risk if you upload copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
there is no copyright violation at all; unless if you count two book covers (File:Surgical care at the district hospital.jpg - File:مختصر-المزني.jpg) under fair use a violation, but all my others uploads is free and I give the links to wikisource for each of them in the upload page! look File:إيثار الحق على الخلق.png is from wikisource, File:الإصابة في تمييز الصحابة.png is from wikisource also,File:التحفة العراقية.png is from a wikisource, File:Taqreeb book.png is also from wikisource please reconsider your deletions, thanks in advance. عبد الله الصيدلي (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

you had removed all of my pictures from my hometown page without any warning! Why?Edit

I have noticed that you had removed those pictures that I make. I want to know the reason.

By the way, I need to edit them many times which does not seem to be any problem.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 90Saeed (talk • contribs) 16:54, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
All the individual pictures used into the collage need source information. Jcb (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Hedwig-glas (cropped).jpegEdit

This is merely a new crop from the "parent" file, which is an open-licence image from the Rijksmuseum. Probably you know the tag appropriate for both images, which I don't, so please add. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 23:33, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, the source file is one of those LizzyJongma files without permission from the photographer. Many of these uploads have been deleted in the meantime, many are still waiting to be found and deleted. Jcb (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Nantes Cathedral altar.jpgEdit

Bonjour,

j'avoue ne pas très bien saisir les raisons pour lesquelles vous avez jugé utile de reverter les modifications que j'avais effectuées s'agissant du fichier porté en objet. Nous sommes bel et bien en présence de l'ancien maître-autel de la cathédrale Saint-Pierre et Saint-Paul de Nantes qui constitue pour le Ministère de la Culture un ensemble cohérent formé d'un autel, d'un tabernacle et de deux anges adorateurs.Cet ensemble a d'ailleurs été intégralement classé en 1862 alors qu'il occupait encore le choeur roman de l'édifice, détruit depuis, quand bien même les anges adorateurs sculptés en 1779 par Jean-Sébastien Leysner sont postérieurs de 29 ans à l'autel. Le cliché permet plus d'ailleurs d'appréhender l'ensemble dans sa globalité que dans ses éléments constitutifs et donc de le rattacher à la catégorie "Maître-autel de la cathédrale Saint-Pierre-et-Saint-Paul de Nantes" qui renvoie tant à la fiche générale Palissy qu'aux trois autres détaillant les parties de la construction architecturée. Cette catégorie renvoie également aux objets monuments historiques de Loire-Atlantique, qu'il s'agisse d'autels, de tabernacles ou de statues religieuses. Par votre action, nous avons un fichier qui contribue à alourdir une catégorie, "Interior of Cathédrale Saint-Pierre de Nantes", riche de 181 éléments. Ledit fichier, dont le nom choisi par son auteur est suffisemment évocateur du sujet qu'il entendait photographier, ne fait que présenter un objet classé dans un cadre architectural plus vaste et flou au demeurant. Si vous entendez privilégier la perception du cadre architectural, il convient alors de s'interroger sur la recevabilité d'un fichier qui présente la verrière 00 de la cathédrale, oeuvre de Jean Le Moal, décédé en 2007, et donc soumise à droit d'auteur. Merci d'avance pour votre réponse argumentée.--GO69 (talk) 05:06, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Your edit made the authorship information invisible. Please always check the result of your edit. Jcb (talk) 10:37, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  • This user merely mislocated a "}}". Why revert instead of correcting, Jcb? -- Tuválkin 12:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Azola Mlota.jpgEdit

Hi Jcb, You deleted File:Azola Mlota.jpg but an OTRS had been sent with permissions granted under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License from the subject himself. All evidence can be provided upon request. Thanks Ceethekreator (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

The OTRS agent did not (yet) accept the permission and sent a follow up message 6 June. We never heard back any thing, so that the file got deleted 30 days after our response. Please be aware that permission must come from the copyright holder (=photographer!), not from the depicted person. Jcb (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Digital GlobeEdit

