Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.


Deutsch | English | français | magyar | македонски | +/−

Uncategorized ‡ unidentifiedEdit

Hi Tm. As regards your 2018-11-28 move from Category:Uncategorized images of waterfalls to Category:Unidentified waterfalls, you caused a bit chaos in the target category. "Unidentified waterfalls" is a category for images of waterfalls, which are not identified, i.e. they were checked by an experienced user and still failed to determine which waterfall is in the picture. If the image contains a clear location and/or the name or specification of the waterfall in the file name or description, then it is certainly not an unidentified waterfall, but only a waterfall to be categorized. Such unsorted content usually remains in the main category until someone processes it. --ŠJů (talk) 03:31, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

User:ŠJů  Perhaps an inbox should be more clearly labeled, such as "Waterfalls to be categorized" with the unidentified as a subcat. Jim.henderson (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2021 (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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, -Killarnee (CTU) 19:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Austin (40313662583).jpgEdit

 
File:Austin (40313662583).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!

Howhontanozaz (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Yellow tram (6099010962).jpgEdit

 
File:Yellow tram (6099010962).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!

-- Tuválkin 12:26, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Konstantino (21004630236).jpgEdit

 
File:Konstantino (21004630236).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!

Pibwl (talk) 19:39, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Little Caprice Villa Roma 2015.pngEdit

Hi. Thanks very much for commenting at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Little Caprice Villa Roma 2015.png. May I just ask where exactly is the CC-BY 3.0 mentioned? I cannot see it anywhere. Thanks. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 12:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


File:Marilyn Monroe Lexington Subway Image (14551832204).jpgEdit

 
File:Marilyn Monroe Lexington Subway Image (14551832204).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!

Ytoyoda (talk) 15:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Public Domain MarkEdit

Hey. Could you always make sure to delete the warning template when you upload a file that is Public Domain Mark from Flickr? Example at File:President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and Vice President Kamala Harris participated in a Presidential Armed Forces Full Honors Wreath-Laying Ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery (50856929253).jpg. Otherwise the image gets deleted after a week. I fixed some of the inauguration images (from the South Carolina National Guard) but I'd appreciate it if you do the rest. Kingofthedead (talk) 22:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Also note if you were planning to get around to that later on then my apologies. Just wanted to point it out in case you missed it. Kingofthedead (talk) 22:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Duplicates MaeyaertEdit

Dear Tm, Can you tell me why you are reverting my duplication tags on photographs by User:TMRMaeyaert. See discussions here and here. I am deduplicating thousands of images, saving highres and transporting useful descriptions. Vysotsky (talk) 12:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Will you deduplicate the ones that were exact duplicates? Vysotsky (talk) 13:29, 21 January 2021 (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.

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:


Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Aren't protests a type of demonstration?Edit

Is it really necessary to distinguish protests from demonstrations within category names that cover them both? It is my understanding that protests are a kind of demonstration (w:en:Protest article agrees). We can always have additional subcategories to distinguish generic demonstrations from ceremonies, rallies, boycotts, and protests, but a single, all-encompassing term seems preferable to "demonstrations and protests", which leads to unnecessarily long category names that are difficult to read and maintain. –Iketsi (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

  Comment See Category talk:Protests and all categories are "Demonstrations and protests....". Tm (talk) 22:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. –Iketsi (talk) 13:19, 28 January 2021 (UTC)


COM:AN#Categorization_activity_of_User:TmEdit

Deutsch  English  español  français  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  português  sicilianu  svenska  Tagalog  македонски  русский  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  +/−


 
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at COM:AN#Categorization_activity_of_User:Tm. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
--Túrelio (talk) 16:21, 28 January 2021 (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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Abzeronow (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2021 (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.

