Open main menu

File:Journalists in Sabana Grande 2017.jpgEdit

I have uploaded a new version of the file with the original metadata. QuinteroP (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

  Done Thank you very much. I closed the deletion request as kept. Taivo (talk) 07:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Voronezh violatorEdit

Как бороться с неадекватным человеком под ником Insider который удаляет под вымышленным предлогом фото и пытается вставить старые фото которое не соответствует реальности сегодняшнего дня, маниакальное преследование хороших фоток к примеру он уже выставил на удаление File:Vozairport.jpg преследует все фотки Воронежского аэропорта и ставит их все на удаление. Защитите хотя бы последнее фото которое он пытается удалить File:Vozairport.jpg он реально психически не здоровый человек а вы ему помогаете. Забаньте этого Insider

Вы должны свои претензии написать в Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Voronezh violator. Файлы представпены на удаление как нарушения авторских прав. Taivo (talk) 17:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Insider психически не здоровый человек. Я Специально сфоткаю опять фото аэропорта заново выставлю его только здесь, а он обязательно поставит его на удаление с якобы нарушением авторских прав. Он все фото будет удалять назло а вставлять те что давно не аэропорт Воронеж. вот эти он будет вставлять Voronezh-airport-december-2012.jpg и вот это Airport Voronezh.JPG сейчас ему только надо последнее фото удалить.

Please review File:Naveen Waqar.jpgEdit

Hi you recently created one image nomination page which i tagged for speedy deletion. Anyways will you please review this image 60px, that is uploaded by me and i just want to know if its rightly licensed or not. Rasheed222 (talk) 19:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

  Deleted. The file was licensed as "All rights reserved" and this is not acceptable in Commons, please look licenses. Taivo (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Ok! will you please guide me which flickr images i should upload? actually i thought it meets commons guidelines. please guide me. Rasheed222 (talk) 10:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Please read COM:L about suitable licenses. Taivo (talk) 10:10, 5 October 2018 (UTC)


Halb kunstEdit

Palun kustuta see rõvedus. Normaalne fail on ka olemas. Sama kehtib selle ja selle kohta. Kruusamägi (talk) 23:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

  Done Taivo (talk) 15:46, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Tänan! Täna sattus muidu ka see fail ette. Samas on olemas see. Asendasin kehvema faili kasutused ja palun see kustutad, et see jälle kuskile artiklitesse ei satuks. Kruusamägi (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Veel mõned väga halva kvaliteediga kunstiteoste reprod kustutamiseks, millest on (nüüd) olemas korralikud versioonid:

Kruusamägi (talk) 05:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Corrections validEdit

Thank you Tavio. Yes these corrections to my updates are valid. The error was on the level up. The women’s page lead by accident to the men’s page. This is the source of the error. I had only realized that Inwas editing the wrong page postum. The corrections back to the original made after my edit are valid. I need to change the incorrect link on the women’s page. 11lionsd (talk) 12:52, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Consent not needed?Really?Edit

Hello Taivo,


You have given the reason "Subject's consent is not needed here", for my image deletion request for this File:Bezwada Wilson in Bhopal 2017.jpg. May i ask why? Why it isn't needed? The subject clearly isn't looking into the camera yet the snapshot was taken. And as far as the venue is concerned that place could be his private place.

There's another file at which i had applied for deletion for this file File:Korea Buddhist flag.png, and you've given a reason of "The file does not surpass threshold of originality". The Commons:CSD celarly doesn't state anything about any threshold, so how would i've know about this. Not only this, i believe your task as an administrator was to check whether the said image was violating free/non-free license citeria or not, which in this case it was with its license laundering Commons:CSD#F6 behaviour. With that said it was an obvious copyright violation.

Yet, you not only overlooked a clear violation of Commons:CSD but went over to come up with the expaination of not surpassing 'threshold of originality'.