I am not sure wether it makes sense to list files to delete by "insource" searches since the nominator surely did not look up wether a file was properly licensed by other means than a general copyright declaration on awebsite. I am not sure especcially with File:Fukushima-1.JPG. Would you please double check it? I have some unclear fragments in my brain that this image was granted by DG via ORTS? If true it might be wrth double check more of those files. I could be wrong, anyway, so if not, please accept my excuse for disrupting. In each case, thanks in advance. --Matthiasb (talk) 01:41, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see, none of the deleted files had OTRS. I have just rechecked all of them. Jcb (talk) 16:49, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

[Ticket#: 2019070910001096]Edit

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mash19.jpg please verify this image, ticket:2019070910001096. Author sent previously too many mails but he didn’t get any response, so that last night I added otrs permission, when I came to knew that I'm not an otrs member then I revet my edit. Author today sent again new release note. And he told me, he don’t want to waste more time to sending mails.

@Jcb: please reply Biki4343 (talk) 14:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
I am not going to dig into this case, an other OTRS agent is already involved. I have tagged the file to keep it online for a while, to grant some time for processing of the ticket. Jcb (talk) 14:59, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
@Jcb: Thank you but but still not, author get any updates,will author send release note Again? Biki4343 (talk) 20:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
No, the author needs to be patient. The ticket is open, it will be handled one day or another. Jcb (talk) 21:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Listen here pleaseEdit

Hi, there! How are you? I see that you deleted my image. After a LONG dispute with the government of South Africa, I finally received the proper permission from the government. You don't how difficult it was. My government publishes images under the CC-BY-NC license. I had to basically beg them for changing the license. I received the proper permission. They issued an official government statement declaring that they consent to image being published a free license, here on Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia and beyond, yet the person who I contacted at OTRS said it was not adequate. Now that I FINALLY received the proper permission, you delete my image. Please restore it and I will happily e-mail you the official statement. Like we say in Afrikaans: "Gee my asseblief 'n regverdige kans." Lefcentreright (talk) 15:43, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

As soon as this is sorted out in ticket:2019060710005052, the OTRS agent will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Why'd you delete the ferret with lymphoma pic?Edit

Hey man, sorry to bother you, but I noticed you've removed the image of a ferret with lymphoma from the Lymphoma in animals article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lymphoma_in_animals) and from Commons. May I ask why? I took this picture myself and it is an image of my own ferret, so there's no issues with consent. I'm pretty sure I licensed it under the appropriate licence. Is its quality too poor? Thanks, again sorry for any inconvenience caused. Watermelon-lemon (talk) 10:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

If it is your own work, why the web-like low resolution? Jcb (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
I took it with my laptop, so the quality was already pretty poor, and then I cropped it a lot so that less of my living room and less of me would be visible. The ferret's face is blurry because she's squirming around. If you like I can take a new one with better resolution. Watermelon-lemon (talk) 00:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
That is probably the best option, the quality of the deleted file is indeed poor. Jcb (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) @Watermelon-lemon: While a better quality image is always welcome, Jcb should not be editorializing an en.wp article from his authority position as a Commons admin: Since there’s no copyright issue, the only thing (for a Commons admin) to do is to undelete it and restore is transclusion in en:Lymphoma_in_animals. (Sorry, Jcb, but this must be said.) -- Tuválkin 14:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
This was uploaded between a bunch of copyright violations, so that I don't have much trust in the claim. If a user uploads one own work between a series of grabbed from the web files, but that supposed own work has no exif and a very low resolutions, not many admins are going to trust that. Now that supposed own work has a quality so poor that the file is practically unusable and the uploader offers to take a real picture, then it's obviously the most pragmatic way out. If anything has to be said, it's this rather than some mistaken lecture on the connection between Wikimedia Commons and English Wikipedia. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Bosum OfBosum'sHele Arms.svgEdit