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:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 09:00, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:An ATA-trained bomb tech with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau uses a nonlinear junction detector to scan for components of a detonated IED at a blast site in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128090038).jpgEdit

 
File:An ATA-trained bomb tech with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau uses a nonlinear junction detector to scan for components of a detonated IED at a blast site in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128090038).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Not a US federal work; descrition includes "Photo courtesy of Royal Thai Police"
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  Bahasa Melayu  Bahasa Indonesia  azərbaycanca  British English  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  norsk bokmål  română  Lëtzebuergesch  español  português  English  hrvatski  Plattdüütsch  français  Nederlands  norsk  Malti  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:ATA-trained Thai investigators, bomb techs, and forensic science officers examine circuitry of an IED via a video camera attached to an x-ray device in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128578491).jpgEdit

 
File:ATA-trained Thai investigators, bomb techs, and forensic science officers examine circuitry of an IED via a video camera attached to an x-ray device in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128578491).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added has been deleted. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Not a US federal work; descrition includes "Photo courtesy of Royal Thai Police"
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  Bahasa Melayu  Bahasa Indonesia  azərbaycanca  British English  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  norsk bokmål  română  Lëtzebuergesch  español  português  English  hrvatski  Plattdüütsch  français  Nederlands  norsk  Malti  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:ATA-trained bomb techs with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau collect evidence after rendering safe an IED outside the Royal Thai Police headquarters in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128762997).jpgEdit

 
File:ATA-trained bomb techs with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau collect evidence after rendering safe an IED outside the Royal Thai Police headquarters in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128762997).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, you may replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Not a US federal work; descrition includes "Photo courtesy of Royal Thai Police"
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  Bahasa Melayu  Bahasa Indonesia  azərbaycanca  British English  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  norsk bokmål  română  Lëtzebuergesch  español  português  English  hrvatski  Plattdüütsch  français  Nederlands  norsk  Malti  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:ATA-trained bomb techs with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau collect evidence after rendering safe an IED outside the Royal Thai Police headquarters in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128762997).jpgEdit

 
File:ATA-trained bomb techs with the Royal Thai Police Metropolitan Police Bureau collect evidence after rendering safe an IED outside the Royal Thai Police headquarters in Bangkok on August 2, 2019. (49128762997).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!

Andy Dingley (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Why are you canceling my changes?Edit

Hi. You have already undone my changes many times, without writing a reason. If you think that I degrade the quality of images, compare my and the previous version. Either there will be no difference, or my version is better. Modern compression and optimization algorithms allow you to compress the image to 50-70% without loss of quality. I also use AI before compressing, because of this, my versions of images are even clearer and more detailed than the originals, with a smaller size.--Ratmanz (talk) 18:10, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

  Comment@Ratmanz: Your compressions are not an improvement to these images and in all cases your compression are unnecessary and with loss of quality, losing of exif, etc Tm (talk) 19:37, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
  • How did you determine that there was a loss of quality? So when I look at different versions of images, I see a difference in favor of my version. Here is an example https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sterling_Armament_AR-180.JPG. Open different versions of both versions of the images and see the difference. Just do not confuse where whose version is.--Ratmanz (talk) 17:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Unnecessary and not lossless sharpening, lost EXIF data, as said by others in Commons:Village_pump#Good_idea. Please stop what you are doing because your edits do make images loss quality, you do not know servers handle images [User_talk:Ratmanz#"optimized"_versions and also as you have stated you "not know what "exif data" is"]. Tm (talk) 18:03, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
I checked which exif data "disappeared", using the example of the Hitchcock image and the AR-18. Either nothing is missing, or there are no references to the color format. Although, for example, up to less Exif data https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hitchcock,_Alfred_02.jpg they were almost empty. But something that is constantly changing. --Ratmanz (talk) 19:00, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Why did you roll back the version Путь героя.jpg?Edit

I am the author of this image. I have the source file from procreate. As an author, I decided to store a compressed file.--Ratmanz (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

No, you are not the author. You only created an translated version of a public domain image File:Heroesjourney.svg, and your translation and modifications are without sufficient creative input to claim to be the "author" of the file. Even the commons original File:Heroesjourney.svg is im itself a derivative of other older works. So you can only claim to have created an third-generation derivative work of an second-generation adaptation of other original works. Tm (talk) 18:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
  • My image has a different style, different colors, a different arrangement of symbols, a different concept. In fact, we are talking about two different images. If there was only a translation, it would be a version of the same image, but they are significantly different. So this is a different image, and I'm the author of it. --Ratmanz (talk) 18:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Yo, plebeyo (1242282060).jpgEdit

 
File:Yo, plebeyo (1242282060).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!

