User talk:Leoboudv

Welcome to the Commons, Leoboudv!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

OTRSEdit

It looks like you need to get the copyright holder (S. Hayter, presumably) to send the permissions email to OTRS first of all, then the image can be uploaded and tagged with {{OTRS-pending}}, while it's in the OTRS process, then the image info can be updated once OTRS has logged it. Not a good idea to upload something before the copyright holder has agreed to it, no assurance that there will ever be agreement. The copyright holder does need to specify which images are to be given a free license, and we will upload only those - could be just the one from a page, or all of them - just needs to be identifiable ("image of Pharoah Foo at http://...", or a file name, or whatever). Once we have permission, you get the image from the page (dragging image to desktop usually works) and then upload in the usual way (doesn't matter who actually does the transfer, as long as the paperwork is correct). Main difference between GFDL and CC is that GFDL has more complicated documentation requirements designed to prevent abuses that almost never happen in practice, while CC is more relaxed about it. In any case, point people at the WP articles on the licenses if they want details. From the looks of it, Simon is wanting to get more traffic *to* his website, and images on commons might take away from that, so he may not be too interested - but it never hurts to ask. Stan Shebs (talk) 17:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

PsamtikEdit

Hi Leoboudv

Thank you for your message and request. This is a small statue of an 'ordinary' dignitary called 'Psamtik' as the namesakes pharaohs. May be from 26th dynasty or more probably 27th, because of the style of the face.

You can check on official Louvre site museum here.

In the Louvre notice, there is nothing else to help us to know who was this Psamtik but what is certain is that he's not a king. No cartouches on the body or on the statue's base, no uraeus on his head... If he had been a pharaoh these sacred signs would have been sculpted for sure.

By the way, i'm grateful about the images of Tanis you uploaded. They have missed us indeed ! Thank you for your helpful work and feel free to use mine !

Greetings from Paris ;-) Neithsabes (talk) 01:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi again !

What a pity with photo in Egypt... I don't understand the SCA's position about it. The first time i went in Alexandria and visited the Bibliotheca Alexandrina's museum, it was allowed to take photo if you pay a right for. I found this solution excellent and a good way for the museum finances. Why they don't generalize this possibility to all egyptians museums ?? Imagine for Cairo Museum they could have a million dollars with and more !! Mystery of image rights i suppose...

About Psametik 1st, you're right... indeed it's very curious we don't have more statues of this Pharaoh... May be is there a lack of studies about this subject, or may be is it related to history? Psametik was protected by the assyrian king against kushites kings and may be he didn't ruled such a long period or became an real pharaoh later in times...?? We have to check it i suppose.

At Louvre you have this small head who, may be, could be from him. But nothing could be sure about. Almost the contrary of the first statue of the homnymous dignitary. This small head have a royal crown, represent for sure a pharaoh (or a god??) but no name on it. The notice at the Louvre say only Tête d'un roi. (Psammétique Ier ?) - 26e dynastie.

May be there is one in Turin Museum. I read it in a book of Maspero but i've never found elsewhere a photo of this statue who seems to be a colossus (Histoire générale de l'art - Egypte, fig. 467 p. 249 ; ed. Hachette 1911).

I agree with you about Cruxifiction's work. At first i believed it was his own work and now i'm not so sure about it... On Psametik III i have an original pic of the relief here if you need it ; i took it during my last trip in Egypt.

Always a pleasure to share things about Egypt :o) Regards Neithsabes (talk) 12:14, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello Leoboudv

Thanks a lot for the article on the ban of photo in the egyptians museums. It's more clear for me now and i understand perfectly ; the same problem can be seen on the most famous archeological sites. Sometimes i saw tourists climbing on statues, sphinx or walls only for a shot... and i was very shocked about it.

In Cairo Museum it's true it's a crowded place and even without photo certain parts of the museum are not easy to visit.

I've never read this article and will be able now to explain it to other people who ask themselves same question.

Thank you again. Neithsabes (talk) 17:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Psammetichus I or Psamtik I - news picsEdit

Good evening and good news

I've found in my pictures of my last trip in Egypt reliefs representing Psammetichus I, during a visit of the tomb of Pabasa - very nice reliefs and very beautiful tomb indeed. I just upload hem today.

It's not a statue of course but that's all i have about Psammetichus I for the moment.

You can see it here. Enjoy ;-) Neithsabes (talk) 18:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Psammetichus IIEdit

Good evening from paris again !

About this pic with cartouches of Psammetichus II it's more difficult for several reasons. At first the Louvre expose it without notice and you can't find no more information in official site of the museum, may be the reason why some people believe it's a statue of this king, because of the cartouches of course but.... nothing can say that's a portrait of the king because if it was the case then you would find for sure other officials signs (crown, uraeus etc.) or epithets as king of Lower and Upper Egypt.

On this statue you find only over the cartouches on the shoulders two signs nefer netjer that you can translate as the good god.

The cartouches themselves look strange no ? In fact they were first erased and then reinscribed with the name Psammetichus II. At his time this king decide to erase name of ancient pharaohs like kushites ones and even Nechao II his father himself... why he has decided it? it is not clear.

What is sure, that this statue is egyptian and not kushite. Probably the man was a priest and presents a statue or a naos with a representation of the king, but it broke now and there is no more inscription on it.

Then we could say that it was a statue of an official from the time of Nechao II may be a vizier or a priest of the king. Later when Psammetichus II erased all the cartouche of his father, he replace by his own name... (it is almost freudian as history isn't it?)

I have to say that i was confused also about this sculpture and still try to find something about it. If i'll find a new source who tell us that it'is a real portrait of Psammetichus III be sure then i will correct it !

Regards Neithsabes (talk) 00:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

About Egyptian MuseumEdit

Hello Leoboudv,

We have to be patient about ; next time i will go to Egypt i'll try to pay a right for photo (not this year but may be next one at autumn). If nobody do it before... even it's the case it's not a problem i suppose ;o) Second, there will be a new egyptian museum in a few years (may be less !!), a big one, near Giza's pyramids. This new building will be great and for sure more spacious and modern. It will be at least and certainly the biggest and best egyptian museum in the world.

Look here and here ;-) Opening may be in 2009. Greetings from Paris :-) Neithsabes (talk) 17:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thutmosis Ist picEdit

I'm not a specialist about license but it's a good news for our work on Commons i think.

About this pic i disagree with what is described. It's not a 2D paint but a real relief ; in fact a bas-relief. You can see it at Deir el-Bahari Hatshepsut's mortuary temple. And it's not Thutmosis Ist but Thutmosis III ; you can check on this other pic here. Thutmosis Ist was the father of Hatshepsut.

All the walls of this temple are decorated with bas-reliefs. Ok they are painted too but at first they are reliefs. You can check this perfectly on the second pic.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 21:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment That picture of Thutmose 'III' not 'I' is definitely 2D art. An Admin told me he thought it was most likely 2D here I tried to get it deleted as copy vio and as a historically inaccurate tagged picture here and I received the same objection--that it is 2D art. PS: If you know that the image is that of Thutmose III not I, please feel free to make a comment on the AfD. Personally, I always thought Hatshepsut honoured her father Thutmose I in her reign since he was the basis for her legitimacy as king of Egypt. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:53, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Leboudv

Ok for 2D art ; it's not a problem fo me ;-)

I agree with you about the fact that Hatshepsut honoured her father Thutmose I in her reign since he was the basis for her legitimacy as king of Egypt. You're perfectly right.

But... about the latter pic, if it's Thutmose Ist or III, please take a look and compare the cartouches :

• 
• 50px

This pic and the first one are same work. You can see it in the position of the pharaoh and the hieroglyphs or on the joints stones on the right leg for exemple. On the first you can see cartouches and they are those of Thutmose III Menkheperra (left one). The cartouche is intact and not reinscribed.

On this pic you can see the left cartouche of Thutmose Ist : Aakheperra.

That's the reason why i say it's Thutmose III on the first pic.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 18:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Amenemope's maskEdit

Hi Leoboudv

Congratulation for this new photo of Amenemope's funerary mask. Much better than the last (now cancelled). I used it for the french section of Wikipedia, but forgot to precise that's your work. Sorry about, i'll do my best next time, i promise ;o)

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done with your last upload Image:Mask of Amenemope by John Campana.jpg. Very nice indeed ! Neithsabes (talk) 22:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Seti IIEdit

Hi Leoboudv

Very nice statue ; i knew it's exposed at Turin but we missed it indeed. Originally it's come from Karnak temple and was placed in front of the Seti II's chapel in the first court of the great temple of Amun. There were two colossal statues in the same position and almost intacts.

The first, the most intact one, was sent to Italy and the second (less intact, the crown is broken) to France where you can see it actually at the Louvre Image:Louvre 122006 038.jpg.

About Gulbenkian's golden mask, i've never seen it before you upload it. I think it's a 26th dynasty work (the style) but where from? I didn't find at yet informations about. May be from Saqqarah where several intacts tombs of this period were found last century... I still look for something about... will take times i think.

About Ibi's sarcophagus i'm not sure also. Probably from Thebes but the style and the djed pillar make me think as a memphite work. I continue to search in my books and when i find it then i will add more information.

Very nice pics in any case ! Thanks again and again ;o)

Greetings!

Neithsabes (talk) 17:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Meresankh II / IIIEdit

Hi Leoboudv

You're right, Meresankh III was the wife of Khafra and Meresankh II then could be not his daughter.

In fact she was one of the daughters of Kheops/Khufu, then rather a sister or half-sister of Khafra.

One mistake more in description... ;o) Neithsabes (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Leboudv,

Catmondo give an answer to your question on my talk-page and upload a very interesting group statue of Hetepheres II and Meresankh III.

Just want to give you more info ; there is a map of her tomb at giza on commons : Image:MeresankhIII G7530.jpg

Now tehre is a category (created by Catmondo also) for this queen too with all the files we can have about her at yet.

Cheers, Neithsabes (talk) 17:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a hobby as for you. I try to study it by myself and i hope to have time one day for studying it really ! may be it's just a dream but a good one ;o) Neithsabes (talk) 17:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ibi sarcophagusEdit

Hi Leboudv

I check in my books informations about this sarcophagus of Ibi and you're right, it's Ibi the chancelor of Nitocris who has a tomb in Thebes (Theban Tomb 36). Nothing to change.

Cheers Neithsabes (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

TT8Edit

Hi again

This is the inner sarcophagus of Kha. Meryt's sarcophagus wear a different wig with blue inlays and her face is more fine and delicate.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 21:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Post meroitic crown of BallanaEdit

Hi Leoboudv

This crown was discovered at the beginning of the 20th century at Ballana in several impressive tombs at Ballana and Qustul. These tombs belonged to nubian kings of the post-meroitic period, after the fall of the kingdom of Meroe (5th century), when three small kingdoms rose just before the christianization of the region (6th-7th century).

There is no category for the moment for these kingdoms of Sudan which inherited meroitic customs with byzantinnes influences. We have to create it I suppose. I look where this crown is exposed ; another crown of this period is in the Museum of Cairo and can be that this one also but I am not sure. When I shall find, I shall put the right category, either if you find, please do not hesitate ;o)

Cheers Neithsabes (talk) 07:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Museum of Turin photosEdit

Dear Leoboudv, I'm looking for among my photos some images of Egyptian Museum of Turin, but the quality is very low. Another problem is that in Italy is forbidden publish hi-quality photo taken in state museum without permission, so I add only a photo. I hope to add quickly some images. --Luigi Chiesa (talk) 11:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

If you understand italian, you can read this. I can upload a hi-resolution photo on Commons, but I cannot use it on italian wikipedia. --Luigi Chiesa (talk) 21:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Ptolemy II / PhilaeEdit

Hi again,

Well done for the relief of Philae, it's Ptolemy II, you're right; I made a mistake in reading the cartouche... sorry about.