Could please explain your reasoning? 14:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I must not show, why subject's consent isn't needed. You as nominator must show, why subject's consent is needed. This seems to be public place and nothing strange is happening here. I'm really surprised, that somebody demands subject's consent, and you need a good explanation for that.
For the another file, it cannot be copyright violation, because it is not protected with copyright (it is too simple for that), and it is in scope as well, because it is used and even in multiple projects. I do not see any reason for deletion. Taivo (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Subject's consent should be required because of this Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people#The_right_of_privacy and this - The subject's consent is usually needed for publishing a photograph of an identifiable individual taken in a private place, and Commons expects this even if local laws do not require it. Taken from here: . What makes you say that it's a public place? It could very well be just an image from outside his house, which is going to put it under the criteria - taken at a Private place. In addition to this, he's clearly not looking into the camera. Didn't i mention that earlier?
  • I'm really surprised, that somebody demands subject's consent, and you need a good explanation for that.
My reply to that is - I don't need a good explanation for somebody demanding subject's consent, I need a good explanaiton for somebody not demanding the subject's consent. Btw, i'm asking for your rationale behind you denying my request. That's it! If you're taking somebody's pic ask for their permission. Besides, a picture taken with consent is going to atleast make the subject look into the camera.
Thanks 16:14, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
The file you linked says clearly: "In the United States (where the Commons servers are located), consent is not as a rule required to photograph people in public places." That's that. Taivo (talk) 16:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
You're still calling it a public place. Why? 17:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Looks like public place. Taivo (talk) 17:46, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
OR it looks like private place. 17:51, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
If you have evidence, that the photo is made in private place, please present it. Taivo (talk) 17:52, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Nah, no evidence....but your bias is clear on this one. 17:53, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
1 This picture clearly violates Commons:CSD#F6 versus, User talk:Taivo quote:"it cannot be copyright violation, because it is not protected with copyright (it is too simple for that)". Hmm... which choice would be the right one? I wonder... —Preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 19:18, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
My choice is correct. Sometimes people upload into Commons files with incorrect author, source and license. If the file cannot be correctly sourced and licensed, then it should be deleted. If the file can be correctly sourced and licensed, then deletion is wrong. Instead, file description, author, date, source and license must be corrected and proper categories added. New users sometimes cannot do that themselves and we must not punish them for that, because nobody is born as master and the skill comes with years. Taivo (talk) 10:15, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm really surprised, that somebody uploads image without providing permission, and you need no explanation for that. Very well, if that's the case lets see whether your unexperienced users care to rectify what they've done and provide the license permission or not. 14:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Your unexperienced user was careful enough to call someone else's work theirs, and you're all out in the open to defend that. Not only this, you've changed the author's name alltogether. What a nice job on your behalf! 15:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for liking my little detective work! Taivo (talk) 15:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
That wasn't meant to be a complement. 15:27, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Respecto a Octavillasmasgranada.jpgEdit

Hola, buenas tardes Taivo. Verás, pediría que eliminases ese aviso que has puesto, dado que esa foto la hice yo, de hecho esa es una mesa de mi casa la que está de fondo. No entiendo a qué viene poner estas alertas sin preguntar ni nada. Ruego las retires por favor. Gracias de antemano, --Granadino7 (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

This discussion must continue in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Octavillasmasgranada.jpg. Taivo (talk) 16:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


Thanks a lot Taivo and congratulations for your work ! Regards; Cquoi (talk) 12:24, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Posters within the category Category:Election posters in IsraelEdit

Hi. I've individually nominated files within the category Category:Election posters in Israel (as you proposed in Commons:Deletion requests/Election posters) following this recent discussion. Yours, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:32, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Category talk:Icons for railway descriptionsEdit

Please restore and move to Category talk:BSicon/railway. Thank you. Useddenim (talk) 22:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

  Done Taivo (talk) 08:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Admin homophobiaEdit

Are the licenses on this site[1] fake? s it possible to threaten a ban for downloading this image? Sealle spoke rudely in Russian on his page. My English is not so good. --Терпрп (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