Aitorembe (talk) 15:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Yo, plebeyo (1242282060).jpgEdit

 
File:Yo, plebeyo (1242282060).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!

Aitorembe (talk) 15:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Yo, renacentista (228138052).jpgEdit

 
File:Yo, renacentista (228138052).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!

Aitorembe (talk) 15:46, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

File:La Virgulilla (1242285000).jpgEdit

 
File:La Virgulilla (1242285000).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!

Aitorembe (talk) 15:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

File:La Virgulilla (228138053).jpgEdit

 
File:La Virgulilla (228138053).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!

Aitorembe (talk) 15:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Map editsEdit

I'm very confused by your edits on File:1857 Map of the town of Sandwich, Barnstable County, Mass. (6094146242).jpg, in which you:

  • Re-added a license that is both completely false – the BPL does not own the copyright of the map and cannot release it under a CC license – and was never even claimed for the current size of the file. Sweat of the brow has been explicitly rejected in US caselaw, and is irrelevant for files like this that were published in the US, which is why {{PD-scan}} is used.
  • Re-added links and categories pertaining to flickr. The larger size of the file is only available on the BPL website, not on flickr - why would we direct users toward an inferior version?
  • Re-added the flickr number - which is, again, associated only with the smaller version of the image and not the version that users actually see - to the file name
  • Re-added a non-permanent link in the file description that duplicates the permalink used in the source field
  • Re-added the internal call number, which is only used to catalogue the physical map in closed stacks and is unlikely to be useful to anyone viewing the scanned map
  • Replaced Category:1857 maps of Massachusetts with Category:1857 maps, a less specific category
  • Removed Category:Old maps of Massachusetts from the Norman B. Leventhal Map Center, a valid and useful category

None of these changes are useful to users, who want high-resolution maps with clear and concise descriptions and correct licenses. Can you please explain why you found these changes necessary, and link to the discussions that you claim support them? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I´am not going to repeat, reexplain, rewrite again what i and others said to you last September, if you did not\do not care no read then or now. The last discussions are easy to find, so go read again the answers to your questions above. Tm (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
The only discussion was about removing flickr IDs from filename, in which files overwritten from non-flickr sources were generally agreed as acceptable to rename. None of the other changes you made have been the subject of any discussions. I find it difficult to believe that you are making these changes in honest belief that they improve the experience for the user, rather than as an effort to revert my changes. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
No it wasnt. Or do you not remember what was said, besides this talkpage or other discussions, the main one in Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2020/09#Removing_reference_and_identification_numbers_from_file_names_set_by_their_uploader where there were 10 against moves like yours and only one in favour of moves like yours. So given that, and what you wrote about my actions, i now find difficult to believe that your making, again, this moves in good faith. So, please, you can of course overwrite the flickr uploads with the BLP site versions and link to that, but, as stated do not remove call numbers, dimensions, publishers, author, scale, collections, like you remove in other maps from flickr of from the Library of Congress or any other original flickr info. Tm (talk) 00:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
There was no objection to Removing ID numbers when they become meaningless, such as when the original source rather than a flickr reupload is used. This file is a perfect example of an ID number that has become meaningless.
In the diff you linked, I provided a useful description of the file contents, moved the source link to the proper section, corrected the license, and added several categories. The only information I removed was LOC internal catalogue information (completely irrelevant to Commons users), and location / subject information already in the title, description, and categories. How is that a problem?
If you insist on making edits like this, please take the time to remove duplicate information and make the result easily readable. Adding Date: c1886. when the description that already starts Circa-1886 and the date field contains {{circa|1886}} is not helpful. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes there was several objections. Where do you read your removals are fine? To the question "In all of these projects, the reference number in the filename is unique, easy to verify and makes automatic double-checking for possible duplicates very low processing demand for API requests, or similar access times, for future "refreshes" or new upload projects. Were the information removed and buried in the image page wikitext or (worse) hidden in structured data, then the complexity of queries, the lags for data exchanges, and most importantly human programming time goes up significantly.", do you know what was answered. A clear contrary to what you claim now in here.
Phrases like, "Such metadata should not be removed from file names", "the harmonization and logic of the filenames is very important, both for the consistency of certain image sets, for potential maintenance, and very important for potentially being able to complete uploads when the external sources are updated or when the upload is done in several part for various reasons", "photos (...) uploaded from the University of Washington Libraries (...). About one in 15 needs renaming; we never mess with this part.", "the main atribute of a file name is that it needs to be unique foreign identifiers added to filenames", "as a default position for batch uploads. I like how I can tell by a glance at the filename that a cluster of files is part of the same upload project.", "Dateinamen sollten tabu sein.Informationen über das Abgebildete können in der Beschreibung und in Kategorien untergebracht werden.", " per many above. Also, it can be helpful to have the ID in the filename when curious non-Admins are discussing a deleted file", "per o.p., per most of the above, and also per the basic spirit of COM:FR", "Sometimes it is the only way I can connect an image back to the original source to get more details", " But there is nothing wrong with (also) using them in the file name. As long as the file name still has a descriptive component (like the examples above), I would consider removing an ID as a violation of COM:FNC and COM:FRNOT.", are clearly against your supposed.
And i´am merely readding basic information that you deleted (besides deleting the flickr id and the original names of this maps and inventing a new one), deleting author information (and many times putting the publisher as author), deleting publisher info, deleting scale and dimensions, deleting call numbers, etc. so it was not me that made a mess of these filepages. Tm (talk) 00:56, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Gilets jaunes Party (50684008141).jpgEdit