About Louvre, there is a lot of things to do here you know, it's a huge museum and i don't know all th rooms perfectly - except may be the egyptian section ;o)

Cheers Neithsabes (talk) 23:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Renaming againEdit

I told you this back in July, it's not possible to rename images, not for anybody, not even admins. You'd have to upload a new image, and edit all the references in all the wikis. Only then will anybody consider deletion of a validly-licensed image. Stan Shebs (talk) 13:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Without the source/license, the old image was going to have someone want to delete it sooner or later anyway - no easy way around that. If you set up meta:Help:Unified login, then you can edit any wiki as yourself. But now you can see why I suggested just leaving the image alone, and adding a detailed explanation on the description page, so people don't keep misusing it. Stan Shebs (talk) 21:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

How to order a new flickrreview & rename imagesEdit

The license was changed from cc by 2.0 to cc by sa 2.0 here: [1]

• And for no known flickr restriction: {{Flickr-no known copyright restrictions}}

• For renaming images: {{rename|Image name.jpg}} --Leoboudv (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Kalabsha stelaEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

This stela is from Psammetichus II and reports the nubian military campaign of his reign. This king has sent his troops against the kingdom of Kush who wanted a this time coming back in Egypt and take the throne. The kings of Kush came from the descendants of the kings of the 25th dynasty, and the famous king who fight against the egyptian and greek army of Psammetichus was Aspelta.

Psammetichus won the war and erected stelae in Egypt and Nubia at Tanis, Thebes, Aswan/Kalabsha ; this latter stela is the most intact and gives a lot of details of the military campaign, especially that the king himself had participated to the last and final battle near Napata. It's at this occasion that all the nubian royal statues were broken, as the famous statue of Aspelta in Boston Museum. (It would be great if you can upload this photo of the stela)

About Kalabsha, you're right there was here an ancient temple or merely a chapel. After the campaign of Psammetichus the region fall again under the rule of the nubian Kings. Later Ergamene rebuilt the temple in the ptolemaic era. It's the temple we can see today. The temple will be finally achieved under roman times. It was a temple dedicated to Mandulis a nubian god.

There was a big gate of Augustus but this monument was dismantled after the war between romans and nubians. In the last 20th century, when the temple has been rebuilt because of the water of the Nasser lake, archaeologists find the blocks of this gate and reconstructed it. This monument was gave as a gift to Germany and is visible actually at Berlin.

Hope my english is clear and correct.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 13:19, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hémi-spéos = speos half built half dugEdit

Hi Leboudv

Hémi-spéos means it's a sanctuary dug in rock (a speos) with a forecourt built with stones. It's a temple or a chapel half built, half dug.

Abu Simbel is a speos because is entirely dug in rock. Gerf-Hussein, Wadi es-Sebua and others are hemi-speos, because their forecourt are built with stones and have osiride-statues like in the famous temple of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari for exemple.

I try to translate the article from french to english but it's not easy indeed... Neithsabes (talk) 22:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Psammetichus II stelaEdit

Hello Leoboudv

Just want to thank you to have uploaded the photo of Psammetichus stela. Just a beautiful piece and so well preserved. I use it for th french article of Psammetichus II.

Thanks again to you and to John Campana ;o) Neithsabes (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Derr/AmadaEdit

Good evening Leoboudv,

About the first photo it's a relief from Amada you're right. The cartouche is one of Thutmosis III. The second photo is from Derr and the king is Ramses II (you can check it with cartouches). Amada and Derr are two temples from different places, different old cities in the egyptian part of Nubia. When waters of the lake Nasser grew, the two temples were dismantled and rebuilt in the same place on the new bank of the new formed lake.

That's the reason why people visiting the two temples in the same trip and confusing them, most of the time because they don't know who's who or what is what, and indeed sometimes it's not always easy to know it.

Greetings from Paris. Neithsabes (talk) 21:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Beit el-WaliEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

Those 2 images are from Beit el-Wali, temple of Ramses II. This temple is rebuilt at New Kalabsha near the temple from Augustus times. This latter temple, has no coloured reliefs and is not very decorated. Instead Beit el-Wali is a really pearl of beginnings times of Ramses II. More than 1000 years separate those two temples.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 13:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Last photosEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

The first photo represents a diadem in gold of one of Thuthmosis III's wifes, found in a tomb at Thebes called the « tomb of the three syrian princesses ». This tomb has been found in 1916 and gaves a lot of pieces of exquisite jewelleries of this period, half egyptian half from the Middle East.

The second one is indeed a relief of Amenemhat I found in his funerary temple at Lisht.

Rergards. Neithsabes (talk) 22:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Dear Leboudv,

I apologize because of this mistake ; it's right it's not a diadem of one of Thutmosis III foreigners wifes. But it's neither the diadem of Sitamun. I checked in one of my books on jewelries of ancient Egypt and found this on this diadem : "Circlet of a queen or a princess, electrum. H. (of stag's head) 8.5 cm. From Salhiya in the Eastern Delta. In the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Reg. No. 68.136.1. (...)"

In the description following the author don't give this crown as a jewelry of Sitamun, no precise date. Just it's may be a work of the 18th dynasty. Source : Jewels of the Pharaohs. Egyptian jewelry of the Dynastic Period. By Cyril Aldred. Ed. Thames & Hudson. London 1978.

We don't have any jewelry or things of the tomb of Sitamun except a throne found in the tomb of Yuya and Thuya and now exposed in the Cairo Museum.

About the second photo it's indeed a diadem of the tomb of the three princesses of Thutmosis III. I confused them...

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 09:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I see you uploaded this photo with my assertion but i was wrong... Even if C. Aldred said it's a 18th dynasty's work and compares it with other works of this period as the treasure of the three princesses (very close with the gazelles heads), the diadem was not found at Thebes but in the Delta...

I reproduce here the text of Aldred :

"This unique crown, consisting of a band of electrum 1.5 cm wide perforated to take tie-strings at the rear and mounted with rosettes and animals heads, appears to have been made in Egypt largely under Asiatic inspiration, if it is not an Asiatic import. In the XVIIIth Dynasty it became the fashion to decorate the diadems of princesses and lesse queens with the figure of a gazelle's head in place of the uraeus or vulture of principal queens. This crown with its four gazelle heads may have been part of the trousseau of a foreign princess sent as a bride for one of the Pharaohs according to the diplomacy of the age. (...) It is reputed to have been found with other goldwork of the Middle Kingdom on a remote Delta site not far from the Hyksos stronghold of Avaris" (C. Aldred. Jewels of the Pharaohs. Ed. Thames & Hudson. London 1978)

Sorry again... Mistake is human... as we say here. Neithsabes (talk) 09:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

MetadataEdit

The metadata is part of the actual .jpg file; in theory the download and upload should preserve those bits, since both steps are supposed to just copy the file's contents without touching it. When I use CommonsHelper, I let it do the transfer itself, rather than saving the file locally; maybe try that? Stan Shebs (talk) 05:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Heh, didn't know about TUSC myself until now. Stan Shebs (talk) 13:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token c67e90a69721378dd4142b85020745ceEdit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Flickr imagesEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

About these two images : The first is interesting because we have few files from this period. 11th dynasty is the start of the Middle Kingdom, a new golden age of Egypt.

The second is very important because it's a stela of the great temple of Aten at Akhetaten. This kind of stelae are unique because they show a very singular form of the god's name with cartouches and the only god who had a cartouche was Osiris, until this period, and of course afterwards.

Osiris had a cartouche because he was the first god who reigned as a king on earth ; it is not accidentally if Akhenaten decided to inscribe the name of his god in two big cartouches. A new reign of a new god on earth, replacing the ancient reign of the ancient gods. Notice that the name of Aten and of Akhenaten are close... Exactly, the second interest of this stela resides in the protocol of Akhenaten himself. You can see on the left cartouche of the king that he has been erased and reinscribed (the level of the stone is not the same) ; that's a proof of the second change of the name of Akhenaten.

I think that the second one is the most important if you want to choose between both.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 21:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Painting CroppingEdit

Hallo, painting cropping is easy with the freeware Irfanview and the free plugin Perspective Transformations.

For perspective crrection open the pic with Irfan, choose the Plugin, switch the drop done from line to rectangle press set and mark the corner of the painting. Then press apply and return to Irfan for cropping. --Marku1988 (talk) 04:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Last photosEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

About the statue's head, i don't know any statue of Ay from the period preceding his reign ; there are reliefs in his Amarna's tomb when he was a simple ministre of Akhenaten and after of Tutankhamun. There is a painting of Ay in the tomb of Tutankhamun and others in his own tomb (badly damaged) but i've never seen a statue of him. There is at Berlin a plaster portrait supposed to be him but nothing sure.

The statue of the king from amarna period in the Louvre is probably one of Akhenaten, you're right, but no inscriptions on it could certify it.

About the chapel it's indeed an alabaster chapel of Amenhotep I. I've seen it at the Open Air Museum of Karnak when i went there several years ago. If you look with attention this photo you could see his cartouche on the left side of the door.

About the queen i don't know exactly who she is ; i will look for information on it the next days. On the other hand, this photo you've uploaded is not a statue of Ahmose Nefertari but from Ankhnesneferibre, Divine Adoratrice of Amun and daughter of Psammetichus II from the 26th dynasty of Egypt. She was never a queen but a high priestess of Amun at this time.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 02:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

KhaemwesetEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

I have a photo of this funerary mask here with several other jewels found by Mariette in the Serapeum at Saqqara, on the mummy of this Ramses's son and high priest of Ptah.

Some scholars dispute this attribution because the mask seems too poor for a such important prince... and because Mariette didn't give at the time of the discovery a detailed description of it. But the jewels and ushebti found on and around the mummy wears the name of this prince and no other one... Therefore it could be not an other person.

However the mask is in gold, enough expensive for anybody for this time, and the jewelries are for sure these of a royal person.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 23:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Ahmes NefertariEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

It's a statue of Ahmes Nefertari. I don't have any photo of it but I will take one of it next time I will go to the Louvre, I promise. In fact this statue is from the 19th dynasty and represents the queen as she became a goddess especially revered at Deir El-Medineh, the craftsmen's village where lived people who worked in the New Kingdom's royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings.

Two royalty persons became gods after their life : Amenhotep I, certainly because he created for the first time the village and corporation of craftmen of the royal tomb and Ahmes Nefertari because she was the mother of the king, and because she was considered as an ancestor of the royal family.

Several statues of this two deified humans were found exclusively at Thebes. Sometimes in some tombs they are also represented like on these paintings found in one of those tombs of Deir el-Medineh :

• 
• 

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 18:25, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Stela of Hatshepsut and Thutmosis IIIEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

This stela is very interesting because it's a rare stela of Hatshepsut (the first king on the left) and Thutmosis III (the second one) who ruled both as a coregency.

