Hello! I've seen some of your edits, and I really appreciate the contributions you're making to Commons. I'm glad you're helping the project! So I would say welcome to Commons although it's been a while that you made your first edit. --GeorgHH • talk 00:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Whose house is it?Edit
It is interesting what you said about two images Mary Arden's House. They are both images I found on flickr labeled Mary Arden's House. If your are correct, then the image would need renaming. Snowmanradio 16:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Watermark removed from Yuyuan.jpgEdit
Hi, I have removed the watermark from the image and uploaded a new version without the watermark http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Yuyuan.jpg. I am quite new so I am not sure that I've done the right procedure. Please let me know if anything else needed to be done. Thank you.Tinbin (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello! As you seem proficient in UK copyrights, I have got a question. I obtained a copy of "Luftwaffe: The Allied Intelligence Files" by Christopher Staerck and Paul Sinnott (ISBN 978-1574883879). They used only photos from the PRO, taken during the Second World War by UK planes (reconnaissance photos, gun camera shots), which were collected by the Air Ministry. Almost all photos are quoted with their Air Ministry registration. Would this then be Crown Copyright? Cheers. Cobatfor 19:10 15 Oct 2008 (UTC)
Tip: Categorizing imagesEdit
Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.
1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:
2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.
- [[Category:Category name]]
For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:
- [[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]
When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.
- Image:CTSW-G-CLEG.jpg is uncategorized since 14 December 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 06:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- Image:ASK13-EBZ.jpg is uncategorized since 10 January 2009. BotMultichillT (talk) 06:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Image:A400M-1942.jpg was uncategorized on 21 July 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
- Image:Falconar-F-11-3-G-AWHY-230.jpg was uncategorized on 25 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Falconar-F-11-3-G-AWHY-233.jpg was uncategorized on 25 September 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
] File Tagging File:HAL Dhruv Avionics.JPGEdit
Provided evidence of permission by providing a link to a site with an explicit grant of permission that complies with the licensing policy : http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/09/rafale-wins-mmrca-competition-on.html see Shiv Aroor said...
email@example.com: You are welcome to pick up any of the photos here that I own the copyright to. I cannot speak for photos that I have picked up myself with due attribution to the respective copyright holder. But regarding any of the photos taken by me, or if I mention that the copyright is mine or LiveFist's, then you're most welcome to use them on Wikipedia.
MilborneOne any further question.
All the press release by DRDO are in public domain.As this image is released in press release. So public domain Licensing is correct.link:-
Generally,press release are in public domain.link:-
Re: Aircraft by RegistrationEdit
Hmm, you could discuss at the Village Pump, but the general rule is to only add images to appropriate subcategories. It is generally discouraged to add images to both subcategories and parent categories, since this duplicates effort and in some ways makes it harder to find images. Especially in situations like this, the 'by type' categories (such as "Airbus A320") will all yield the same aircraft look, but perhaps in different liveries; the 'by carrier' categories will all have similar liveries, but different types of aircraft. I know where you are coming from in your complaint, but I just don't think it is such a big deal as to start muddying up the categorisation system. In any case, I'd appreciate if you let me know how this situation develops. Let me add that I don't really care which method is ultimately used (though I admit I somewhat prefer the more minimalist approach), I'm just following the standard categorisation method here. Cheers! — Huntster (t @ c) 00:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Please Don't Delete..Edit
Hi, please don't delete the following image that you tag in commons. All of the image that you tag were given me a permission by the owner mostly member of timawa.net\forum(which I am also a member),and because I am not aware of the OTRS before.. They only sent me a personal message granting me to use their image in my inbox in the forum not in email. I have already send them an email request last June 2 before you tag those image. So I am waiting for the email with OTRS template from the respective owner. Also the File:PAF S211 2.jpg is not a copyright violation it is from my account in friendster but i can't remember the email and its password because it was way back 2007 when I last use the fs account. I don't have also the original copy of the image because my PC was corrupted and I formatted it in the same year. I also want to tell you that the image in flickr:http://www.flickr.com/groups/693106@N22/pool/41397624@N06/ is a real copyright violation, I don't know if he copy it from my fs account. Hope you'll understand.Your consideration will be appreciated. Thanks
European Air GroupEdit