 
File:Gilets jaunes Party (50684008141).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 06:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Occupy Graham 2021-01-15-3 (50839794361).jpgEdit

 
File:Occupy Graham 2021-01-15-3 (50839794361).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2021 (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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, — Draceane talkcontrib. 18:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Lisbon categoriesEdit

Thanks for recategorizing my files related to the transport in Lisbon. I wanted to do it, but you have done it while I have had to leave my PC. :-) — Draceane talkcontrib. 20:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

File:A giant rabbit statue wearing a medical face mask in Minneapolis, Minnesota (49692426881).jpgEdit

 
File:A giant rabbit statue wearing a medical face mask in Minneapolis, Minnesota (49692426881).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!

Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 00:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

ReversõesEdit

Por que continua fazendo reversões na descrição do arquivo "File:Plenário do Senado (22556424336).jpg"? Deixei todos dados mais centralizados na caixa de informação. Qual o problema nisso? Mr White 18:47, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Para começar, flickr review e origem (source) não são a mesma coisa, o autor não o que adicionou, permissão não é necessariamente o mesmo que licença, etc. Tm (talk) 18:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Claro que é, está escrito "Esta imagem foi originalmente carregada no Flickr por Senado Federal em https://flickr.com/photos/49143546@N06/22556424336" com link e tudo. Como isso não indica a fonte? E o remover o nome do fotógrafo do campo "autor" faz com que não apareça quando a imagem é utilizada em sites móveis (além de ser contra a licença, que pede a atribuição). Mr White 19:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Nos sites móveis aparece exactamente a mesma informação e como disse a origem não é a mesma coisa que o flickr review, falando eu como um dos revisores de imagens). Tm (talk) 19:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
A informação é redundante, aparece duas vezes. Sobre o autor, aqui um print para ilustrar o que quero dizer. https://imgur.com/a/xsP0MDt Mr White 19:27, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Não é redundante como já disse e a página que mostra não é desta foto, como bem sabe, e que o mesmo formato dessa mesma página só aparece nas fotos que estão em artigos das várias Wikipedias e que se pode clicar em "detalhes". Tm (talk) 19:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Não é dessa foto e não falei que era, estava apenas ilustrando a situação. O ponto é que o nome do fotógrafo não aparecerá no lugar que deveria. A imagem pede atribuição e a atribuição de autor correta é "Geraldo Magela/Agência Senado" e não "Senado Federal", como você colocou. Manter essa informação no campo "descrição" é um erro. Quanto a redundância de repetir duas vezes a mesma informação de formas diferentes, podemos concordar em discordar. Mr White 20:05, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
E a atribuição já está feita, Mr White apenas mudou a mesma de lugar e o nome aparece no lugar que deveria como se vê em https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Plen%C3%A1rio_do_Senado_(22556424336).jpg. Tm (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
O parâmetro "author" serve para mostrar o nome do autor sem ter que abrir a descrição completa. Deixá-lo escondido na descrição não é o ideal. Parece que está a fazer birra por um detalhe só para não admitir que está errado. Mr White 20:37, 18 February 2021 (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.