Hi, you deleted this image due to lack of licence. It was my own work, possibly I forgot to add the licence. Is there any way of looking at the text in the file description, I probably spent quite a lot of effort writing that up. I would like to restore the image, with a licence added. is that possible? ThanksLobsterthermidor (talk) 11:42, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Lobsterthermidor: I have undeleted the file and reset the timer. Please add a license within 7 days. Jcb (talk) 20:42, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Uncompleted deletion requestsEdit

Hi. Please see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.--NMW03 (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

They will be handled one day or another, we have a lot of open DRs that are much older. Jcb (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Slipandslide#Copyright_status%3A_File%3ADark_Chamber.jpgEdit

Artist has sent the completed template to OTRS. Keep in mind that I have to upload first in order to obtain the url(s) for the permission template- there should be a better way to do this.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Slipandslide (talk • contribs) 12:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
There is a way: when you upload the file, put the following code in the permission field: {{subst:OP}} . Then we know that permission via OTRS is on the way. I see that in the case of this file you already did that, but there is no license. Files without a license get deleted after 7 days, with or without OTRS permission. Jcb (talk) 13:30, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

File:YBC-7289-REV.jpgEdit

Can you please explain why you deleted File:YBC-7289-REV.jpg, a faithful photographic reproduction of a several-thousand-year-old (and therefore public domain) two-dimensional work, as needing evidence of copyright permission? Even if that side of the object is deemed copyrightable (it contains only fragmentary working-out of a mathematical problem) the person who created it has been dead for a couple of orders of magnitude longer than 70 years. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

This file is not a reproduction of a 2D work ?!? Jcb (talk) 17:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
It is, though. It is a clay tablet with two flat sides, on which the only interesting content is the writing on both sides. It is as two-dimensional as an oil painting — on both kinds of objects, the writing surface has nonzero but small thickness and in both cases the thickness is only marginally interesting to the content (the brush-strokes of an impasto oil painting have a three-dimensional shape, as do the quill strokes of a clay tablet, but that should be considered de minimis for the dimensionality of the object). Both kinds of objects are in actuality rather thicker than their surfaces (the canvas of an oil painting is stretched in three dimensions over a frame) but again that's not very relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
This is not a 2D objects and it is not comparable to paint strokes. For pictures like this, there must be permission from the photographer. Please compare COM:CUR on coins. Jcb (talk) 20:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
That is not an argument, it is merely an unsupported assertion. To pick another example: a mural or fresco is a 2-dimensional artwork even though it is incorporated into a 3d object (a building or wall). But if you are insistent that it is not a 2-dimensional work (note: work, not object; it is the inscription, not the chunk of clay, that is relevant here) I will be happy to escalate this to undeletion requests. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Not a single admin will agree with you that the three-dimensional clay tablet is a two-dimensional object. And yes, it is relevant that the 'chunk of clay' is three-dimensional. Taking a picture of a 3D object like this generates copyright for the photographer in almost any jurisdiction. Starting an UDR on this is pointless, because every admin will stick to what copyright laws prescribe. Jcb (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Löschung der Gerngroß-FotosEdit

Nur zu deiner Info, ich hatte eine Info für den LA - die OTRS-Freigabe mit der Ticketnr 2018121810007261 wurde dafür allerdings bereits am 18.12. 2018 geschickt, da muss also was schief gegangen sein. Bitte um Recherche danke K@rl (talk) 09:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can see, out OTRS robot was unable to connect the files to the ticket, because the file names were abreviated. Let's see if I can prepare a file list for in the ticket and then ask Krd (who is a native speaker) if this ticket can be resolved. Jcb (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Many thanks, now its okay. --regards K@rl (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Snatt's - Mariam Coulibaly (cropped).jpgEdit

Hi, this file deleted recently is a crop of another file with OTRS verified. What's going wrong? Thanks! --Yuanga (talk) 14:13, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