License is valid and unacceptable for Commons. You must make difference between block and ban. Repeated uploading copyright violation can lead a block and even indefinite block, but probably not a ban. Со мной можно говорить и по-русски. Taivo (talk) 16:19, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
@Терпрп: Admins do not care about what you download from Commons. Everybody may download stuff from Commons, even users who are blocked or banned. It's uploading that can be a problem. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:18, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
What do you have in mind? I do not understand. --Терпрп (talk) 16:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Почему CC-BY-SA-4 не подходит? --Терпрп (talk) 16:50, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Можете ли пояснить? --Терпрп (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
@Терпрп: Вот теперь я видел. Внизу была лицензия "All rights reserved © Slava Mogutin, 2018" и вначале я больше вообще не посмотрел. Теперь вижу, что у некоторых фотографии отдельная лицензия CC-BY-SA-4. Эта лицензия подходит. Извиняюсь. Taivo (talk) 17:48, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Дело в том, что фотография была удалена и выписана предупреждение с мотивом, что это "фейковая лицензия" и что я должен в фонд отправить письмо от самой фотографа Лауры --Терпрп (talk) 12:19, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Я не понимаю, какие фотографии были удалены. Вы ни одного файла в Викисклад не загрузили. Может быть, вы загрузили их в русскую Википедию? Тогда я не могу помочь. Конечно, OTRS-разрешение от Лауры было бы особенно хорошое. Taivo (talk) 14:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Простите. Я это User:Терпр. Я в той рувики пароль потерял. А файл File:Slava Mogutin and Robert Filippini.jpg --Терпрп (talk) 14:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Я создал заявление для восстановления в COM:UDEL. Я не хочу восстоновить такие файлы без согласия других. Taivo (talk) 15:09, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Спасибо! --Терпрп (talk) 18:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Taivo, I'm afraid you missed the authorship issue, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Slava Mogutin and Robert Filippini.jpg. The uploader was well aware the file was deleted for this reason and misled you, as well as allowed himself another offensive thread header. I hope next time you will let me know and force this person to keep the AGF policy after multiple warnings he's got. Sealle (talk) 11:23, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

File talk:După trecerea unui convoi între Birzula şi Grozdovca.jpgEdit

Good morning!

I quote:

1.Long descriptions are not wrong, until they are not too long.

2. References are not written into description, but into source field.

In reality:

1. The description of the photo is very long. It also includes the source of non-photo affirmations. It does not match the description of the photo with what Carp writes. This (Carp) does not say the dead of that photograph are shot. He does not say that their author is the Tarca sub-officer. Do not tell if he (Carp) is the author of the photo or someone else from whom he took it. That's an unknown one. There is also a big problem of verifiability.

2. In the source field only the source of the photo is mentioned, not the source of the statements made by the author of the posting of the photo.

In conclusion, if we go over length descriptions (which is a relative problem), we can not overcome the inaccuracies in the description or the lack of sources to confirm what Dahn says. Respectfully 05:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of the wolf, Tarca is at p. 259. And no, it does not say they were shot by Tarca, just that he was the highest in charge for the whole operation. Of course, he also received orders from higher officers, but locally he was the highest in rank. Footnote points to sheet X, and the legend of the first photo says "the convoy", not "a convoy" as the second photo. Such articulation points that the author already spoke of which convoy was "the convoy". It is not original synthesis, it is reading with comprehension. And, yes, the only person who gets such shootings attributed (whether he shot them himself or just gave the order) is Tarca. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


Mr. Ariadacapo also let me delete my photographs and pictures eg File: Walter WIZ (1921), drawing Milan Tošnar 1981.jpg, File: Walter 0 a.jpg (Walter 0 racing 1924, drawing by Milan Tošnar 1980) and File: Walter Super 6 (1930) at a commemorative ride 1,000 miles Cz. 2018.jpg. I have explained several times to the other pictures (from 1913-1936) that I acquired them legally in the years 1980-1982 from the company archive as a Walter employee. Now all these pictures (glass plates) are stored in the State Regional Archives in Prague, because Walter collapsed in 1995. Libor Tošnar Ltosnar (talk) 16:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for mentioning. Now please read Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Ltosnar about what to do for undeleting the images. Taivo (talk) 17:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Long time no seeEdit

Hello, Taivo. I have not disturbed you since quite some time now. Therefore please do me a non-admin favour to have a look at User:Peteravivangel's contributions, such as in and help me to avoid a silly edit war. Thank you very much in advance. Best. --E4024 (talk) 19:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Taivo. Some people do not know how to categorize, as I do not know how to make better links (see below :), and oblige one to go for an edit war while they are cool enough because they do not have too much at stake (other than obstinately exposing a certain lady). Here: Can you give a hand to check the cats, please. Tyvm. --E4024 (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:At hyderabad.jpgEdit