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:


Yours sincerely, Larryasou (talk) 10:47, 21 February 2021 (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.

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:


Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Crowded SpainEdit

Thanks for your help. :-) Anna (Cookie) (talk) 20:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

File:09SERIES dellsGoldLogo 02.jpgEdit

 
File:09SERIES dellsGoldLogo 02.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!

Glorious 93 (talk) 14:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

MOTD NotificationEdit

A file you uploaded is on the main page!

File:Alto Minho (50793085131).gif, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

 

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

My bad in PDM file deletionEdit

Hello Tm, this is to apogize for my oversights in deleting your PDM uploads qualifying as owner marked. Please let me know if you need me to do something to correct them. — Racconish💬 15:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Readd the proper categories that were lost in the deletions. Also, some of the images could be copyright violations as seen in some exif of the files, like File:Yellow tram (6099010962).jpg. Please leave the provisional Category:Portugal to check as i will review the exif to find doubtful authorship and possible others copyright violations. Tm (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@Racconish: We all can make mistakes and it is good and i commend you that you recognize this mistake. Also thanks for your readdiction of categories and no harm done. Cheers. Tm (talk) 15:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I leave it there for the time being, but please let me know if you need anything else for these files. — Racconish💬 15:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@Racconish: Please continue to add the categories that were present in the first uploads, as some took me some time to research. Thanks. Tm (talk) 15:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
  Done with renewed apologies. — Racconish💬 16:44, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
  Comment Thank you again. Tm (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Informal meeting of justice and home affairs ministers Etienne Schneider (35369403830).jpgEdit

 
File:Informal meeting of justice and home affairs ministers Etienne Schneider (35369403830).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 08:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Informal meeting of justice and home affairs ministers. Tour de table Tour de table and the round table (35711283936).jpgEdit

 
File:Informal meeting of justice and home affairs ministers. Tour de table Tour de table and the round table (35711283936).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!

A1Cafel (talk) 08:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

19170704 Riot on Nevsky prosp Petrograd.jpgEdit

Hallo Tm, why did you revert my restoration? The resrictions of COM:Overwrite applies not, since the first two versions (the original picture) was without useless framing for more than 10 years! For the articles we need images without framing and i've also upload the framed version for other reasons. Regards --Ras67 (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Previous reverts of recategorized overcat files in LisbonEdit

Hey, I was just cleaning up overcat files in Lisbon that are also in Night in Lisbon and noticed that you had reverted such changes in the past. What is the rationale behind it? Do you plan on further mass categorizing these files into different subcategories before removing them from the Lisbon category later on? —Iketsi (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Question about renamesEdit

Hi Tm, why are you re-adding the random postfixes to file titles? The edit summaries are blank, so I am having trouble determining why this was moved per FNC? Example: File:Taylor Swift - The 1989 World Tour - Ford Field 003 (18304749635).jpg --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Heart Eyes or U+1F60D (35557896110).jpgEdit

 
File:Heart Eyes or U+1F60D (35557896110).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!

Douuwwurunwuuzhe 16:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

DubteEdit

@Tm: Bona tarda, Tm. Tinc un dubte. Veuràs, sense entrar en controvèrsies sobre qui fa millor la seva feina, m'agradaria saber perquè reverteixes la imatge File:Meg Myers 9-18-2014 -14 (15309001791).jpg que havia restaurat i la substitueixes per la teva. A mi em sembla que he fet prou bé la feina i de fet és la primera vegada en més de deu anys que algú substitueix la seva per la meva tot adduint que ell ha fet millor l'eliminació de la marca d'aigua. Ja et dic que no m'importa gaire, ja que si és millor la teva, doncs endavant, però m'agradaria saber quin és el defecte que li trobes a la meva per no tornar-lo a repetir. Atentament. --Edithsme (talk) 16:41, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

