User talk:Storye book

Welcome to my talk page. My English Wikipedia page is: w:User:Storye book

Archives 1, 2, 3

Contents

Life+70

Hi SB, you've uploaded several 20th-century works with a life+70 tag but "unknown" listed as the author - how do you know the creators of these works died over 70 years ago, if their identities are unknown? Someone working in the 1920s could very well have lived through the 1940s. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:27, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up on this. I have now edited all my life+70 tagged uploads with unknown authors for this year, adding a note to clarify the situation. I used add such notes for all my life+70 uploads with unknown authors, but gradually forgot to do it. I always make full checks for authorship and copyright claims, though. Please let me know if you have any further issues. Storye book (talk) 10:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks - you should also be aware of this discussion regarding life+70 tags on unknown-author works. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, a tip that might be useful to you (I hate seeing uploads made in good faith taken down just because the licensing is slightly off): check the permissions on this file File:Winfrid O Burrows, Bp Truro.jpg. For photographs taken by unknown photographers and published before 1947 (of which you've uploaded a few), this is much sounder than life+70 if you can't verify life+70. If the photograph was taken before 1923, it's public domain in the US - you can use PD-1923, and you're completely in the clear. Regards, LookLook36 (talk) 23:17, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both - very helpful. Storye book (talk) 10:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

As an aside, it doesn't appear to be an unknown author, though; the National Portrait Gallery webpage it was taken from says that it is "by William Heath". He was born around 1824, though, so he is definitely covered by the UK life+70 rule. I've updated.

BTW, LookLook - it isn't that the photograph has been taken before 1923, it is that it was legally published before 1923 (an anonymous, unpublished US work is protected for 120 years after creation). For a UK anonymous tag to apply, you also need to legally show the research you've conducted into the identity of the creator - but since the identity's known, it's not a problem here. Hchc2009 20:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:Christopher Chavasse 002.jpg

And also:

• File:Christopher Maude Chavasse 003.jpg

Yours sincerely, clpo13_(talk) 18:25, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Storye book. You have new messages on another wiki at [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Christopher Maude Chavasse#{{{2}}}]]. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Image without license

File:Bradford Cathedral August 2017 004.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 10:31, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Done. Storye book (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Bradford Cathedral August 2017 003.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 10:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Done Storye book (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Bradford Cathedral August 2017 002.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 10:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Done. Storye book (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Former School Board building Leeds 104.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Former School Board building Leeds 104.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Former School Board building Leeds 104.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

4shadoww (talk) 10:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Image without license

File:St Michael Shelf 002.jpg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)}, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:33, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Done. Storye book (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Honoured Artist of RSFSR medal.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Honoured Artist of RSFSR medal.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Sealle (talk) 04:26, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Done. Licence had been apparently accidentally removed by previous editor Storye book (talk) 10:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Princess Elizabeth wedding 1947.jpg

File:Princess Elizabeth wedding 1947.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. 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!

George Ho (talk) 20:15, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

Hi Storye book, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please do not tag redirects as {{speedy}}. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

---

--Steinsplitter (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2019 (UTC)