What went wrong is that the permission was somehow not added to the crop. Undeleted and fixed. Jcb (talk) 13:07, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! --Yuanga (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Wojciech Dworczyk.jpgEdit

Hi,

Could you undelete file File:Wojciech Dworczyk.jpg? The proper agreement has arrived some time ago - actually before the file was uploaded, but no one has informed us that it is uploaded. ticket:2019013110010027, cheers. Polimerek (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

@Polimerek: I can't find a deleted file with that name? I have retried by copy-pasting the filename directly from the ticket, but I get nothing. Jcb (talk) 13:11, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
I made mistake in word "file". See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wojciech_Dworczyk.jpg
@Polimerek: Oops, I didn't notice that either. I have restored the file. Please process the ticket. Jcb (talk) 14:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

#2019012310006388Edit

Hi Jcb,

Could you please restore some of the files you've deleted on 11th July? We want to restore the files which are marked as "No OTRS permission since 31 May 2019". We have an OTRS mail about them. If you restore OTRS ticket #2019012310006388, then I will be very happy.

All of the pages which are uploaded by this user that are currently red are included in this tag

Thank you! --Elmacenderesi (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@Elmacenderesi:   Done - please process the ticket - Jcb (talk) 15:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Stopnswopicecave.pngEdit

Hey there.

I'm a noob with uploading to Commons, so it's not surprising that I probably made a mistake somewhere with this file... But out of curiosity, what did I do wrong? I spent upwards of two hours looking at guidelines and rules and steps and all that junk. And then some time after the fact, I was told that I missed a step, and didn't specify ownership of the screenshot... but I sent an e-mail and did so like I was told. Said e-mail, or so I thought, was accepted.

How did I screw up uploading Stopnswopicecave.png? What guideline did I violate, and why were my privileges taken away? IceKey8297 (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

We responded to the OTRS ticket with additional questions, but never heard anything back. Jcb (talk) 15:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Oh shoot... that was my secondary e-mail that I rarely check... my bad. Although it would've been nice if someone notified me on my discussions page.
Once my ban has been lifted, can I still claim the image as my own work, even though I did not create the game? IceKey8297 (talk) 15:26, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
No, the real author will have to be creditted and permission from the real author will be needed. Jcb (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm confused. Let's start over. What steps am I to take to upload and use a screenshot, that I took, from a game, that I did not create? What license should I give it, and how? IceKey8297 (talk) 17:05, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
You can only upload such a screenshot with a valid permission from the creator of the game. That permission should be sent by the creator to OTRS. Jcb (talk) 17:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Fashion streetEdit

Why did you delete these files? OTRS is pending and permission received. Templates were in the summaries. Didn't you see? Restore it please. --Regasterios (talk) 05:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

What is the ticket number? Jcb (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
2019071210004498. Under discussion. --Regasterios (talk) 16:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
@Regasterios:   Done - please process the ticket. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Please bear with me. I need to agree with the copyright holder about the details. --Regasterios (talk) 09:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
The OTRS received template will keep them at least 30 days online. Jcb (talk) 14:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Freigut (Zürich) Salon erster Stock.jpgEdit

Hello Jcb. Why did you delete that photograph? My mother, who has the copyright, did send her agreement long, long ago (I stood next to her and saw it). Regards, --Freigut (talk) 10:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jcb and Freigut; I see that the file had an "OTRS pending" tag since February. Maybe the permission is still stuck in the OTRS queue, which often takes months to process? Gestumblindi (talk) 10:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The current backlog is 125 days, which is a lot, but a ticket from February should have been handled by now, unless it got in some subqueue for another language. Did you receive an autoreply with a ticket number? Jcb (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I don‘t know – my father is deleting his mails very fast ... Well, I will ask my mother to send her agreement again. --Freigut (talk) 15:55, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Another agreement has been sent today – I'd appreciate the quick undeleting. Thx. --Freigut (talk) 15:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Did you receive an autoreply with a ticket number? Jcb (talk) 19:40, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
De nummer is 201 907 191 000 4351. Dank je wel. --Freigut (talk) 06:01, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright violationsEdit