You know this story, Thutmosis III was too young for ruling the country and then Hatshepsut, his mother-in-law, has ruled at first as a queen-mother and then as a pharaoh. It's the only time that two kings have ruled on Egypt with their own cartouches, their own crowns, their own ruling years...

Few monuments of this period are still intact except some stelae and reliefs or the Red-chapel of Hatshepsut at Karnak, found dismantled in a pylon of Amenhotep III and rebuilt now in the Karnak museum.

See for example this photo:

You can see the two same cartouches (this time Hatshepsut is on the right and Thutmosis III on the left). It's a relief of the Red chapel from the same period.

Greetings from Paris. Neithsabes (talk) 10:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

IntefEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

You're right it's not easy to know who's who in Intef family especially with these sarcophagi which have most of the time only the cartouche of « Intef » and not the other one with the other distinct name...

About these two sarcophagi actually at the Louvre you can check it : here about Intef Sekhemra Heruhermaât and here about Intef Sekhemra Wepmaât. Note about this latter, that the notice museum attibute it to this Intef but is not certain (you can see the "?").

Note also that there is an other Intef's sarcophagus at the British Museum ; see this photo ; it's look very close from the gilded sarcophagus of the Louvre. We don't know which Intef it's belonged.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 13:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Amenemope's maskEdit

Hi Leoboudv

I find the Commons's image of Amenemope better than this one. I used it for the french section of Wikipedia. The other is a little bit blurred isn't it? Neithsabes (talk) 10:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

 Done ;o) Have a good night ; here it's the middle day (12:12 pm). Regards Neithsabes (talk) 11:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Lion-headed goddessesEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

This aegis could be one of Sekhmet, or Bastet or merely Uadjit. Well, it's not easy to identify it without an inscription. Bastet is usually represented by a cat but also by a lion. At first, she was a lion goddess, only later she became a cat goddess under the New Kingdom and after.

Like for Hathor, who could be identified with Isis or other goddesses, Sekhmet, or lion-headed goddess, could be identified with other goddesses even as Mut but also as Bastet.

I received your mail but because you don't put an title object i found it in the "junk" box... That's the reason why i haven't seen it at first. I reply to you right now.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 10:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

BTW, have you seen this one at the Louvre ?

This aegis is very close from the other you show me, and this one is from the time of Osorkon IV.

Last photoEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

I use the last photo you uploaded on commons for the article about Ahmes Nefertari. Nice one indeed. Hope it's not the "last" about Egypt, your work is really good and you have done a lot since you are an Commons's addict ;o)

I promise you, i will take one other of this statue and of Mesha Stela the next time i will go to the Louvre ;o)

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 02:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Intef - AntefEdit

Hi Leoboudv

You may be right on these two sarcophagi. I can only said about what i read about on the Louvre museum base Atlas. See the links i gave you above.

I will look for other sources and hope we can check it soon. By waiting we probably have to use them carefully. We could choose them for the disambiguation page Antef, because these sarcophagi belonged to Antef kings. After all we are not specialists and we have to be more serious you're right.

To be continued...

Greetings from Paris. Neithsabes (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

Rama the author of this photo follow the Louvre's description of this sarcophagus as i show you last time here. See the notice about, it's in french but you could recognise the name of the Pharaoh.

On Sekhemre Wepmaat nothing are sure about the second sarcophagus (just on right ont the photo of Rama) ; the Louvre says «  Sekhemre Wepmaat ? » because there is nothing on the sarcophagus to confirm this attribution. What we can say on it, it's a sarcophagus of a king Intef (the cartouche on it is clear about) ; but the second name which could give more precision is lacking.

Next time i go to the Louvre i will took photo of the notices to confirm all these affirmations.

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 13:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy new year !Edit

Hi Leoboudv and best wishes for this new year ! Hope you're fine and you had nice feasts. Greetings from Paris. Neithsabes (talk) 17:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

CNG CoinsEdit

Hi Leoboudv, I also dont have an acess to OTRS, so I can't see what's inside this OTRS ticket. But we have a license template for coins from this website: {{CNG}}. You can upload it and use this license template, images from CNG are sorted to the category Category:CNG coins. --Martin H. (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Very good, greetings, --Martin H. (talk) 23:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion on CNG coins OTRS permission here --Leoboudv (talk) 18:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

FOP in FranceEdit

Hi! There's no FOP in France, see COM:FOP#France. The Eiffel Tower is in the public domain, as Gustave Eiffel died in 1923. The only copyright problem concerns the lighting at night: the lighting company claims copyright, but I don't know whether it has been tested in court. The Louvre Pyramid is protected and we don't allow pictures of it on Commons except when it's not the subject of the photograph, but only a small part of it (some kind of Commons:De minimis).

FOP only matters for artworks that are *not* in the public domain. Any pictures of Egyptian, Greek, Roman antiquity or any other PD artworks are acceptable on Commons, whether the hosting country accepts FOP or not. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

The US accept FOP for buildings but not for statues. Speaking for myself, I believe FOP is a "natural" exception to copyright, both for statues and buildings. Most people upload their pictures in good faith; they're stunned when we tell them we had to delete their pictures because there's no FOP in the host country. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Trebula Mutuesca inscriptionEdit

Hi, Leoboudv. Yesterday I was reading the Trebula Mutuesca inscription file history and I realized that you asked to Dan Difendale to change the license of the file. I want to thank you for that. This file was one of my firsts I up loaded and I had any experience on do that. I saw the file in the article and I forgot to fallow the history of the file in commons. The file and many others Difendale has in flirck are very interesting and useful for wikipedia but I am ashamed to ask him to change the license, so I give it up. I realize too that you translated the Latin inscription to English I am doing the Spanish translation and I see there is some differences, but I think this is normal in translations from Latin and Greek. So, thanks again and au revoir. Ups I forgot the signature--eliasjorge4 (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The pictures you up loaded are beautiful and very interesting. Thanks again and I will pay attention to the license. Bye.--eliasjorge4 (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Tkanks again I will keep the note you send me to use it in the future. I think I send something to Difendale with the link to the Trebula Mutuesca Article but I don´t believe I asked him to change the license. To other flirk owner I asked to change the license in one of his pictures to the article "Historia de Monterrey", but the person answer me he didn´t know to do that I try to explain him, but I think I couldn´t so he didn´t change it. Anyway I stated to looking for images in the web and I found them. This was an odyssey but I could learn something new. Thanks for everything. Bye Bye.--eliasjorge4 (talk) 03:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Sansepolcro church walls and bells.jpg

Sansepolcro church bells against the sky.jpg

File:Sansepolcro_church_bells_against_the_sky.jpgEdit

Answers to your comments on my Talk page.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

The pictures are still on Flickr and under a correct license for Wikipedia. See my talk page.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Sent e-mail.  Done.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for having the DR closed on the subject pictures. I appreciate it.

• http://www.flickr.com/photos/kumquatqueen/2871359309/in/set-72157607406550108/
• http://www.flickr.com/photos/kumquatqueen/2872213796/in/set-72157607406550108/

Presently I see they are both licensed under the Attribution License.

I am not that familiar with the various licenses, so am going to take a stab at some of this. I am sure you are much more familiar with these than I am, so please make corrections on my points. I suspect once a person places a certain license that is acceptable to Wikipedia ( "Attribution License" -or- "Attribution-ShareAlike License" ) and the picture was uploaded with that license, then later (i.e. a month or two or three) that person decides to place back on it some license tags that are not acceptable (i.e. "all right reserved") that the first instance is irrevocable. That is the "Attribution License" (for example) can not be taken back. If that is correct, then it should also apply to Wikipedia. In these particular instances the pictures were uploaded 8 January 2009, however I was notified of a problem on 19 March 2009, over two months later. Any number of things could have happened to the Flickr picture meanwhile in such a long period. The person could have changed the license, or renamed the picture, or pulled the picture from Flickr. There is basically no way to prove it had the correct license when it was uploaded after such a long period of time lapse. There should be (and perhaps there is, I don't know) a rule that IF the uploader is not notified of a problem within a short time (i.e. 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours) then the license specified by the uploader is automatically valid and assumed as specified. Then later (i.e. a month or two or three) a notice can not go to the uploader and have him prove again of a valid license. There should be a short time limit (i.e. 48 hours) after which Wikipedia can not delete the picture due to an invalid license or suspicion of an invalid license. Can a Flickr person withdraw his license after two months?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:30, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed response. I can see you understand this copyright stuff much better than myself. It gets over my head real fast. Both pictures have passed the review. I did pose that question to User talk:MBisanz.

Flickr pictures to me are very interesting and an excellent source of pictures. Already there is over 12,000,000 pictures that have the Attribution License and over 8,000,000 that have the Attribution-ShareAlike License. With the below "form letter" I send to Flickr people having all the other licenses of over 80,000,000 where they have a picture I could use, I get 3/4 to change their license to one that is acceptable - giving me an additional 60,000,000 pictures. I recently wrote a 16 article DYK about Appomattox, most with pictures from Flickr. I wrote an article on the Blue Ridge Parkway tunnels, most pictures from Flickr people that lowered their license so their picture could be used in the article. Also wrote Michigan logging wheels where most pictures in the Gallery are Flickr pictures.

"Form Letter"

I write articles for Wikipedia. Your picture is interesting and would fit into one or more of the articles I am presently writing on.

(Here insert Flickr link of their picture)

There is at least one tag in use that makes your picture not usable on Wikipedia.

Would you consider downgrading your copyright tags to "Attribution License" -or- "Attribution-ShareAlike License" so I could use it on some Wikipedia articles. First one or last one on this list.

http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/

Do you have any other similar pictures?

Thanks for your consideration.

(signed) --Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I do believe we are on the same wavelength with the "Attribution License" -or- "Attribution-ShareAlike License" ONLY. Notice the wording in the "Form Letter" of First one or last one on this list.

http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/ (I point this link out so they get EXACTLY the correct licenses to use that are acceptable to Wikipedia)

The Flickr "creativecommons" is the same as ours. The example you gave is like my examples in Blue Ridge Parkway tunnels and Michigan logging wheels.

Typical of the 75% that are willing to lower their license to one of these two acceptable licenses is a Flickr message I received today.