Some browser problem waiting a helping hand from a good admin: Commons:Deletion requests/File:At hyderabad.jpg. Tyvm. --E4024 (talk) 13:51, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

  Done Taivo (talk) 15:35, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Mug shots of people of RussiaEdit

Спасибо за вашу помощь. Я хотел бы у вас спросить ещё об одном вопросе политики Викисклада. Категория Category:Mug shots of people of Russia и Category:Victims of political repression in the Soviet Union содержат "шоты" из уголовных дел многих известных личностей. Их метят или {{PD-RU-exempt|type=mug shots}}, поскольку материалы уголовных дел вроде как государственный документ, эти фото сделаны неизвестным автором по госзаказу с целью составления госдокумента. Или {{PD-old-70}}, {{PD-Russia-1996}}, поскольку это старые фото неизвестных авторов. Но эти фото избирательно удаляются. Возражения что 1) госматериалы уголовного дела это не государственные документы 2) что дата публикации вне суда этих фото часто имеет дату 1990-х. Такая трагическая ситуация сложилась с File:Anna Barkova.jpg. Вопрос в том, нужно ли бороться за восстановление или нужно срочно эвакуировать эти категории в Русскую Википедию как несвободные? --Терпрп (talk) 14:44, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

{{PD-Russia-1996}} скажет, что 70 лет считают не с момента фотографирования, а с момента первой публикации. Так что эта лицензия вас обыкновенно не поможет. Но {{PD-RU-exempt}} кажется правильной: "other materials of state government agencies and local government agencies ..., including ... other materials of ... judicial character". Taivo (talk) 15:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi Taivo, please take a look at w:ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Авторское право/2011/02#Фото документов, w:ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Авторское право/2014/10#Снимки заключенных из дел НКВД and w:ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Авторское право/2014/02#Фотографии советских и российских преступников. Sealle (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Похоже Sealle ещё и преследованием занялся. --Терпрп (talk) 12:46, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Нет. Я спросил у него совет. Taivo (talk) 17:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for giving me a second chance for me to contribute constructively at commons. Your unblock is something that I'll never take for granted. You're one of the kindest admins I know and I hope you continue working on commons.  Eltomas2003 (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


Taivo, I've restored the block on Eltomas2003, which you lifted inappropriately and contrary to policy. 1) Eltomas2003 was blocked for sockpuppetry, not copyvios; the unblock rationale did not address the socking issue, which was as recent as one month ago (!!!) with J0n 47 n454 (per COM:BLOCK, we require "An acknowledgement that the block was appropriate and a credible promise that the behaviour that led to the block will not be repeated"); 2) in addition to copyvios and sockpuppetry, many of the socks have been used to upload COM:NOTHOST/COM:SCOPE violations, an issue that also needs to be addressed; and 3) again, per COM:BLOCK: "Before granting a request to lift a block placed by another administrator, the reviewing administrator should consult with the blocking administrator, except in obvious, uncontroversial cases." (emphasis in original). This is not an obvious, uncontroversial case. See, for example, Category:Sockpuppets of Eltomas2003 for the extensive known socks, many of which are recent. Эlcobbola talk 23:16, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Aaah, I eat bananas 101. That   - Alexis Jazz ping plz 23:23, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Guess what? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorting paintings from DenmarkEdit

Hi Taivo. I can see that you have changed the sortorder for some of the paintings by painters from Denmark, for instance File:Jørgen Roed - La Scala Santa i San Benedetto - studie - 1839.jpg. The sortorder in the "Paintings by Jørgen Roed" was set to 1839, and you changed it to something else. I hope it is clear to you, that when members of the community make a sortorder in the first place, there is a reason for that, and it is not a good idea to change it without a discussion. The reason for the original sortorder is that we wish to follow the artist through the years of her/his working life, and that is conveniently done by using the dates of the works. Do you see the point in this practice? Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 05:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

OK, I will remember, that Denmark is different from any other country, and will self-revert the sorting . Taivo (talk) 08:58, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for bearing over with our backwards ideas. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 13:03, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Arcturus (optical).pngEdit

I was about to nominate this file for deletion, but noticed that it was previously nominated for deletion (by me), and then kept (by you). The file description has been updated with the following text:

Data retrieved from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST) are part of the public domain and need no explicit permission for use, with the exception of proprietary data. We take care that these proprietary data are only provided to those who have proprietary rights. No explicit permission is needed for the use of MAST tools. Please acknowledge NASA and MAST when using data retrieved from MAST.

and also tagged as "solely created by NASA". It is not solely created by NASA and it still copyright. The blockquote explicitly states "with the exception of proprietary data" and DSS2 data is proprietary. This is stated at the bottom of the link in the permission section and explained fully here and here. The acknowledgements and permissions explanation is geared mainly towards scientific (non-commercial) users, but makes it very clear that the datasets are subject to copyright, which makes them unsuitable for inclusion here. The status of all the MAST Catalogs and Surveys Group products is explained here. None of this should be confused with the similarly-named but entirely separate SDSS (Sloan Digital Sky Survey), which has recently been released into the public domain. Lithopsian (talk) 15:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

There is no evidence, that DSS data is used for creating the image. Neither file page nor source page mentions DSS. en:Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes does not mention DSS. Actually MAST as archive does not create any data; it only storages data. So in my opinion the license is correct: neither MAST nor DSS was co-creator of the file, all work of NASA. Taivo (talk) 18:14, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Arcul de Triumf by Britchi MirelaEdit

Domnule Taivo, ma numesc Britchi Iulia Mirela cea care a fotografiat Arcul de Triumf. Constat ca vreti sa le scoateti pe motiv ca arhitectul (Petre Antonescu) are drepturile de autor pana in 2036.

Dar daca vreti sa le scoateti sau deleted de ce nu scoateti si poza lui DanielValahul (File: Arcul de triumf noaptea) poza din Concursul Wiki Loves Monuments 2018. O poza foarte frumoasa. Am mai vazut poze cu Arcul de Triumf, din Concursuri Wiki Loves Monuments si nu le-ati scos. Dar mie imi scoateti pozele intr-o veselie. Eu nu sunt de acord sa-mi tot scoateti poze, care au fost acceptate, inventand diverse motive sau chiar fara motive. Britchi Iulia Mirela --Britchi Mirela (talk) 11:24, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. The discussion should be in Commons:Deletion requests/Arcul de Triumf by Britchi Mirela. I have not yet discovered every photo about the Arc of Triumph, but I'll work to find and nominate them all for deletion. Taivo (talk) 11:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Domnule Taivo eu doresc numele celor care au propus stergerea fisierelor mele cu Arcul de Triumf, poze care au fost acceptate in Concursul Wiki Loves Monuments. Sa ma razboiesc cu ei nu cu dumneavoastra, daca dumneavoastra nu aveti nici o vina. Britchi Iulia Mirela --Britchi Mirela (talk) 13:43, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

This was my personal decision. Nobody other proposed that. Taivo (talk) 15:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy holidays 2019! ;-)Edit

    * Happy Holidays 2019, Taivo! *
  • Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!
  • Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année!
  • Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!
  • Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом!
  • ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!
  • Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!

-- George Chernilevsky talk 15:14, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New YearEdit

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Hi Taivo, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year,
Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to Commons,
   –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 18:35, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year!Edit

Happy new year, Taivo! Is this vandalism? Best. --E4024 (talk) 18:30, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it is. I rolled the edit back. The user is globally locked. Taivo (talk) 10:50, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Acción Chaqueña.pngEdit

Hello. You deleted this image (here) saying it has incorrect license with "All rights reserved", but the source for the fire is this:, where is says "CC0 Creative Commons Free for commercial use No attribution required". --Yilku1 (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

This fire safety symbol is really published under CC-0 license, but it is totally black and the deleted image was totally dark red. Shape was also different. You can upload the linked black image and use it. Taivo (talk) 10:48, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
It was because I colored it, filled the center and dwarfed it. --Yilku1 (talk) 00:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Rename to place of deleted fileEdit

Hi Taivo! Can I rename File:Annamanna Orsós Kanada (Niagara vízesése).jpg to File:Annamanna Orsós Kanada (Niagara-vízesés).jpg what you just deleted? I confused two filenames. If I can't, could you? --Regasterios (talk) 14:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Taivo (talk) 14:14, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you very much. --Regasterios (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Special Barnstar
For deleting over 200 or more of my image redirects!, Your work and help is greatly appreciated,