This and this are copyright violations. You should delete them. Thanks.--Dipralb (talk) 00:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

They are in a deletion request. No need to contact individual admins. Jcb (talk) 14:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Can these be reinstatedEdit

Hi Jcb. On 11 July you deleted File:Charlotte Waters ruin with tank, 1982.jpg and File:Charlotte Waters 1982 NTLib PH0147-0050.jpg because "(No OTRS permission for 30 days)". I wrote to the librarian who gave permission to confirm exactly how and when she'd given her permission, but she's been away for a while, so I have only just heard back from her. She has said: " I emailed/replied to them on 12 June 2019. [and got this response] RE: [Ticket#2019061010010478] release of Charlotte_Waters_1982_NTLib_PH0147-0050.jpg and Charlotte_Waters_ruin_with_tank,_1982.jpg [...]" - but she hasn't heard anything since. Is this a matter of not having enough volunteers to do the admin required within 30 days, or has something else gone wrong? Is is possible for you to reinstate these photographs, or... what happens next? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:11, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I have found the ticket and sent a reply. Restored for now, to give it another 30 days. Jcb (talk) 14:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
And verified in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 00:57, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleting my filesEdit

Hi. You deleted some of my original photos because OTRS didn't respond to my ticket. I got two approvals from them in the past but this time no one even did answer. And even i forgot what photos were those as you haven't written me anything about that.--Eldar Mansurov (talk) 06:08, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Do you have file names and/or ticket numbers for me? Jcb (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Jcb, here are my tickets, check out these so we can proceed.--Eldar Mansurov (talk) 11:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
I found it. ticket:2019061210003259 is still open and somebody will look at it one day. The permission was not accepted within 30 days after our first human response. As soon as the involved OTRS agent thinks that the permission is valid, they will take care of undeletion. Jcb (talk) 12:52, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Charlotte Waters ruin with tank, 1982.jpgEdit

@Jcb: just to inform you I created a Category:Charlotte Waters, North Territory earlier. You might with to add the image to that category. thank you for your time. :-à Lotje (talk) 14:45, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done - Jcb (talk) 14:49, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Batavia situering der gebouwen, 1895.jpgEdit

Hello. Why are you not waiting at least seven days before closing these kinds of DRs? I know they don’t have a license but as admins we can exercise some discretion if it is possible the file might be PD. Something from 1895 could quite easily be hosted in Commons. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 17:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Seven days without a license is deletion, we have never applied "discration" to that. So if you think that one of our accepted licenses applies (e.g. {PD-old-assumed} can often be applied to files from before 1899), add it. If you doubt about that added license, convert to DR. But don't convert to DR without adding a license template. Jcb (talk) 17:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Ping!Edit

I'm not very good at pinging people and I don't think I really know how. Please see my input here. Thx. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I responded their. I put that page on my watch list, so that I will see if you respond there. Jcb (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
I am asking you as kindly as I can, for the second time, to stop tagging images I've uploaded for a 7-day delete until you've explained to me what to do. I don't know if you've even read what I've written here. If the Southerly Clubs OTRS does not cover images donated to and/or created by associates of Chairperson Demitz, whom I believe is mentioned on the template and in the OTRS, I need you to explain to me what license should be used, so that the files will not be deleted during the current 6 month perimissions backlog. Though I am an experienced Commons contributor and have acted in good faith for years, is is a totally new problem to me. Will you please explain, before you continue to 7-day tag SC images? Please! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
For every author, we need to have evidence in the ticket that they indeed transferred the copyright to the Southerly Club. The authors that are fine are listed in the template. For other authors: please do not upload the files before you have confirmation from OTRS that they are accepted. Regarding the missing license, please click the word license for more explanation. I have linked this page already several times today. And yes, if I come accross more files without a license, I will tag them. Jcb (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, sorry....Edit