From: GettysGirl

Subject: Re: Wagon Wheel

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I forgot to apologize for the delay in responding to your initial message("Form Letter"). I'm an elementary special education teacher, and conferences are looming. It's a busy time of year! That would be fine. I'd be honored to be included in your article. I'll make that change later this evening (my students are returning now) and you should be good to go. Thanks again for selecting my image as one to include. I'm flattered. Take care, Krystn

That "Form Letter" seems to work quite well for me. It gives me access to over 60,000,000 more pictures. I then send them a message to show the article where their picture was used. If they are concerned if they get the credit for being the photographer I then send them additionally the uploaded picture link from Commons. Many times they find additional similar pictures they have taken and ALSO put on one of the correct license so it can be used on Wikipedia. Sometimes they even go out and take pictures for me or give me information I can use for the picture. An example of this is the gavesite pictures of Henry Fielding. I have uploaded dozens of Flickr pictures and they all work since I make sure it is one of these two acceptable licenses before I upload them. Thanks for all the advice you have given and solving the issues on the two church pictures.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Here is a list of over 100 Flickr pictures I have obtained using my "Form Letter" and they lowered their tags to one of the acceptable licenses.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Valued Image PromotionEdit

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Amenemope.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The scope looks more like a description than a scope... I would support the picture with a scope limited to this pharaoh ("Amenemope"). "Ancient Egyptian funerary masks" would be a nice scope, but with much competition, maybe. --Eusebius (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment I have changed the focus to Pharaoh Amenemope as you requested Eusebius. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Little misunderstanding... First, that was only a suggestion, not a request. Plus, I suggested the scope to be simply "Amenemope", and nothing about the mask itself. I think the character is a nice scope, Egyptian funerary masks make a nice scope, but the funerary mask of a given Pharaoh is too narrow for me. --Eusebius (talk) 21:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment I have revised the scope to what you suggested. Thank You for your suggestion. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Thanks. We have two masks for this pharaoh, I think this one has the best lighting and thus makes a better illustration. I think the picture should have an approximate geotag for the Cairo museum. --Eusebius (talk) 05:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Actually I was the person who managed to get the 2 masks of Amenemope here. Before, there was nothing and the Cairo Museum has banned all photography in their building since 2005. I don't know how to do a geotag unfortunately. All I know is Cairo's coordinates are latitude = 30°03'N and longitude = 31°22'E . --Leoboudv (talk) 06:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll add the geotag when I have some time. --Eusebius (talk) 06:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done --Eusebius (talk) 13:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me. --Eusebius (talk) 13:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 06:32, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

In reply to your questions...Edit

In reply to your questions...

The Citizendium is a project like the wikipedia, founded by Larry Sanger, one of the wikipedia's other original founders. I decided to try it out, to compare it to the wikipedia. I created a couple of dozen articles there, including some on topics related to transportation. I used the flinfo tool when I uploaded some images there, to illustrate those articles. Those two images, and several others, were approved by the flinfo tool on November 6, 2008.

I gave the Citizendium a good faith effort, and decided my energies were best spent here. I moved a bunch of images I originally uploaded there, over to here, including the two you asked about. If you look at my upload log there you will see the edit summaries show I pasted in the output of the flinfo tool.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Flickr images needing human reviewEdit

Your comment was moved from COM:AN/UP to Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Attention#Flickr_images_needing_human_review. The User Problems board is for issues with other Commons users, issues needing attention from an administrator (like backlogs) go on COM:AN/A. Cheers! -- Editor at Large • talk 04:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem, thanks for pointing out the backlog! That category gets filled quickly, last I checked there were only a few files there. Greetings back from Canada ;) -- Editor at Large • talk 05:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Done the 3 listed on my talk page! -- Editor at Large • talk 03:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Marina da PovoaEdit

Marina da Póvoa.

Of course, I no longer hold the email (look at the upload date!), besides it does not guarantee the email is authentic . Although it would be easy to mail them again... But the pic is no longer useful, it's obsolete, and small, it is not worth the effort. best regards. -PedroPVZ (talk) 23:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• You are from Bari in Italy?

I've taken a pic sometime ago, it is not very good, the tide was low, so the sand bellow the sea looks like an oil split, it's weird, but better than nothing. lol -PedroPVZ (talk) 09:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

ok. No problem. Although, I think that behaviour of that admin is an abuse of admin powers, that should be avoided in this project. But in this case is irrelevant, as we already spoke. best regards. --PedroPVZ (talk) 15:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Your Flickr reviewer requestEdit

Hello,

As a result of your request at Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers, I have added you to the reviewers list. This means that you can start with reviewing Flickr images. I would like to ask you to be carefull and don't review images you upload yourself.

Did you know that there is a nice script you can use to add to Flickrreview buttons to your edit balk? When you add the code below in your monobook.js and you clear the cache you will see 2 new buttons, one for a good review and one for a failed one.

importScript("User:Patstuart/Flickrreview.js");

Please see for more information the Commons:Flickr images/reviewers page, and add {{user trusted}} to your userpage. When you still need help or information feel free to come to my talkpage.

All the best, Huib talk 16:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Finally! BTW, I've e-mailed Bryan to restart FlickreviewR, and since he didn't reply and is inactive anyway, I've also asked User:Dschwen whether he could take over that bot (or program a replacement for it). Lupo 07:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I emailed him also, my idea was to place a back-up bot on my server so it will not go down when the toolserver will go down, so far no answer. Huib talk 07:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

MonobookEdit

Monobook notes.

Ramesses XIEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

I'm not sure i have this photo ; are you talking about the ostracon of the Louvre where only a drawing is considered as a portrait of Ramesses XI? (no cartouche on it so it's difficult to assure it indeed) I have to go again to the Louvre i hope next week, then i will take a good shot of this document or any other you need/want. Just tell me.

By the way, thank to you to load the lintel of Ankhefenmut with cartouches of Siamun. That's great ! is it possible to load other files of this amazing collection of the Pennsylvania University Museum?

Regards. Neithsabes (talk) 02:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Ibón de l'Acherito.jpgEdit

You're welcome. It's a pity Manuel is not with us anymore. So, I'm really happy to have contributed to keep an image he uploaded. I don't think we have much more image on Aragonese (a small Spanish region) issues. Best regards and don't hesitate to contact me whenever you think I can be helpful. --Ecemaml ^{talk to me/habla conmigo} 19:02, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Adding flickrreview with botEdit

Hi Leoboudv! I'm running a search with my bot for Flickr images without a review [2]. Lets hope we will not drown in bad images. --MGA73 (talk) 14:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Excellent idea. --Captain-tucker (talk) 14:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I just have to remember that not all reviewed files has a normal "review-template" :-) But i stopped the bot, cleaned up, and is ready to try again. --MGA73 (talk) 16:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, now I stopped my bot again (just below 300 images). No need to flood the system. Lets first see how it goes. If 90 % is passed it is ok but if we get to many "failed" then it would be nice if we can empty the categories before the bot finds a new load.

So feel free to comment. If you find some images that should not be marked for review please let me know. --MGA73 (talk) 18:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Bot has finished. It did give some files to check. And as you can see from my talk page also some comments. --MGA73 (talk) 20:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Seems we once more has some old images that was never reviewed. I moved some of them to the "old" categories to make sure they were not speedied. Maybe we could asume good faith on some of the images that was not found because image was deleted. We have no proof that image was ok but on the other hand we have no signs that image was not free. Once more I found an image that was reviewed but where that review was removed. So we should remember to check file history and any text on the page that might tell us it is ok. Lets hope that new users are better at asking for a Flickrreview--MGA73 (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Miami County Courthouse clock and Justice.jpgEdit

Why did you change the permission for this image to a CC license? The Flickr description says "This work is dedicated to the Public Domain. Due to restrictions of the Flickr licensing system, this work is marked with a Creative Commons Attribution License. Please disregard that license." I placed this image into the manual review category manually, because I knew that a bot would not be able to observe that statement. Nyttend (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure that was because Leoboudv also missed the text. I changed the license back now that I saw this note. --MGA73 (talk) 15:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I'm sorry if I sounded angry; I was simply confused. Nyttend (talk) 02:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Unfree butEdit

[3] --Leoboudv (talk) 06:30, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

License reviewEdit

[4] edit for picasa or ipernity images.

•  Comment: How to review a PD-Files for review image: [5] Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Comment: Photography Workshop.

Raymond BurrEdit

I found an old 1956 film Please Murder Me, which is in the public domain. The good thing about it, is that he plays a lawyer and looks much like he did in Perry Mason. I think this one is a good one for the infobox. I've uploaded 4 images, only 2 are of him, and you can see them at Category:Please Murder Me (film). Regards, Rossrs (talk) 11:49, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Yes, the one you chose is a clearer image. The other one is a bit dark. I like it from an artistic viewpoint, but for the infobox the lighter image is probably the more suitable of the two. Rossrs (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know of any free Perry Mason images. I searched on a few websites that host free material and I couldn't find anything. Rossrs (talk) 20:36, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Girl Aloud 1.jpg & File:Girl Aloud 2.jpgEdit

I did something to get them out of Category:Possibly unfree Flickr images. That was the best I could think of right now. I also started removing "Flickr faild" if there is an "OTRS pending" on the image. That way image will get out of the category (for example Category:Recent unfree Flickr images) and we do not have to look at them every time we check the category. --MGA73 (talk) 13:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

• That is the only solution in this case since the account is deleted on flickr. Best to AGF here. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent or notEdit

Hi! If you read the text at Category:Recent unfree Flickr images you will see this "Images in this category should be deleted if reviewed within 7 days after upload. If they are older, please place them into Category:Possibly unfree Flickr images". If this is to be changed then it should be discussed somewhere. --MGA73 (talk) 11:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

This image, originally posted to Flickr, was reviewed on 11 February 2010 by the administrator or reviewer Leoboudv, who confirmed that it was available on Flickr under the stated license on that date. The license originally specified when this image was uploaded to Commons was CC-BY-3.0. It is unknown whether this license was valid at that time.

Thanks for the edit!Edit

Thanks for associating my flickr page with "author". I would not have thought about doing that. I will definitely utilize your tip in the future!

Thanks again - Cam Vilay (talk) 02:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Dear Leoboudv,

Thank you for your advice. I often become confused with the legalities, copyright laws, such and such, that it did not occur to me to just ask flickr accts for usage. I think the assumption is they'll always say "no". But how is one to know without asking? Such is life, to questions ones own assumption. Thank you. I'm sorry to hear about your health. I sincerely hope that you have a speedy recovery.

Thank you for your contributions, Leoboudv. I enjoy your work.

Cam Vilay (talk) 06:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Mesha stelaEdit

Hi Leoboudv,

I hope you're well and healthy.

I went to Louvre last thursday and I took new pictures. I remember your ask of the Mesha Stela and after a long walk and numerous halls and corridors, i discovered it ! I just uploaded three new photos of Mesha Stela : File:Louvre 042010 01.jpg, File:Louvre 042010 02.jpg and File:Louvre 042010 03.jpg.

Better now than never ;) Have a good sunday, Neithsabes (talk) 14:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Panoramio reviewEdit

You might want to put this User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js into your monobook.js. It supports Flickr, Panoramio and Picasa. Makes reviewing these files a little easier. --Captain-tucker (talk) 16:42, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced Panoramio filesEdit

You can now use {{Panoramio no source|Leoboudv|2010-05-24}} for files without a Panoramio source. I suggest you tag {{subst:nsd}} as well or use the script. Cheers, ZooFari 01:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Canada DayEdit

I congratulate You with Canada Day!
By talk way: if You wish to communicate friendly not concerning Wiki-projects You can use e-mail (look it at my user page).
Cheers! :) -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

My statsEdit

This is my stats as of July 19 from MGA73:

My stats on Wikipedia and wikicommons are listed on this useful page

• 894 images as of July 21, 2010.
• 896 images as of August 10, 2010.
• 916 images as of August 29, 2010.
• 919 images as of Sept 27, 2010.
• 927 images as of May 20, 2011.
• 938 images as of July 10, 2011.
• 964 images as of Sept 11, 2011. (excludes reuploads)
• 971 images as of Dec. 8, 2012.
• 990 images as of Dec. 18, 2013. (including 19 images taken at UBC on Sept. 3, 2013)
• 991 images as of Dec. 31, 2013
• First registered Commons account: May 19, 2007.