Apologies tho for the amount of redirects tho,
Anyway thanks again :)
Happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 17:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

File:George Henry Durrie - Red School House, Winter.JPGEdit

I checked the Metropolitan Museum website, and changed the date back.Wmpearl (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Complex artworkEdit

Hi Taivo. All these look like artwork that requires OTRS to me. Right? --E4024 (talk) 17:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, they all need OTRS. Taivo (talk) 20:59, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

My imageEdit

Hey Taivo. Someone deleted an image I created (over a year ago) and uploaded (nearly a year ago), of the Psychedelic Fidget man (file name- File:The Psychedelic Fidget Man.png), without explaining why at all. You again failed to explain why it was removed, sticking a great big "final warning" on my talk page, again without explaining why it was deleted at all. I assumed it was a copyright violation, so I uploaded an original variant of this ( File:Fidget-Spinner Head Psychedelic Priest.png) without lettering I got from a fair-use website, just to be on the safe side. This was deleted too, no explanation! Can you give me one. I created this image, it's copyright free, and it deserves to be on Wikimedia Commons. Can't you help a newer editor like me instead of just picking on me? Thanks --Leavepuckgackle1998 (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

File:The Psychedelic Fidget Man.png was deleted by Elcobbola with reason "Copyright violation". I do not know, what kind of copyright violation is it, but educational value was weak and you added sentence "Do not use without asking me first please" into file description. This was bad: every file in Commons must be usable by everyone without any permission. File:Fidget-Spinner Head Psychedelic Priest.png was also deleted by Elcobbola with reason "Recreation of content deleted per community consensus". Taivo (talk) 07:53, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Admin Request VoteEdit

Since I cannot edit on Commons:Administrators/Requests/Elisfkc anymore, I wanted to reach out and thank you for your support on my admin request. Even though it didn't end the way I wanted, I appreciate your support. --Elisfkc (talk) 02:29, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

User:Cyberbot IEdit

Hey Taivo,

This bot is malfunctioning and should not be in use right now. It has already been blocked on enwiki for the same thing. -- 1989 (talk) 11:45, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done I blocked Cyberbot I indefinitely as malfunctioning bot and notified its owner. Taivo (talk) 11:57, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


Taivo please Could you approve these images please?

Please--Qer44 (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

I have take upon myself to check this a little better. No conclusive evidence yet, though. I just looked at one picture. The Youtube website correctly states CC license, so far OK. But the same page also states "No se permite bajar videos de este canal, Copyright Dulce Osuna.". Means more or less "Not allowed to download from this channel". After searching I found a contact email, sent a question, now awaiting response. But so far it looks to me like a mistaken CC license. Have not looked at all pictures, if one is ok, the it is worth looking at the other. Note: A mexiacan television programme probably has lots of viewers, so the picture is clearly useful for Wikipedia/Commons. --Janwikifoto (talk) 21:10, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Solved. The reply came very quickly indeed. "so it must be a mistake, my editor sometimes uploads and forgets to change that part. I don't allow my videos to be downloaded and be uploaded on another youtube channel". Signed by Dulce Osuna, producer and journalist. So no CC license, and I would not approve the pictures to stay. I can forward the email if needed. --Janwikifoto (talk) 22:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
No need to do that, you are OTRS-member and I trust you. I'll delete them. Taivo (talk) 22:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, you are not OTRS-member, but I still believe you. I started to suspect problems with these files myself. Taivo (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
However, note that the uploader did the correct thing - assumed it was ok, because it did look ok. You should message the uploader what I wrote. --Janwikifoto (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
More of the same, probably to delete, search "Dulce Osuna Wikipedia" and you will find lots of pictures with the same (error) tagging. For example But I am not a deletionist, and I have no time for this. So somebody else can now take over. --Janwikifoto (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@Qer44: Hi Sol-lol. @Janwikifoto: it keeps your feet warm and was indefblocked. Guess? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:56, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Expert viewEdit

Taivo, expert, how can a collage like this be PD when every item in it is copyrighted to different authors? Please teach me. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