@Tm:
Buenas tardes Tm, puede que no hayas recibido mi primer mensaje o tal vez es que no entiendas el catalán y es por eso que he decidido reenviártelo en castellano y también en inglés (este idioma no lo domino mucho) y así quizá sí que podrás contestar la mi pregunta con más comodidad. Atentamente Tengo una duda. Verás, sin entrar en controversias sobre quién hace mejor su trabajo, me gustaría saber porque reviertes la imagen File:Meg Myers 9-18-2014 -14 (15309001791).jpg que yo había restaurado y la sustituyes por la tuya. A mí me parece que he hecho bastante bien el trabajo y de hecho es la primera vez en más de diez años que alguien sustituye la suya por la mía con la excusa de que él ha hecho mejor la eliminación de la marca de agua. Ya te digo que no me importa mucho quien hace mejor su trabajo, pero en este caso no le veo la diferencia, ya que si fuera mejor la tuya no pondría ninguna objeción, pero me gustaría saber cuál es el defecto que le encuentras a mi versión para no volverlo a repetir. Atentamente.--Edithsme (talk) 15:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tm:
Good afternoon Tm, you may not have received my first message or maybe it is that you do not understand Catalan and that is why I have decided to forward it to you in Spanish and also in English (I am not very fluent in this language) and so maybe you will be able to answer my question more comfortably. Sincerely I have a question. You see, without getting into controversies about who does her job better, I would like to know why you reverse the image File:Meg Myers 9-18-2014 -14 (15309001791).jpg that I had restored and you replace it with yours. It seems to me that I have done the job quite well and in fact it is the first time in more than ten years that someone substitutes his for mine with the excuse that he has done better the removal of the watermark. I already tell you that I do not care much who does their job better, but in this case I do not see the difference, since if yours were better I would not object, but I would like to know what is the defect that you find in my version not to repeat it again. Sincerely.--Edithsme (talk) 15:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Counter-Strike (26415759641).jpgEdit

 
File:Counter-Strike (26415759641).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!

193.210.235.71 07:19, 29 March 2021 (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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Senator2029 13:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Deena Pierott- Managing While Other (15481882365).jpgEdit

 
File:Deena Pierott- Managing While Other (15481882365).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!

2601:601:1200:EF40:40A0:6CD8:6B02:ED62 04:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


File:Manifestation du 5 décembre 2019 (pour la défense des retraites) (49178097873).jpgEdit

 
File:Manifestation du 5 décembre 2019 (pour la défense des retraites) (49178097873).jpg has been marked for speedy deletion. A reason for the tagging has not been detected or none was placed.

Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now ! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : A1Cafel.

And also:

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 16:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Question about a user's licenseEdit

Hi Tm, I'm not experienced with commons, but there's this user User:Diascevasta who I think is uploading an edited file with no attribution from Flora-On's website which have a NonCommercial 4.0 license. Take a look at this image [1] and this one from Flora-On [2], or this one [3], and this one [4]. Is he allowed to do that without attributing the author? Average Portuguese Joe (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Average Portuguese Joe: Good catch that you made. First things, first. Commons does not accept licenses with a NonCommercial restriction (or licenses that forbide derivative works for that matter) as you can see Commons:Licensing. So, for starters, this files cant be uploaded to Commons for that reason alone.
But, also pretty bad is the uploading of other peoples work without proper attribution. Just for the sake of argument, lets say that User:Diascevasta had uploaded files with a Creative Commons license compatible with Wikimedia Commons, because of the license he has to attribute the authorship to the authors and not what he did by falsely claim that he is the author (even, for ethic reasons, with a CC Zero licenses, but that is lateral to the question in case).
The only excuse that this user could have is that he is the author of the files in Flora-On's website, but given that the two images that he stole images from Ana Júlia Pereira and Miguel Porto, two different persons, this is not possible.
What could be made is to open a deletion request or even, in a case clear case like this two speedy deletions on basis of blatant copyright violations. You can make this yourself or if you prefer i can make this. Hope this helps. Tm (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Flip photoEdit