File:Early 20th Century Inuit parka (UBC).jpgEdit

What the museum says is one thing, the other ist, naturally summer skins are not thick as in winter. And the picture shows, these are very flat skins.--Kürschner (talk)

The best skin quality is in autumn and the beginning winter. Former we used the skins of young caribous, called pyshiks or pijiki (4-6 month or till one year old (called nebljujs)). This suit looks like young pijiki with skin from adult animal at the hood. Furs from elder raindeers are not for hard wear (if your English is better than mine, you should write it in the article. The mention of source I will put to it). --Kürschner (talk) 06:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

(you could answer here) That should be okay. I only know the skins of adult winter raindeers. The summer skin is short with compact underwool. My very best book for this describes the hair-length of each furred animal exactly - but not from caribous. I could look in much of my other literature, but I think, this should be ok (but nevertheless, it looks for me more like skins from young caribou calves... ;-) - Next holiday in Vanvouver.) --Kürschner (talk) 07:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Dear me: winter hair: on the sides 5 cm, back 9 cm, cross 10 cm., neck till 30 cm. The book is good, but the reader... --Kürschner (talk) 07:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

• I think the additional commentary by you is sufficient for the parka's description. Most people don't care too much about the exact thickness or thinness of the caribou skin, so don't worry. They just want to know what material the parka is made of. And if it is made of 2 layers--as the UBC museum description says--then this is an added bonus. There are many many displays in the museum and I almost missed the parka which is placed in a large glass panel case. But I am glad I took the picture of the parka...and hope someone can use it for a good cause. Best regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:13, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I used it here: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelzarten#Rentier_.28Nordamerika_.3D_.E2.80.9EKaribu.E2.80.9C.29_oder_Pijiki --Kürschner (talk) 08:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

• Sure, that's good. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:24, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Images from Egypt ArchiveEdit

Placed here --Leoboudv (talk) 04:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello from ParisEdit

Hi Leoboudv

Long time ago i didn't gave news from me and i apologize for this lack of. Hope you're well and you've spent a good summer.

I was very busy with my work for several months and it will continue but i promise me to work again and also on wikimedia. I would thank you a lot for your last uploads. As usual, they're so precious and ever usefull for our work on wikipedia.

Pedubast's one is wonderful, really.

Have you others? In preparation?

Greetings from Paris,

Neithsabes (talk) 22:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Flickr review requestsEdit

Hello. To be fair I was not aware that the flickr upload tool I used was enough. My confusion actually stemmed from the fact that in the upload information, I was listed as the reviewer. As I'm not an admin or anyone of authority here, I wanted to make extra sure. Perhaps I should have asked at the help desk. I don't see the need of that discussion though, as a message would have done fine. So "i got the message" like you said. ;) As the the admin noted, I actually did stop when I saw his edit summary as then I realised I had been to cautious over any changes that the original author could have made on their account. Well, thanks for letting me know though. Have a nice evening too.Raintheone (talk) 20:54, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Change the licenseEdit

Hello Leoboudv. What happened to that user from Flickr, the images were yesterday under license (cc-by-2.0). and now, change the license. --MyCanon (talk) 09:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

This file, which was originally posted to Indafotó, was reviewed on 6 December 2011 by the administrator or reviewer Lymantria, who confirmed that it was available there under the stated license on that date.

File:Great Patriotic War Monument in Shatki.jpgEdit

Hello!

I think I missed a point:

Why do you use {{PD-RU-exempt}} for any war monuments in Russia? --High Contrast (talk) 09:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Milestone picturesEdit

See here Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:11, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

RfCUEdit

Thank you for your support and kind words.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

AppreciationEdit

Hi Leoboudv: I've just looked over your fabulous pictures. The ones of Lisa Brokop and of her costume in Wikipedia are fantastic. The picture of the costume is exceptionally striking. Thanks for all your help and Kind regards. KemiahKemiah (talk) 12:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Trusted user templateEdit

Thank you very much, Leoboudv, for think on me as a trusted user. I appreciate it. Ralgis 23:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

An other 17th Dynasty Crown ?Edit

Hi Leoboudv

I was looking for files or image of Nubkheperre on the web when i found this page [6] on Nicholas Reeves website.

I thought you will enjoy it also ;)

Greetings from Paris. Neithsabes (talk) 23:35, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Geograph imageEdit

Linking a geograph image --Leoboudv (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

RequestEdit

Hello, could you please delete the file 90px rather than the file 90px? The later one is more focused and thus more clear. Please tell me if I need to do further application. Thanks! --Wildcursive (talk) 05:20, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation! I now understand and will try to find other pictures.--Wildcursive (talk) 06:30, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I found another picture and upload it. Please check as this is not simply a picture of a book but something additional that contributed by the family who took it. I am a Taiwanese editor who is writing a new article en:People Power Revolution on Chinese Wikipedia. Thanks! --Wildcursive (talk) 01:25, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your reference! This case looks mixing different elements and is a little bit complex for me. I am still in progress to realize the boundary of what I can upload and what I can not. Anyway, it's interesting to know friends from Canada and Netherlands on Wiki.--Wildcursive (talk) 04:13, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I got it. I highly appreciate your very quick and kind help! --Wildcursive (talk) 07:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

ImagesEdit

Hi Leoboudv. Thanks. Good images! Best Regards, --JMCC1 (talk) 00:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC) Ok. Thank you for the message.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cfccreates/8577114531/in/photostream, http://www.flickr.com/photos/leweb3/8261213300/in/photostream, and http://www.flickr.com/photos/financialtimes/8577541044/in/photostreamEdit

Hello Leoboudv, we once resolved a copyright ownership issue who owns the copyright of a CFC celebrity events photo posted on their flickr account (the organization or photography group), but also I'm concerned that many other celebrity parties/events (held by many organizations/corporations like CFC) flickr images taken by hired photography group(s) are vulnerable to potential deletion requests like the DR. Recently I found three similar cases of the issue, http://www.flickr.com/photos/cfccreates/8577114531/in/photostream, http://www.flickr.com/photos/leweb3/8261213300/in/photostream, and http://www.flickr.com/photos/financialtimes/8577541044/in/photostream. first and second cases are mostly same with File:Robert_Lantos.jpg case whose image descriptions mention the photographer(s) of the images (Rebecca Sapp, @francois). in last case, its image description does not mention the photographer(s), but EXIF data says Dianna Bonner/www.worldvisionphotos.co.uk. Can this three images also be counted as the organizations paid photography firm(s) for its services and own the image rights and/or may we need to ask the flickr accounts about copyright ownership of the images indivisually? --Puramyun31 (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful imagesEdit

Hi Leoboudv. Beautiful images. Best regards from Madrid, --JMCC1 (talk) 10:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

OTRS waiting list and 1-2 other issuesEdit

Hi. I wonder why you not answer my long post, but now I've realized, that it seemed it was not saved...!!?!?!

In short: at first I thought your post were unfair critic - but the second reading showed me it wasn't so I didn't think so :). But I'm not an Egyptologist, so I'm not the right person depending your other points with the Flickr images. But I'm planning an international Network of Wikimedia Archaeologists - and hopefully in future we can work over all Wikis depending these Questions. Marcus Cyron (talk) 22:04, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Cameroons that Saker laboured.jpgEdit

Could you give an opinion about this file? I see that you added a note about dubious copyright status.

According to Flickr, the image comes from the same book from 1908 by Emily Saker which we were discussing in a deletion request somewhere. As the book was published in 1908, it is in the public domain in the United States.

For the source country (the United Kingdom), don't you think that it is likely that the image either was made by Emily Saker herself, or, if not by her, that the image is anonymous? If I remember correctly, I think that we concluded in one of the other deletion requests that it is unlikely that Emily Saker still was alive in 1943, but I can't remember where that discussion was. Do you remember where that other deletion discussion was held? I suspect that either {{PD-old-70}} or {{PD-UK-unknown}} is true, but it would be nice to hear your opinion too. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_Panorama#ArmeniaEdit

Hello Leoboudv, thanks for your good news, but I wonder if Armenian FoP law forfeited Armenian copyright holders' right to control the usage of their FoP-covered works (Architectures, Sculptures... etc). What do you think? --Puramyun31 (talk) 07:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. but how about this? User:Canoe1967 said "A copyright cannot and should not be taken by any government. It is an inalienable human right for creators worldwide." this is why I asked this question. --Puramyun31 (talk) 07:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, Thanks for your answer. regards. --Puramyun31 (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

How to best tag derivatives of flickr uploads?Edit

Hi, I see you've had to manually review and approve a couple of derivative flickr images I've uploaded. For my last one I tried to copy what you did here, only to have FlickreviewR complaining no source. So, how should I tag such images to have FlickreviewR approve them without having to bother you or others? Guess I should have known without asking, as I used to be a admin around here, but it seems I've forgotten more than I ever learned :) Finn Rindahl (talk) 11:02, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Flickrreviewer will not pass cropped or edited images. But the "no source" reaction can be avoided by adding "Original source: <Flickr link>". That's the way I usually do these things, although Leoboudv's way is nice as well. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 06:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

How to file a mass DR requestEdit

See this link here. --Leoboudv (talk) 22:10, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer toolEdit

Why you don't use Rilke's image reviewing tool? It helps notifying users if review fails, and automatically gives you three links for [Change license]For when licesen on Commons and original source does not match [License+]When Commons file and original file has no problem, and there is no issues(like FlickrWashing), so you think it is OK to mark reviewed and [License-]When there is no source, copyright violation, unacceptable licenses. You can use this tool by putting following lines on your javascript page:

importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); //

And, you should mark No source indicated when flickr link is unavailable. Thanks for your reviewing and have a nice day. --레비Revi 09:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

• Next time, I'll consider marking 'no source' when a flickr link is unavailable. I personally have the npd and nsd tag option--and no source--but did not use it on a certain picture you reviewed. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Philips Arena.JPGEdit

Hi, I saw your copyvio nomination in which you suspect copyvio because of the circumstances. There is a trick to become more sure in most of these cases:

• Click to the image to get the URL of the file (by clicking on the image): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Philips_Arena.JPG
• Go to http://images.google.com
• Enter the URL of the file in the search field and press the search button
• Above the results, you will find a link saying something like 'search on image'. Click that link
• You will get all identical and similar files Google can find
• For this specific files I found with this method e.g. http://www.eireizen.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Philips_Arena1.jpg, of which the deleted file is a cropped version.

I hope this trick will help you to do your good work even better. Jcb (talk) 11:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

•  Comment: I will try this method next time. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Flicker to CommonsEdit

Hello: Yes, I can find all the links of the photos on Flicker and show as previous. But do not know how to ask for a new order to "flickrreview". Can you help me do it? Thank you very much. Best Regards.Adolfobrigido (talk) 10:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello: I have already put the "links" of all the images and the type of permission. What should I do now?. Please help me because I have little experience. Thank you very much. Best Regards.Adolfobrigido (talk) 13:17, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I think I've already done the work. I do not know if I've done well, I did what I could. Thank you very much again. When you can, please tell me how I've done the work. Best regards.Adolfobrigido (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello again: I think in your last post you said that I still had some work to do. Just then clicked on the link you gave me and I saw the images that you meant, but now can not find them. Could you send it again? Sorry for the inconvenience and thank you very much for everything.Adolfobrigido (talk) 16:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Uf, what weight relieves me. Next time I'll go with more care and raising fewer images. Thank you very much. If not for me you would have deleted all and foulbrood worse, had not learned anything. Thank you. Best regards.Adolfobrigido (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Derivative worksEdit

No opposition to your deletion requests of my photos, but I really don't get what derivative works' policies applied here mean. Commons:Derivative works really doesn't help. For example, if I take a photo of Times Square and it contains several logos of trademarks, or if I take a photo of a public park/playground with a tiny model of Mickey Mouse in it, am I allowed to upload them to Commons and license them with a free license?