There is no different authors, but everyone of 8 photos is watermarked "© Cecile Bloch". And actually the photo isn't PD, but published under CC-BY. I reviewed the license. Taivo (talk) 07:52, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. The letters are so small, I could only device "copyright" at the beginning. :) Cheers. --E4024 (talk) 12:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Do you mean that Cecile Bloch probably waived the copyright, for publication in Pone journal? --Janwikifoto (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Your question goes to the expert, right? --E4024 (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I think so. The journal clearly states, that all materials published in it are CC-BY. No exceptions are stated. Cecile Bloch must know that, if she publishes something in it. Taivo (talk) 20:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
E4024> Ah yes I was unclear, but the question was for the expert, yes :-) And yes, his reply makes sense to me. So according to me (also) the copyright for this publication is CC-BY. However, Cecile might publish the same pictures elsewhere, under a different license. That is how I see it. Thanks for the clarification, --Janwikifoto (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

How was colombian law closed?Edit

Hello Taivo, I remember you from when you sent a message about my Charlotte-Perelli-picture used on estonian wiki. Now I need to understand a vandalism report by Patrick Rogel. You closed it with "other user wrong". However, I saw the changes actually in the law of colombia, and even Patrick Rogel stated that the changes where there. My question to you is, did you read the law? Or just the summaries that other people wrote? What did you base your decision on? Especially since it looks like Patrick Rogel himself states that he was wrong, and the other user correct. I did not read all the law, but in what I read, I found what the other user had written. I read the spanish version, not an english summary. I am not complaining, just curious. --Janwikifoto (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

As much as I remember, Patrick nominated some images uploaded by Yurilizarazu for deletion and they got deleted. Then Yurilizarazu created undeletion requests for his/her deleted files and they got oppose votes from other admins. As of today, none of them were restored. Also I nominated Yurilizarazu's last remaining upload for regular deletion (the request is still open). Under such circumstances, I considered Yurilizarazu's complaints against Patrick disruptive and I blocked him for a week. The block is now expired. The block was not related with law of Colombia and I did not read Colombian law. In my opinion the Colombian law wasn't even mentioned in Yurilizarazu's request. Taivo (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Need helpEdit

Hi Taivo, I need help because this guy @Patrick Rogel: is removing the photos that I upload to Commons, like in this [[File:Maria Teresa Belandria.jpg]] and that is a photo of the U.S Department of Defence. He is just removing my photos because he want. --Enmanuel2307 (talk) 00:13, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

  Done @Enmanuel2307: This was a difficult problem and I thought 2 days, but at last I decided to pass the image. Taivo (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Reordering of categoriesEdit

Hi, is there a specific reason why, when you add some categories, you also reorder the existing ones? It makes it harder to tell from the diff what you actually changed, so if there is no reason for it, it would be nicer if you didn't do that. It's obviously not a big deal, I just wanted to make you aware of it. Tokfo (talk) 18:07, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

 OK Taivo (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Valencian languageEdit

Why did You delete category Valencian language?  Bojan  Talk  03:49, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

I repeat: incorrectly named) duplicate, content moved to Category:Valencià. Taivo (talk) 08:08, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files of NikkittossEdit

Do you have nothing more to do? What kind of unproven removal? Return as it was. This is not one day of my labors.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikkittoss (talk • contribs) 06:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
No, I had nothing more to do. The removal was quite proven. It is provenly illegal to restore files in first group, because they violated sculptors' copyright. For second group there are serious suspicions, that they are not your own photos. For example, many of them were taken from a website and I am not sure, that you have right to publish them without website permission. But if you really photographed the shots in second group, then please open OTRS page and look, what kind of e-mail should be sent to our permissions department in If you are really copyright holder of some of these files, then the files can be restored. Со мной можно говорить и по-русски. Taivo (talk) 08:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


Hi. What do you think about the "Russian bride" images uploaded by User:Anastasiaka? I have a suspicion like these being pictures used in "Find a blond wife" pages. (Don't ask me how I came to know the existence of them pages. :-) --E4024 (talk) 15:53, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't know ... You can nominate them all for deletion as likely copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 16:02, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Auto bricks machineEdit

Hello, my friend. Would you please take a look at file:Auto bricks making machine 01.jpeg? If the description says shot in Hainan, then I own the photo and Facebook took it. Thank you so much. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:31, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Others in the group:1 2 3