Hey Jcb,

I was converting some files from EAC to rectangular format. I had no Idea that File:Behind the Scenes at the Natural History Museum - 360 Video.webm is a copyvio, I didn't even checked the file-name as there are many EAC format (from Category:EAC Video) video that needs the conversion. -- Eatcha (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Jcb (talk) 20:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Pauly-Wissowa IV A,2, 2259.jpgEdit

hi there, I'm at a loss to understand your notice since both author (died 1945) and book publication (1932) evidence that more than 70 years have passed since. should this not meet with your requirements for being PD-old, then please delete. regards --Pfaerrich (talk) 07:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, PD-old will apply, but you have to add the license template to the image description page. The code that should be added: {{PD-old}} . Jcb (talk) 09:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

SignatureEdit

Hey, does it need signature? --Mhhossein talk 08:17, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

No, this template does not need a signature. Jcb (talk) 09:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Flickr PDEdit

Please can you direct me to the page that outlines the policy on the Public Domain Mark 1.0 (as used on Flickr) and why it cannot be used on Commons? I want to refer to it but the link was on the files you deleted. Thanks. Cnbrb (talk) 09:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Please see Template:Flickr-public domain mark. Jcb (talk) 12:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Ah that's the one. Thanks! Cnbrb (talk) 17:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Torgi gorodsk nedv imushestvo MGV79 1906.pdf may be deleted questionEdit

The file File:Torgi_gorodsk_nedv_imushestvo_MGV79_1906.pdf you have marked as for possible deletion due to lack or contradictory license info, is a scan of house owners sale list from 1906 public newspaper of Russian Empire. I had a long discussion in Undeletion requests ( [[6]]) , we agreed that using 'PD-Russian-Empire', 'PD-100' or similar tags provide false info because these files contain nothing creative but pure lists, so PD-text would be most relevant.

So I've marked files as PD-text, provided Author and Source as of newspaper title from where I've copied them. After that I've got your warnings as well as warnings of JuTa for 'derivative work' so I'm totally frustrated how can I still use wikicommons. Could you please clarify your warning about lack of license? I agree that 'PD-text' along with source provided are clearly enough.

Currently there is no license at all. What we need here is not PD-text, this is way too much text to be ineligible for copyright. The copyright on the depicted text may be expired though. What we are at least missing is a license from the photographer. This is not a flat scan. Did you take the pictures yourself? Jcb (talk) 12:59, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
I insist that there is no copyright (to be expired). It is not a fiction, nor a story, nor picture. These files are lists of persons, published in more than 100-years old newspapers for official notice (voters etc). So there is no copyright, no derivative in the content of the photos. Yes, I took the pictures myself. What type of license tags do you recommend to use?Alx90865 (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
You could e.g. use {{CC-BY-SA 4.0}}, one of our standard licenses for own work. If you paste this code to the image description page, everything should be fine. Jcb (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

You are being impersonatedEdit

They're not doing a very good job though.

I don't believe that's you. Already filed a CU request. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:05, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably an LTA. They are indeed not good at it. I think it's well known that I have no difficulties using my own account when criticizing something. Jcb (talk) 12:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Walter Frederick Adeney.jpgEdit