This is to avoid copyright violations in my future uploads (as I have a pile of photos in my computer and want to contribute them here, not counting those transferred from Flickr). Quenhitran (talk) 06:47, 19 July 2014 (UTC) Please reply on my talk page

Also, many of my Flickr uploads got stuck here at Category:Flickr images needing human review, I've already used Flickr2Commons for those works and all the links/sources were filled in automatically, why couldn't the bot find them? Quenhitran (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

• If its a small image of a copyrighted object or the copyrighted image is not the primary object in the photo, it should be OK. But in this DR most of the images focus on the copyrighted object which means that Commons cannot keep it. Like this This is a modern banner and the studio which created it would sue Commons if it found out about this copyright violation. Finally, in this image the picture focuses on the copyrighted poster and the poster clearly dominates most people's view of the picture and is the main item in the photo so Commons cannot keep it either. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:49, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

• PS: Bots are machines. They just upload freely licensed images and cannot tell if an image has copyright problems with derivative images or lack of FOP for post-1978 sculptures in the USA unlike human beings. Pictures of 1978 sculptures installed in the USA are deleted on Commons unlike Canada, the UK, Mexico, China or India which have full FOP. See COM:FOP Goodbye, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:57, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Well thank you for your answers, but you didn't seem to get the gist of my second question. I understand that the bot cannot determine whether or not the images violate the regulations on derivative works or the freedom of panorama, but it should be able to detect the original licenses of images on Flickr (CC-BY or CC-BY-SA). Many of my Flickr uploads are originally available under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA 2.0, but the bot still stated that it cannot determine. Probably there is some problems with the server where the bot's running, it's becoming unreliable these days. As a reviewer, please take your time reviewing images left in Category:Flickr images needing human review. Thanks, Quenhitran (talk) 10:59, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

• If you don't crop the images, the bot should pass the images but sometimes the bot puts it into flickr human review for reasons unknown. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I must say, you are dedicated tireless to your work her, for many years. Thanks  ;) Geagea (talk) 02:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Eric Dane at 7th Annual Chrysalis Butterfly Ball 2008.jpgEdit

Please be more careful when reviewing files from Flickr. The file's metadata and even the description on Flickr clearly state that the file was taken by Alexandra Wyman and grabbed from WireImage, meaning that the license selected by "Ash90291" is of course completely invalid. Thanks, —LX (talk, contribs) 21:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'll do my best to catch them but please note that I'm not perfect. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Admin noticeboardEdit

This is at COM:AN

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:19, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Korean pop images at LREdit

Have a look at User_talk:-revi#LR_question. I was going to review some of these, but I don't see free licenses at any of the sources so far... INeverCry 05:29, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

• I have seen the Korean images but I can't read the Korean license so I don't want to mark them. However, tistory definitely seems unfree. revi should fail them since can read Korewan and is an Admin. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 07:17, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

QuestionEdit

My dear Leoboudv, what would be you saying as a seasoned license reviewer if I were to upload US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew in Kyiv, Meeting with Minister of Finance Natalie Jaresko, Jan. 28, 2015 with two licenses: CC-BY-ND-2.0 since it lists it plus PD-USGov since it is a US State Dep. work? Best, --Nabak (talk) 03:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

• Give the {{PD-USGov}} tag and say that the source is the US EmbassyKyivUkraine. I suppose it should be OK. I am not an Admin, just a license reviewer, but this normally is OK. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

OTRS permissions queuesEdit

Hello Leoboudv. You are receiving this message as a license reviewer. As you know, OTRS processes a large amount of tickets relating to image releases (called "permissions"). As a license reviewer, you may have the skills necessary to contribute to this team. If you are interested in learning more about OTRS or to volunteer please visit Meta-Wiki. Tell your friends! Thank you. Rjd0060 18:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you but I have a full time job and have slowed down on marking images so I will likely not apply as an OTRS volunteer. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
• a link & guest book --Leoboudv (talk) 02:06, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

RFAEdit

Hello Leoboudv,

Do you agree to be nominated to administrator? -- Geagea (talk) 03:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

• Admin INeverCry has asked me this too last year but I have to say No because I don't have time for the responsibilities of being an Admin. Sorry. I have a full time job and I'm content with marking images and asking other Admins to deal with problematic uploaders/copyright issues. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I thought that dedicated user, hard worker, experienced so many years as a reviewer and together with that humble and cautious in his work, can be good addition to the admin team. Anyway, think about it and let me know if you change your mind. -- Geagea (talk) 05:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

• Thank You but I have a full time job in real life and I do most of my edits at night. I don't have time to be an Admin but thanks for your message. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:16, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Flickr statisticEdit

Note this statistic from flickr. --Leoboudv (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Russian stamps againEdit

It may be of interest to you to provide some input base on your Russian expertise at this undeletion request: Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Undeletion request for postal cards in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category: Postcards by Peter Emilevich Bendel. Ww2censor (talk) 09:44, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment: I don't have any expertise on Russian stamps unfortunately to make a contribution. --Leoboudv (talk) 09:19, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem, I thought you had some Russian knowledge to make some knowledgeable comments. Thanks anyway. Ww2censor (talk) 13:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Question by FauvirtEdit

Hi! Are you sure that you "confirmed that it was available on Picasa Web Albums under the above license on that date" by these pictures? Because the album have the name: "Kézfogásaim", what means "My handshakes"... I am in correspondence with Tibor Végh, so I am sure that he is not the author of these images... Can you examine the decision reviewed by these pictures, please?... Thank you, Fauvirt (talk) 11:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

• Yes,. I am sure. The picasa account owner is Tibor Végh and the license is 'cc by 3.0 generic.' It still is and unless Tibor stole the images from another person's account, it seems that likely to assumne that the images are Tibor's own work. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:06, 29 June 2016 (UTC) --Leoboudv (talk) 01:04, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
• The picasa review bot passed this image and it is a robot, not a human being so the license is confirmed as 'cc by 3.0 generic'. PS: Tibor Vegh has 278 images on Wikimedia Commons. So, he seems to be a legitimate photographer. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2016 (UTC) --Leoboudv (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment: If you want to ask an Admin about Tibor's images you can post a message here as I am not an Admin. I just review licenses. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:18, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay I'll try to ask the Administrators. Fauvirt (talk) 10:26, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

{{Polish KPRM files}}Edit

Leoboudv, {{Polish KPRM files}} is not a license template, it is a source template, yy edits like thisyou are removing a license template from the file and can cause file deletion. Please add {{Polish KPRM files}} but do not remove {{PD-author|Chancellery of the Prime Minister of Poland}}. --Jarekt (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

• OK. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Szigeti.pngEdit

the picture is of 1950, who is the photographer, what is the PD ? --Goesseln (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment: The license was {{cc-by-2.0}} at upload in 2014 which means it is free for commercial use provided the source is credited. The photographer is not named but the source is clearly trustworthy. The license was later changed to include Non-Commercial and no-Derivative use restrictions....and today is not free but it was passed in 2014 and is considered passed for life on Wikicommons. I don't know who the photographer was. I mark images based on the license at upload and if the source is trustworthy. It is quite possible that the photographer worked for the Texas Library or donated the rights to the library since it was taken in 'Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.' Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:06, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
• There are several other images from this source on Commons and they passed review. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Roger Puta filesEdit

I would hold off on spending your time reviewing the Roger Puta images. They're all already OTRS confirmed (see {{RogerPuta}}), so I'm hoping to have that template replace the 'license review needed' template for the several thousand photos in the collection. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:54, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment: That would be a relief! Zhuyifei1999 runs the flickrreview bot and you could post a message on his talkpage asking if this could be done. Everytime someone uploads the Roger Puta images from flickr, they end up in the human review needed category since the flickr license is PD Mark (PDM) but the OTRS permission is valid as Admin James Woodward informed me here. So, the images are essentially public domain in this case as the OTRS message states. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:33, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I usually manage to replace the PDM with the proper template within a few minutes when I upload one, but that's not always the case. There was just a mass transfer of ~3,000 images from the collection; the uploader will be putting the proper template on when they recover from the flu. Thanks as always for all your license review work; it's much appreciated. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:38, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

• No problem. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker): I noticed all these images and was hoping someone would place a positive review tag on then seeing as there is an OTRS ticket on them all. It would be quite a marathon task to individually review them. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 23:06, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment: 2,800 images is too much. I'll ask Zhuyifei1999 if he can get the flickr bot to pass images from this source. --Leoboudv (talk) 09:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
• Zhuyifeii1999 dealt with the problem here. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Leoboudv!Edit

Happy New Year!

Leoboudv, a new year is like a blank book, the pen is in your hands. It is your chance to write a beautiful story for yourself! Happy New Year 2017. Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 18:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thank You Hedwig. Happy New Year to you too. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:56, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:VIRINEdit

Virins: US Military licenses.

Mass Deletions through a VFC (Visual File Change)Edit

Go here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:VisualFileChange.js&withJS=MediaWiki:VisualFileChange.js

• Name the user's name. Click on the user's selected upload's, give the reason and click the Execute bottom button. --Leoboudv (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

• • select category name in the drop down menu. this will avoid having multiple "files by uploader" deletions. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 13:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
• I'll do my best but I probably won't be filing many more mass DRs right now. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:46, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Public Domain Mark licencesEdit

Hello Leoboudv

I've uploaded Flickr file under Public Domain Mark licenses, and I know that this license isn't accepted on Wikimedia but the FLickr uploader is a member of US army, so an employe or officer of US government, it is possible to validate these files with a {{PD-USGov}} template ?

Here are files I upload: [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Regards from France, --Glabb (talk) 00:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your rapidity.--Glabb (talk) 09:04, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

PDM DREdit

This one Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

resolved

Re: Enterprise IncidentEdit

I wish I could say "yes". What we have here for Star Trek came from eBay finds-photos sent to various newspapers by those connected with the program. I'm sure publicity photos for this episode were sent to newspapers and magazines, but I haven't seen anything like this that we could use turn up as yet. Not to say it won't happen-that depends on what Star Trek photos are being sold on eBay.

Searching eBay for them on a regular basis can help. When I do, I look at both current auctions and completed, because you can view the original, now closed auction where things like backs of photos with the information we need is. ;) I use Internet Archive for keeping links to the photos, along with front & back upload. The only thing to remember is that the dating for the photos has to be between 1966 and 1969-the series original run on NBC. After it got into syndication, Paramount became very diligent about using copyright notices for the photos.

The only other way I can think of for a PD photo from the episode would be to find an advertisement for Star Trek printed before 1978 with no notice that used an episode photo. With the syndication of the show, local television stations who purchased these packages may have used photos to promote themselves airing the series in newspapers or local television guides.