Note that the filenames are not quite something I'd pick, but the 01 02 03 are. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Numbered files had description "This machine is manufactured in China and supplied by China Bangla Engineers & Consultants Ltd., Bangladesh. Auto bricks machine in Bangladesh." Unnumbered file had description "Automatic clay bricks manufacturing plant provided by China Bangla Engineers & Consultants Ltd., Bangladesh." The files did not look at all like own work, but like taken from promotional catalogue. Taivo (talk) 07:39, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Ah understood. Okay, thanks. I must have gotten them from somewhere that said they were free. My apologies for believing them. Thanks for the deletes. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


Hi Taivo, my recent edit was a mistake, I am sorry about this. I'm not sure how this did happen. Thanks for reverting. Regards, --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 09:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Category:Blues BassistsEdit

I see that you deleted this category and that it was effectively replaced with Category:Blues bass guitarists. I just left a message to this effect with Synthwave.94, but I'll repeat it here. I'm to understand that a bass guitar is the same instrument that is normally called an electric bass and that a standup bass or double bass is a different instrument. The replacement category contained Willie Dixon, who to the best of my knowledge never played electric bass. So are we misidentifying things here and should still have a category for blues bassists as a parent category of bass guitarists instead of the arrangement you created?RadioKAOS (talk) 22:53, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

  Comment Sorry, I do not know anything about music and I have not heard about Willie Dixon. I deleted the category, because it was nominated for speedy deletion, it was empty and had obviously incorrect name ("bassists" should have small b). Do as you want, but please write "bass" or "bassists" with b, not with B. Taivo (talk) 07:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Two Deletion Request can be closedEdit

Hello Taivo, I wanted to ask you, if you could delete these two files: Commons:Deletion requests/File:3-dimetilammino-propenetiale.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sodium hydrosulfide.png. They are open since 8 days now and I think their is no argument against deleting it! Thanks in advance, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 16:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

  This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of file GIEC report graph 1 - portuguese.pngEdit


I'm sorry to see you deleted the file

I knew it's not under the correct copyright to be uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, but as explained in the file description I wanted to upload it first before asking for permission to IPCC.

Can you point me to the procedure to ask for permission to IPCC to have this graph on Commons ?

Thanks --Effco (talk) 08:31, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Please open COM:OTRS page and look, what kind of e-mail should be sent to our permissions department at After the permission is received and processed, the files can be restored. Taivo (talk) 08:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok, I'm gonna do that. Would you allow me to temporarily re-uploaded the file on my own workspace to display it on my homepage so that I can show IPCC what will be the look of the image on wikimedia commons as I translated it in Portuguese ? --Effco (talk) 09:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
No, such thing as "file on my own workspace" does not exist. Every file in Commons can be used everywhere. Taivo (talk) 09:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok thanks. One last question. Since the image is my own translation in Portuguese of the original IPCC image, can I upload it on Commons as my own work, then ask permission to IPCC ? --Effco (talk) 10:21, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
No, it would be derivative work of copyrighted image. Taivo (talk) 10:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Gee that's tough. So how people translating images generally do to upload their files in commons ? --Effco (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
At first, the source image must be in Commons under free license. After that you can translate it, crop it and so on. If source image is not in Commons, then you must start from obtaining OTRS-permission. For example, you can upload the translated image into own website under license "All rights reserved" and then ask from copyright holder "Do you agree to publish the file under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license?" Sometimes copyright holder doesn't agree, then there's nothing to do. Taivo (talk) 10:37, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


Äkki kustutad selle. Kasutaja pani sama faili topelt üles, kuna üks läks vale nimega (lingitu). Kruusamägi (talk) 14:49, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Come closerEdit

Hi Taivo. I thought I saw there a horse. :) Was it another animal? Really, tell me, I have a great curiosity now... --E4024 (talk) 22:13, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I did not see there any animal. Really. Taivo (talk) 22:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
After taking a second look, I saw horse head. Sorry. But quality was not good. Taivo (talk) 22:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


Hi, deleting this file has broken many pages that used it as a placeholder. E.g. CommonsDelinker erased it from de:Portal:Sizilien/Bild des Monats/Archiv, before after. What was wrong here? --Sitacuisses (talk) 22:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

  Done At moment it seems, that this was my error. I restored the file. Taivo (talk) 22:21, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Taivo".