Hi Tm, I am sure you know the ins and outs of how things are done here. Tell me, are we allowed to flip images for aesthetic purposes? In biographies we mostly use the photo of the subject on the right, but sometimes the person in the photo is facing outwards (out of the page), which looks odd. Please look at this one that you cropped and let me know if it is possible to flip it to face inwards. Thanks. Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 09:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Rui Gabriel Correia: Yes, given that any photo in Commons has an license that allows the creation of derivative works. Given that the file is in heavy use in several wikis and some could want that version i´ve already uploaded a flipped version in File:TOUR DE TABLE 2016-07-08 Informal Meeting of Justice Ministers (27553458143) (cropped) flipped left).jpg. Cheers. Tm (talk) 12:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Great stuff! Thanks a lot. Appreciated. Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 13:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Bell AH-1F Cobra 67-15826 Sky Soldiers Pass 02 TICO 16March2014 (14673157815).jpgEdit

 
File:Bell AH-1F Cobra 67-15826 Sky Soldiers Pass 02 TICO 16March2014 (14673157815).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!

FOX 52 (talk) 01:26, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

A photo that you uploaded is a candidate for Featured PictureEdit

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Freckles (14052401039).jpg

Here is the link. I liked that photo, so I proposed it. RAMSES$44932 (talk) 07:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

A photo that you uploaded is a candidate for Featured PictureEdit

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Freckles (14052401039).jpg

Here is the link. I liked the photo, so I proposed it. Apparently, I m not the only one. RAMSES$44932 (talk) 07:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Carly Rae Jepson-DSC 0191-10.20.12 (8107374853).jpgEdit

 
File:Carly Rae Jepson-DSC 0191-10.20.12 (8107374853).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, you may replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: copyright watermark, lower right corner
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  Bahasa Melayu  Bahasa Indonesia  azərbaycanca  British English  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  norsk bokmål  română  Lëtzebuergesch  español  português  English  hrvatski  Plattdüütsch  français  Nederlands  norsk  Malti  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Cabayi (talk) 07:37, 14 April 2021 (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.

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:


Yours sincerely, Anarchyte (work | talk) 17:57, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Category: maps and unidentified mapsEdit

Are there some specific reason for move again files in category Maps? Do you have identified any of them? --Ciaurlec (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Most part of this maps are clearly identified or very easily identifiable. Tm (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
But till now that they are surely unidendified; or do you see any other difference between the two categories? --Ciaurlec (talk) 02:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
"they are surely unidentified"???? Them they have names of locations or names of places depicted in the description, filename and\or categories "they are surely unidentified??????? Tm (talk) 02:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Calmo! You could even try to identify them one by one if you prefere, but till then "Esta categoria é uma categoria principal. "O máximo de imagens possível deve ser movido para a sub-categoria correcta. Se criou e/ou carregou, ou se sabe do que o conteúdo de um ficheiro de media nesta categoria trata, por favor coloque-o na sub-categoria correcta alterando-lhe a categoria." Please try to be collaborative, and respond me: which is the difference between the two categories in your opinion? I means that a file like [[File:Abbottella domingoensis dist map.png]] seems to me cleary identifiable, even if not again put in the right category. --Ciaurlec (talk) 02:41, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
And there are too a lot of file like File:Bay Meadows Areas of Interest.png that have some more specific categories...--Ciaurlec (talk) 02:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
"Which is the difference between the two categories in your opinion"? ~I answer to you, what is an unidentified object? Tm (talk) 02:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I think Category:Unidentified maps means that the maps there need to be assigned Commons categories, not that they are unidentifiable. The category header says "This category contains unidentified, unclassified, unknown or mislabelled maps. We would value your expertise to identify these media and find their rightful places in the appropriate category structure.", and Category:Maps describes the Unidentified set as "maps needing categories".

(The two categories actually seem somewhat interchangeable in practice, Category:Unidentified maps noting "See also: Category:Maps, where some authors like to put their maps unsorted: please tidy up".)

If you glance at an Unidentified Map and can see that it's clearly London, you should recategorise it as Category:Maps of London rather than Category:Maps. --Lord Belbury (talk) 08:46, 20 April 2021 (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.