Regarding the way non-free photos are handled in television articles at en:WP, I wish there would be a "standard" which would allow a non-free image if no PD one is available for articles written about individual episodes from a television series. Since at least one person (likely more) took the time to write and source an article about a given episode of a program, it should be permitted for the sake of identification. The photo aids those reading the article by allowing them to see a scene, thus "connecting" them with what the article is written about. Can imagine many people saying "Oh, yeah-now I remember this!" which may not always be possible with just text alone. Just my thought--if there's enough well-sourced information for an article about it, that should mean a photo-one non-free if necessary-should be allowed. We hope (talk) 13:43, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

File:North East Dundas Tramway, 1906 06 02 Insert 3 (14401325523).jpg

Thank you very much for spending nearly an hour on updating the licensing info on the Australian photographs of the North East Dundas Tramway and the Sandfly Colliery Tramway on 27 May 2017. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:38, 1 June 2017 (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. 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!

Affected:

• File:Precinct of Montu 002.jpg

And also:

• File:Precinct of Montu 003.jpg

Yours sincerely, Guanaco (talk) 21:40, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

PD US 1923 to 1977 imagesEdit

{{PD-US-no notice}} license

Copyright status of works by US subnational governmentsEdit

See link above.

Reviewed photographs from Flickr with dead linksEdit

Please avoid marking photographs with perfectly valid Flickr sources as having no source. These are correctly, and officially, reviewed and are not appropriate for deletion just because the source page has changed or been taken down. If there are reasons to delete such files, a DR is required. --Fæ (talk) 12:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

• I won't mark the third photograph in this category but can't decide the situation anyway since I am not an Admin. Its unfortunate the images were reviewed after the sources were deleted. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:08, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. If you check the history, the files were automatically image reviewed soon after upload, which could only have happened when the source was available. --Fæ (talk) 19:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Tell Rifaat imagesEdit

, , and were all licensed under Creative Commons. What do you mean there is no "show more" button? There clearly is one for all 3 videos. This may be a problem on your end. I think it's best for a team to check the copyright status of files instead of a single person checking hundreds of images. This way, there would be more transparency.

Also, this KurdWatch video was clearly licensed under Creative Commons. Other videos by the same channel may not be, but this one clearly is. Editor abcdef (talk) 08:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment: There is no CC BY license mentioned for this video clip here since there is no 'Show More' Option. 'Sort By' is not Show more and does not show a youtube license. Even this Halab clip clearly shows a license. Hopefully an Admin can locate the license as he/she will decide this Deletion Request. Goodnight, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:57, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry but this seem to be a problem on your end. There is clearly a "show more" button below the bread video, and below it is the Creative Commons license. You may have been using the non-classic version of Youtube, or the mobile version, or whatever, but something is not right. If you don't trust me, you can ask a third-party to verify this further. Editor abcdef (talk) 10:59, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

• I'll ask an Admin if they can see the license. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Template use within LicenseReview templateEdit

Let me first thank you very much for reviewing lots of the licenses for the waarneming.nl and observation.org -images uploaded by BartBotje. However, I noticed there was a little problem in the resulting html when the Waarneming.nl template is used as the site-parameter to the LicenseReview template instead of an url .. For example : [12]

{{LicenseReview|site={{Waarneming.nl|14773155}}|user=Leoboudv|date=2017-08-29}}

I changed the rest to versions simply stating the url to the image. Maybe this is a template issue ?. Can you please prevent this in the future ?. Thanks a lot and keep up the good work ! Bj.schoenmakers (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

• I think it is a template issue. Whenever, I mark the images, I get the extra 2 brackets at the end...and I don't know why. I have to work soon. Best, Bj.schoenmakers --Leoboudv (talk) 19:59, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Jewellery of KhenmetEdit

Hi Leoboudv. Good image! For this image, see Tomb Treasures of the Late Middle Kingdom: The Archaeology of Female Burials [13]. Best regards, --JMCC1 (talk) 05:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

SuggestionEdit

Thanks for suggestion/ I now load up pictures which include a time stamp like this one. The picture has the timestamp at bottom left. I can then crop once the evidence has been checked. Thanks for your help. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 07:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Tasnim imagesEdit

Just a quick heads up but I see you gave File:Mohsen Hashemi.jpg a good review but you forgot, as I have also done on occasions, to remove the category:Tasnimnews review needed template. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:08, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I see you gave a load of Tasnim images good reviews but again forgot to remove the category:Tasnimnews review needed template. Ww2censor (talk) 23:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

• You are right. I don't know why that category doesn't disappear! I will try to remember. With so many images to mark, its easy to forget this small thing. I hope you were not inconvenienced. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah giving a good review by script does not remove that category. You have to do it manually after your review. You had done all except one, so I removed it using "Perform batch task" replacing it with a space, so no real problem. Then I cleared out the last image too. Ww2censor (talk) 13:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!Edit

Thanks for your help, have a snack Victuallers (talk) 11:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: Etiquetando imagenEdit

Me expreso en español, ya que no sé hacerlo correctamente en otro idioma. La plantilla que has colocado en File:Moreno Calderón.jpg es improcedente. El archivo indica que la fuente (source) es la Biblioteca Virtual del Ministerio de Defensa. No se especifica quién es el autor porque este es desconocido (unknown), y así se indica. Y se informa expresamente de que la licencia con la que está publicada es Dedicación de Dominio Público CC0 1.0 Universal. Por consiguiente, la plantilla no tiene sentido.

Si quieres cuestionar la presencia de la imagen, puedes abrir una página de debate al respecto. El procedimiento "ultrarrápido" de siete días no es procedente. Su utilización constituye un abuso.--Chamarasca (talk) 21:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Disculpas aceptadas. Todos cometemos errores. Saludos desde la vieja Europa.--Chamarasca (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for the many, many license reviews - you're making a heroic effort! GRuban (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

OGL LicenseEdit

{{OGL3}}

License launderingEdit

I thought you should be aware, I blocked a major license launderer today as a result of this: Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from plus.google.com/u/0/photos/108486439348393922354. The Flickr account is blacklisted, and if you see any images from that Google Plus account, they should be speedied. We can't trust anything this person says or uploads. Guanaco (talk) 23:52, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks Guanaco. This reminds me why I rarely mark images with a "tistory.com" source since I don't understand their licensing policies well and there is a language barrier. I occasionally mark images by uploaded by Puramyun but generally I don't mark these images at all. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:47, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

License reviewEdit

Hello.

Could You confirm the license, please:
Marzenna Drab.JPG

Thank You very much

Artur Andrzej (talk) 19:23, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for your work. NdaniTV are releasibg freely licensed videos which I am screengrabbing. Your overcheck of the licence meand that good articles look more interesting. Like this AND we are creating lots of pix for others to exploit. Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 14:49, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

• Thank You. I'll mark them if I have the time Victuallers. I have to work too in real life. There are many other images in this category Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Re:This DREdit

 Done. Thanks. Regards. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 16:00, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Mushroom reviewEdit

I didn't know about the {{mushroomreview}} template. I'll use VFC again to clean up these duplicate tags. Guanaco (talk) 00:08, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• That's OK Guanaco. License review is good too. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

  Alright. I just removed the ones which had both a completed mushroom review and an incomplete license review. There were only about 15. Guanaco (talk) 00:12, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• That's good Guanaco. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	I'm not sure we'd ever get through all these license reviews without your help. Guanaco (talk) 00:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Ditto. You're doing a great job.--GRuban (talk) 14:16, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Mushroom copyviosEdit

A lot of the old images are heavily in use on several projects, so I'm trying to replace them where possible, using CommonsDelinker like this. If you find them can you list them at DR instead of speedy, so I have a chance to do the replacement? Guanaco (talk) 06:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

• I don't usually tag speedy delete on old images as a rule since there may have been a license change--just a regular DR. I will file a regular DR for your benefit in any case Guanaco. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Milad Tower CategoryEdit

Hi, I saw that you once deleted files in Category:Milad Tower. Yesterday I categorized files with Farsi names there. Would you please see the category again and delete or nominate violations per the last nomination? Best regards, MasoodHA (talk) 17:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

• OK, Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

TistoryEdit

Hi. I've been trying to help out with the license review backlog but I'm not sure how to approach all the images on Tistory because it's all in Korean and even with translations, I've got no idea how to navigate the website. All I know is there's usually a little icon in the corner that says the license the images have been released under, but are there any other pages I should check before passing it? Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

• I don't mark Tistory images since I cannot read Chinese or Korean. You should ask reviewer Explicit who marks these images Anarchyte. See this edits by him/her. The only other person I trust is uploader Puramyun31 who knows copyright. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Tistory is definitely a tricky one because of the language barrier most reviewers face in reviewing the blogs. A starter kit I can offer is User:-revi/Tistory and Category:Tistory.com related deletion requests. Generally, there are three pages to check for any restrictions: the text on blog post itself, the guestbook (방명록) and a "notice" page, if it has one. Two main keywords you want to look for are "2차가공" (secondary processing) and "로고 삭제/로고 크롭" (logo removal/logo crop), as these are always followed by some form of "금지" (prohibited), which makes these not okay for Commons. These are sometimes written in English on the posts ("do not edit"), and when answering to a query in the guestbook, the photographer will respond with "[...] 안 됩니다" ([...] is not allowed). Also, it's also a good idea simply search the blog (whatever.tistory.com) on Commons and cross-check for reviews of older uploads from the same blog. You also free to ask me, -revi, and (presumably) Puramyun31 to give something a look. ℯxplicit 10:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Anarchyte: you might also find it useful to review Commons:Where is the license on various sites? if you don't already know about that page. It has a Tistory entry. Ww2censor (talk) 11:18, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: There are extra messages here Anarchyte. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I did. Thank you all! Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

A Place to ask questions on Copyright & Uncertain CC By SA licenseEdit

See here: COM:VPC & {{Cc-by-sa-all}} Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Review filesEdit

Hi Could you review files from the Category:Samsung Galaxy A8 ? --Panam2014 (talk) 10:23, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Samsung Galaxy A8 (5).png have been already reviewed. Could you review :

• File:Samsung Galaxy A8 (1).png
• File:Samsung Galaxy A8 (2).png
• File:Samsung Galaxy A8 (3).png
• File:Samsung Galaxy A8 (4).png
• File:Samsung Galaxy A8 (6).png --Panam2014 (talk) 18:01, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
• The other images have derivative screen images on their screens...and may not be kept on Commons. I marked only one. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
  • I think in none of these files the contents of the screen really cause a problem, but I nominated three for deletion for the dragon. Jcb (talk) 21:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
    • @Jcb: I agree for the removing of the dragon. Can I upload a version without it ? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:18, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
      • Yes, you can upload a new version over it. Then we can delete the first version and close the DR. Jcb (talk) 21:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
• Thank You Jcb . I won't mark any image with a dragon in it. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
  • @Jcb: Done. Please, could you close the AfD and review the files ? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
    • Thanks. I have closed the DRs, files can be safely reviewed now. Jcb (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
      • Leo could you please review the files ? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Done here. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:37, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
• Next time maybe you should ask Anarchyte rather than 2 different reviewers. I saw something wrong here and I asked Admin Jcb...and he filed a DRsince he thought the dragon was a derivative while I thought the screen was a derivative. Interesting. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

QuestionEdit

Is this statement enough for this image to be considered in the public domain? Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

• This permission is too broad. It has to be CC BY or CC BY SA. No version is also specified or hinted at. See how someone answere my copyrighted question Here at COM:VPC Anarchyte. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

eldiario.es licenseEdit

Hi,

I noticed that you have confirmed a lot of images from this site (eg. File:Concentración frente a la conselleria de Economía este jueves.jpg) as being CC-licensed. Looking at the license page at that site: http://www.eldiario.es/licencia/ I see the section:

Estas condiciones tienen las siguientes excepciones:
- No se aplica a los contenidos (textos, gráficos, informaciones, imágenes...) publicados por eldiario.es procedentes de terceros que vayan firmados o sean atribuibles a agencias de información (EFE, Europa Press...) o a cualquier otra empresa diferente de Diario de Prensa Digital, S.L. Todos los derechos sobre estos contenidos quedan estrictamente reservados a su titular (la agencia) y, por tanto, no podrán ser reproducidos, distribuidos, transformados o comunicados públicamente sin el consentimiento expreso de su titular.