Hello, you proposed the pictures that I added on WIKIMEDIA COMMOMONS for deletion. I object, because they are owned and taken by the organisation for which I work (being the European Air Group). Some of the pictures also appear on our website, of which my organisation also owes the rights. The pictures are all uploaded in a Wikipedia article on the European Air Group. The main purpose these pictures were taken , was to put them on our website. Later we (the EAG) decided to use them for an article in Wikipedia. Keesbleijerveld (talk) 12:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
- You need to send the permission to use the images into the OTRS system, working for an organisation doesnt give you the right just to copy images and uload them here particularly when you declared them as your own work. If you have other images that you have declared as your own work then you should really remove that claim. The only images that you can upload as your own are those that you have took yourself and hold the copyright any others need the permission from the copyright holder. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, are you sure about en:Avro Vulcan XH558's civil registration? It's article states G-VLCN. Perhaps you knows better since you've seen her, so I don't want to correct it in the description of File:XH558-AvroVulcan-1379.JPG, where you (or someone else) stated it to G-VULC (which is stated for en:Avro Vulcan XM655 in the articles). – I always admired these beatiful planes, though I am from Hungary. If you would reply, would you mind to do it on my Hungarian talk page? (I seldom check the Commons talk page.) - Er... and Happy New Year! --HoremWeb Place of Auditions 21:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry my error it is G-VLCN - I have corrected the caption on the image, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi and hello from a first time WIki user - apologies if I'm getting some of this Wiki thing wrong - I`m not really a techno-phobe, honest! I was just looking at your Camcopter picture. Any chance you can email me about it? firstname.lastname@example.org Many thanks. Aviator 738 (talk) 14:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
You placed this file in Category:1992 Farnborough Airshow; the flickr uploader that is the photographer of this image stated that this photo was taken "at Farnborough 1989". Was the flickr uploader wrong with his statement? Thanks. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:A-29B Super Tucano on Patrol over the skies of the Dominican.jpegEdit
Hi MilborneOne. Just for your interest: While I have no objection against the new category name for files like RAF Brize Norton - KC-30 Voyager. Cheers LittleWink (talk) 16:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC), the RAF calls them KC-30's on their website, see
- Understood but I am afraid it is wrong as the rest of the RAF and AirTanker does not use the title it was a designation of the Australian aircraft but has not been used since the RAF aircraft were named (also the KC-30 has a boom the Voyager does not). If you have a look at http://www.airtanker.co.uk they only use the Voyager name and they own and operate the aircraft rather than the RAF. MilborneOne (talk) 19:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletionEdit
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue.
Usage of boing 787 dreamliner pictureEdit
I´m Julio Romero from the SCI - Sociedad Colombiana de Ingenieros (Colombian society of engineers), I´m leaving you this message to ask you if it´s possible that we could use your picture of the boing 787 dreamliner in our magazine "Anales de Ingeniería", it would be very helpful, certainly we will attribute your work. Thank you very much for your time, i´ll be waiting for your response. --Jromerogalofre (talk) 22:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
A reader contacted Wikimedia to report that the waterfowl in: File:Bentley-wildfowl2.jpg are magpie geese, common in northern australia.
This seems plausible, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magpie_goose
If you agree, I would be happy to correct the image title and the description, uness you want to do it. The image came up because it is used in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentley_Wildfowl_and_Motor_Museum
File:XL472-Gannet.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Permission to use an imageEdit
I am writing a book on the Tornado ADV and have seen your image of ZA254 taken at Farnborough in 1980 and would very much like to use it but find the explanation of the licence involved a bit unclear for commercial purposes. Would it be possible for me to use the image and if so how would you like it to be credited?
- Dont have a problem with it being used, you can credit it to "MilborneOne on Wikipedia". If you need anything else then you can use the "Email this user" button on the left of this page and I can contact directly. MilborneOne (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
'Email this user' does not seem to be an option available to me , book has now been published and I would like to forward a copy of it to you. Des52
Hello, Your photo of the Learjet 45 at the 2008 Farnborough airshow is captioned "A Canadian-built Learjet-45". I would like to clarify where the Learjet 45 was built. The aircraft final assembly took place in Wichita, Kansas, with major components supplied by other Bombardier divisions, such as Shorts Brothers in Northern Ireland (fuselage), and deHavilland Canada in Downsview, Ontario (wing). The Learjet 45 was upgraded to become the Learjet 75, certified in late 2013. So, the Learjet 45 is a U.S. built and certified aircraft, with some major components supplied by other countries, such as those just mentioned. The current aircraft uses engines built by Honeywell in Phoenix, AZ, and avionics supplied by Garmin, Olathe, KS. Thanks for reading.
Michael I screwed this up, can you kindly fix it. When I inserted the website link it went haywire - (also he should be Blocked for a bit) Many thanks in advance FOX 52 (talk) 19:16, 21 January 2018 (UTC)