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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (18) (42383500400).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (18) (42383500400).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!

JopkeB (talk) 08:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (11) (30324098098).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (11) (30324098098).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!

JopkeB (talk) 08:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (20) (42383499620).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (20) (42383499620).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!

JopkeB (talk) 08:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (22) (42383498750).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (22) (42383498750).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!

JopkeB (talk) 08:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (26) (42383497440).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (26) (42383497440).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!

JopkeB (talk) 08:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (27) (43285361165).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (27) (43285361165).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!

JopkeB (talk) 08:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (41) (44143064732).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (41) (44143064732).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!

JopkeB (talk) 09:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (42) (44143064092).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (42) (44143064092).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!

JopkeB (talk) 09:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (45) (42383492990).jpgEdit

 
File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (45) (42383492990).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!

JopkeB (talk) 09:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Don't edit warEdit

Please do not edit war as you have done here. The user is perfectly entitled to nominate the file for speedy deletion. If you don't like the nomination, reverting their edit once (let alone multiple times) is acting against the community spirit. There is a clear process and YOU are expected to use it. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Please enlight me in how his constant attempts to remove valid names is backed up by Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Category. None of this are empty and useless or wrong names. Tm (talk) 00:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Wrong answer, you are not listening. The person is entitled to make a nomination. If you don't think that the speedy nomination is correct then you convert it to a discussion. That is the agreed process.

I am not here to make a determination about the rightness or wrongness of a name, that is the purpose of a deletion discussion. I am solely here to tell you that you are acting outside of community expectations. I expect you to follow the agreed and expressed policy and guidance of Commons, and not edit war.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Even in this case, when there are several sources that backup this names and the same user is trying for more than a year trying to delete valid names or facts, even then are we expected to follow strict rules, when you have someone that is gaming the system? Lets just hope that a malicious and cunning vandal doesnt discover this and makes a long con and starts gaming the system and starts nominating to speedy deletion several categories and all you can do is took this to DR because there is a process that can be gamed? Lovely to now.Tm (talk) 01:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
You are not listening, and you are being argumentative. I am not judging the naming, that is guided by Commons:Naming categories and Commons:Category redirects and someone will review it; that is the agreed process of the community. You are not following the agreed process of the community. If the community thinks that someone is gaming the process then the community can deal with it, by instructing administrators to manage it or by changing the process. At the moment, YOU are the one gaming the process by reverting rather than converting a speedy nom to a standard deletion request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Fix sigEdit

Would also be so kind to fix the code of your signature. Try putting the span on the outside of the talk like

[[User:Tm|Tm]] (<span class="signature-talk">[[User talk:Tm#top|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]</span>)

Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: I dont think that the problem is the signature code, as others signatures and templates are broken, but a years long problem that after a certain size all templates, signatures, etc in talkpages break i.e. a problem not under mine control
You are correct, you have exceeded the number of allowed templates. Try archiving, see Commons:Talk page guidelines#Archiving, it can be automated by size or by date.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:01, 29 April 2021 (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.

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:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 02:36, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Web Summit 2018 - CryptoConf - Day 3, November 8 DF1 3011 (30842360147).jpgEdit

 
File:Web Summit 2018 - CryptoConf - Day 3, November 8 DF1 3011 (30842360147).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, you may replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Photographer & copyright holder = David Fitzgerald Sportsfile; so for clearly not an own work of: "DF1_3011 , Web Summit"
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  Bahasa Melayu  Bahasa Indonesia  azərbaycanca  British English  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  norsk bokmål  română  Lëtzebuergesch  español  português  English  hrvatski  Plattdüütsch  français  Nederlands  norsk  Malti  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

LexICon (talk) 00:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Web Summit 2018 - CryptoConf - Day 3, November 8 DF1 3011 (30842360147).jpgEdit

 
File:Web Summit 2018 - CryptoConf - Day 3, November 8 DF1 3011 (30842360147).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!

Vera (talk) 06:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Carol Conka (25837033244).jpgEdit

 
File:Carol Conka (25837033244).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!

Épico (talk)/(contribs) 00:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)