That (IMO) clearly states that third-party signed photos (not by "Diario de Prensa Digital, S.L.") are not covered by any CC license. Could you, please, comment on this?

My opinion is that (almost?) all content imported from this site should be deleted. Ankry (talk) 10:43, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: Dear Ankry,

I don't speak Spanish but trusted user Discasto has uploaded many many images from eldiario like this: File:Gabriel Rufián.jpg & File:Javi López está preocupado por la deriva antidemocrática que se cierne sobre Europa Foto.jpg. All 3 images have the same author: Sandra Lazaro. If you have a question, please ask him. I trust Discasto since he is a trusted user and speaks Spanish. I trust the person who speaks the local language and knows the local license there and that person is Discasto. If you have a question, contact Discasto first. If I cannot trust a Spanish trusted user, then I cannot trust anyone. I am about to sign out for bed in Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

• Please ask Discasto if Sandra Lazaro is a third party whose work is "signed or attributable to information agencies (EFE, Europa Press ...)" or if she is working under contract for http://www.eldiario.es. If the second case is true, then http://www.eldiario.es is paying her salary and would own the copyrights of her many images. But...first ask Discasto this. Or E-mail http://www.eldiario.es to get a final answer. I have to sleep now. --Leoboudv (talk) 11:23, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, I will. Ankry (talk) 13:04, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

DerivativesEdit

Hey Leoboudv, I just wanted to give you a heads up. I DR'ed a couple of the images you license reviewed because of derivative works in the background that may not be covered by the Tasnim News Agency CC release. The DR can be found here: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Freshman404. --Majora (talk) 06:54, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Admin?Edit

Hello Leoboudv, I often see your name in my watchlist for various edits of yours, I also saw that it have already been asked to you if you could accept to be candidate to admin status, and that you answered that you did not have the time. As I see that you are currently quite active I wonder if you can reconsider your position, have you more time? can you accept a candidature now? we lacks of active administrators, and I think you are a good potential candidate. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:14, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

• Sadly, I have a full time job and reviewing images is almost like a full time job too. I can't be an Admin. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the answer, and for all. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Let me add my thanks, your help is invaluable! --GRuban (talk) 02:31, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: I mark or review images if I have the time. If not, hopefully someone else will step up. GRuban Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:36, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Tasnim News reviewsEdit

Please remember to remove the Category:Tasnimnews review needed from images that you review out of there. It is not an automated category and it will still be listed in the license review backlog until you remove it. I've gone ahead and removed all of the ones that have already been reviewed so far. Thanks. --Majora (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

• I try to remove it if I can remember. The category doesn't disappear when on e marks an image sadly. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:26, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

• Yeah, I know it doesn't get removed. It is easy to forget but equally easy to fix so it isn't that big of a deal. A search for incategory:"Tasnimnews review needed" AND -incategory:"License review needed" plus some visual file change magic and it is fixed in no time. I just wanted to let you know. Thanks. --Majora (talk) 05:31, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Reza Daneshmir - TEDxParsUniversity Speakers 2017(2).jpgEdit

Hi, this is not an old photo. It was held on 2017 and they released these pictures with public domain license. So, what can I do? SlowManifesto (talk) 08:29, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: Do you see this Flickr license table. Commons accepts the Attribution, Attribution-ShareAlike and Public Domain Dedication License (CCO) only. The license here is PD-Mark which is not accepted at Commons since it is not legally enforceable...and the copyright owner does not surrender any copyright over the license. Please ask a question at Common's copyright question website if you have a further question or ask the copyright owner to change the license to one of the three flickr options I mentioned. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't know the difference between PD-Mark and CC0. I sent an email to them and waiting for their response. SlowManifesto (talk) 14:11, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

	The Original Barnstar
	For your great contributions and license reviews. SlowManifesto (talk) 10:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Mushroom Observer toolEdit

One advantage of this tool is that the template (with source,author...) is automatically generated and you know automatically if the image is already in Commons. --Leoboudv (talk) 07:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Stop It!Edit

Hey Leoboudv! What is wrong about my last uploads? you completely wrong, i am so tired of this kind of nominations, seems everyone can do what he pleasant in the Commons. do you know persian or not? so, how can you know that pictures is not from Farsnews? did you checked the source or not? i will be quiet if you be have a logical response, or this will be a kind of trolling. --Rafic.Mufid (talk) 10:29, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

oh man, i got what you meant know, sorry Leoboudv. I just thought you nominated all my last uploads related to Category:Funeral of Nemat Haghighi. but you right about "Derivative images". --Rafic.Mufid (talk) 10:34, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

• Its just a question of copyright. Who took the original black and white photos? Did Farsnews do it or was it perhaps a personal friend of the deceased. If you have a question, post your pictures Here and ask a copyright specialist if they are OK or not? If the answer is no, please do not blame me. Someone who took a picture of an older picture does not own the copyright of the older picture. The person who took the original picture--I assume in the 1980's or 1970's did. I, too, got an image deleted since I took a picture of a picture and an Admin asked me if the original photographer licensed the image copright free...for non-commercial use. I said...I did not know and so the image I uploaded here was deleted. That was one image and it was a painful lesson. Please ask Village pump Copyright if the Fars pictures are OK. Its simple. I have to sign off soon as its past 2 AM in Canada unfortunately. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:38, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

you right, excuse me Leoboudv. i forgot you are Leoboudv the reviewer! yea, i don't think the Fars photographer Hamed Malekpour is owner of that old photos. --Rafic.Mufid (talk) 10:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Daticamera.itEdit

The question has already been resolved, so please talk with Majora and stop flooding my talk page, I do not want 633 notices on my talk page.

Also please, if it's consistent with the policy, remove those notices from my talk page, since I did not violate anyone's copyright. Those uploads were absolutely correct. Thank you. --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 08:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Stop flooding my talk page now and read the message above! Please, PLEASE, take five minutes to read the link I provided you and to talk to Majora and/or Ruthven. --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 22:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: I know what you say. But after I filed a no source on one image Majora found the source for an image and passed it. So, I decided to do it this way. Anyway, I am done with this dati issue just now. Sorry for the problems. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

The sources are easy to find, so no need to put the files in deletion. @Sannita: I think that I've fixed most of them, but, if necessary, google "name surname site:dati.camera.it" and you should find the source. --Ruthven (msg) 22:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

• Dear Ruthven,

I missed these two below.

• File:Enrico Gasbarra daticamera.jpg
• File:Filippo Piccone daticamera.jpg

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

I knew that it would take about a week to fix all these images. I did not except multiple people to get in the way while doing so, making my job much harder in the process. These images are fine and marking them for deletion just puts unnecessary strain on my ability to properly review them. I've removed the remaining {{no source since}} tags from what's left. I know you have said that you are leaving them alone. Please do so and let me finish what I started. --Majora (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

• No problem Majora at all. That is why I didn't tag these 2 images above. Its just a pity the uploader uploaded these images without an accesible online source...which created these problems in the first place. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:36, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
• The 2 images below have a problem. The source link expired.
• File:Alberto Zolezzi daticamera.jpg
• File:Alessandro Saro Alfonso Pagano daticamera.jpg
• You can remove the no source tag for this image if you wish: File:Ileana Piazzoni daticamera.jpg

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:39, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done,  Done, and  Done --Ruthven (msg) 08:03, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

FilesEdit

Hi Could you review File:Kim Kardashian 2017.png, File:Kylie Jenner1.png, File:Kylie Jenner2.png ? --Panam2014 (talk) 22:21, 5 April 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. 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!

Affected:

• File:Psathyrella epimyces (Peck) A.H. Sm 373856.jpg

And also:

• File:Psathyrella epimyces (Peck) A.H. Sm 373857.jpg

Yours sincerely, Majora (talk) 04:02, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Mynewsdesk.comEdit

Hello Leoboudv,

I am here because I see that you have successfully passed the license review for File:Tingsrydtravet upplopp.jpg. Please note that mynewsdesk.com is listed at COM:Bad sources. When you see a file from that website, you should tag it with {{npd}} or {{nsd}} according to the instructions given at COM:Bad sources. You should not add {{LicenseReview}} to such files because the mentioned licenses are vague: they lack a version number (3 or 4) and a direct link to the legal web page of CC licenses at the official CC website. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pinkman with Yannick Gingras.jpg for an example.

Thank you. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: On mynewsdesk, I once saw a photo album or gallery once where individual images were licensed as CC BY 3.0 but OK, I will tag it as npd next time 4nn1l2. I don't know if people know about image licenses there. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:05, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi Leoboudv, The following discussions in March 2012, June 2012 and August 2012 are probably the most pertinent to mynewsdesk being listed a bad source. I also think I see what they have done though I have no idea when they made the change. Previously the Creative Commons link on their image pages was to the actual license, while now it just states that images have a CC license without stating which one. I distinctly remember some of the discussions where Yann was also a contributor but we currently have 5,000+ mynewsdesk images here of which 178 are in a category need review but another category contains 3,800+ images, so there must be another 1,000+ lying around somewhere that are not categorised as mynewsdesk sourced images. Perhaps there needs to be a new discussion about the validity of all those images because I assume, based on a quick look at a few images, the 3,800+ all have good license reviews, thought I was always suspicious of mynewsdesk's licensing. Let me know if you take this any further. Ww2censor (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2018 (UTC)'* Comment: Thanks for the links Ww2censor on mynewsdesk.com. I always had the sense that something was not quite right but the license seemed to be CC BY 3.0 so I reluctantly reviewed them. I have been busy with work these past 2 days to mark many images at all. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

• Dear 4nn1l2 & Ww2censor

Here is the so-called mynewsdesk Photogallery and on the "Link" you can actually acccess the image and click on the license...and it says CC BY 3.0. So that was how I justified passing images from this web site with the words CC Erkannande. But the strange thing I thought when I passed the images was that....the author/photographer was never named. My apologies, the photographer is Named but I don't know if these images are truly OK for Commons. Maybe you do....but I have the feeling this website owners don't understand copyright. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:30, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

A quote for youEdit

	Be happy!
	Be happy. Not because everything is perfect. But, because you choose to to focus on the perfect moments. Rafic.Mufid (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

• Thank You Rafic, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Public Domain Mark 1 is not accepted licenseEdit

Please do not mark Flickr images tagged with this licence as "accepted". PDM is not PD nor CC 0! Check this template for example: Template:Flickr-public domain mark/en and explanations provided there. Masur (talk) 19:27, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment: I don't mark flickr images that are PDM on flickr unless they are from the US Federal Government or its agencies Masur or from foreign states whose laws say they are PD--in which case I pass them. Other images with these license from private accounts I fail them unless they have a valid OTRS ticket which I checked with an Administrator first. I just did not know that PDM images existed on Mushroom Observer like this case. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:32, 19 April 2018 (UTC)