Hi, the National Portrait Gallery explicitly releases these smaller versions of images under a CC 3.0 licence (see here), and many of them are available on Commons, so I'm curious as to why you deleted this file with no discussion. As far as I remember, I gave the CC 3.0 licence correctly in the description. Nizolan (talk) 13:36, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Actually I missed that it's a non-commercial licene, so that's my mistake—apologies! (But you might want to look into all the other images available by that photographer.) Nizolan (talk) 13:40, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Ok. The author of this picture, Walter Stoneman, died less than 70 years ago. The NC license for the simple act of scanning as applied by NPG is usually ignored, because this act is ineligible for copyright. So these NPG scans are fine for photographers who died before 1949 ({{PD-old}}), or, if the photographer or date of death is unknown, for pictures taken before 1899 ({{PD-old-assumed}}). Jcb (talk) 13:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I was referring to Stoneman rather than the NPG as a whole—my decision to upload was informed by the fact that there's an entire category for his photos at Category:Walter Stoneman. And thank you for the info. Nizolan (talk) 14:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Ok, I will have a look at them later. I do know that we recently deleted about 100 pictures from Stoneman, these pictures may have been missed. Jcb (talk) 14:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, it looks like the category has been thinned down a lot since my upload. I clicked through them and the remaining ones largely seem to have special circumstances. Thanks again. Nizolan (talk) 15:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Copyright for UK traffic sign symbolsEdit

Hello, I noticed you left a copyright notice on one of the symbols I uploaded. The 10 or so symbols in that folder I have uploaded have all had the copyright information taken from the traffic signs already on Wikimedia commons, and they fall under the same status as the UK road signs. Hence this information shouldn't be wrong and if it is then the copyright for all the UK signs needs to be changed. I do not claim to own the right to these symbols and if it states somewhere on the pages that I do, I wish for that information to be removed. Nathan A RF (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea why this file was tagged as 'no license'. I see nothing that could have triggered the tagging, something must have gone wrong somewhere. I have removed the problem tag. Jcb (talk) 19:58, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Neville chamberlain1921.jpgEdit

I wonder, does Commons:Deletion requests/File:Neville chamberlain1921.jpg qulify to be speedy deletion? -- Geagea (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Strictly it does, although this may be borderline. I think it's good that a DR page is present, because that gave me the opportunity to add it to the undeletion category. Jcb (talk) 20:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't think so. Please see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Old photo and speedy deletion. -- Geagea (talk) 21:14, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Photo of Nina Youshkevitch and Zbigniew KilinskiEdit

Hello, Jcb. You tagged this photo for possible deletion, because you questioned the copyright status. The original copyright holder of this image would have been the Polish Ballet (Balet Polski), an institution that became defunct in 1939. The derives from the estate of Nina Youshkevitch, also deceased. I am her sole heir, so the photo belongs to me; and I am releasing it into the public domain. Please remove your objections.

Thank you.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancemaven (talk • contribs) 2019-07-21T15:07:46‎ (UTC)

Why did you remove File:Neshan nav logo.pngEdit

hello . Why did you remove this image from the warehouse ? The publication of this file is permissible with " fair use " .With respectMobin2008 (talk) 18:46, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Please see COM:FU, we don't accept Fair Use. Jcb (talk) 19:23, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Why did you remove File:George_Danezis_2000.Edit

Why did you remove George_Danezis_2000.jpg, I have written permission from the fellow who took the photograph. Which I will re-add. Thanks

Your deletionsEdit

Hi Jcb, You should bring your admin work back to agreed common standard. If you fail to do so, you should resign as an admin. This specially concerns these files, and this is a recurrent pattern. Specially, you should

1. inform the uploader,
2. check the copyright status of each file, and not bulk-delete them because there is an issue with one of them,
3. not speedy delete files when there is no obvious copyright violations,
3. undelete the files when it appears that the deletion was wrong, which is the case here.

Regards, Yann (talk) 07:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

You can add this to the list: Special:DeletedContributions/Communication_Saint-Sever. Yann (talk) 07:29, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

undeleting Category:2013 events in JerusalemEdit

Hello, could ypu please recreate Category:2013 events in Jerusalem? it now has images. DGtal (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Edoardo Salmeri .jpgEdit

Hi,

Could you undelete the file: File:Edoardo Salmeri .jpg. The OTRS agreement seemed to be OK. Don't know why it is deleted. Ticket:2019053110004447. Cheers, Polimerek (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Jcb".