Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Yann

CFD for Category:Unused personal files

Wrongly Marked Photo for possible copyright infringement

This tourist map of Kannur (a district in Kerala) have been created by me as part of my academic module on cartography. I have created this map from scratch.

I intend to make similar maps for all the districts of Kerala. I also intend to make minor corrections and add more details in the uploaded map of Kannur.

Do consider the same and pull back the copyright infringement claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arogon05 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

File:International Festival of Queer Culture 2009 (2).jpg

No permission? I remember that the organization gave OTRS --Терпр (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Терпр, Do you have a ticket number? Regards, Yann (talk) 05:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
No, but I remember how the organizing committee of the festival sent you these pictures with a license. Regards, --Терпр (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Copyright violations by User:7partparadigm regarding Congressional maps

I noticed you posted a warning over a year ago on User_talk:7partparadigm#Congressional_maps regarding potential violations of copyright in his uploading of congressional district maps. I agree that these are violations. He has tagged them as public domain as work of the U.S. Department of Interior, even though his main source [1] clearly indicates these are copyrighted. That page clearly states its preferred method of citation, which he did not use. I question whether the majority of the sources used to create these files fall under public domain, since two of them are copyrighted books (Martis and Parsons). The National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS) is an entity at the University of Minnesota, and the Atlas of Historical County Boundaries is property of the Newberry library. The raw county data is available under a CC-BY-NC-SA non-commercial license, and therefore not are eligible for inclusion on Wikipedia absence approval from the entities.

I believe this data and the maps are a welcome and important addition to Wikipedia, and one that I've been working on for many years, but without a clear source that fits Wikipedia's license, I have been reluctant to upload any of the images I've created. This user went about it the wrong way. Short of posting violations on every single one of his images, do you have any suggestions on how to remedy this situation? The user has not been active since late 2017.

I've cross-posted a link to this on the user page in question to encourage him/her to participate in this discussion. Dcmacnut (talk) 20:48, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dcmacnut,
Thanks for looking into this. It is a quite complex issue, so it should be brought to COM:VPC. I have no idea what solution there could be anyway. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


Bonjour, ta license ne correspond pas [2] Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour Christian, Merci, c'est corrigé. On ne peut pas définir la licence quand on importe sur YT avec un smartphone, il faut le faire après coup. :( Je croyais l'avoir changée. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
ok license confirmée, et merci pour la vidéo! Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Please notice, that some files look like this: [3], [4], [5]. I have made inquiries in National Gallery in Prague and learned, that hundreds of very low quality photographs were uploaded by (pirate) bot. National Gallery requests to delete all files uploaded by NGCZ.--NoJin (talk) 17:30, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi NoJin,
Corrupt files can be deleted, but Commons does not recognize the claim by the National Gallery, which does not own the copyright of these paintings anyway. There is no "pirate" bot. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brookfield Junction Depot.jpg

I urge you to reconsider your close of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brookfield Junction Depot.jpg. There is no evidence that the image was published before 1923, and thus {{PD-1923}} is not applicable. Thanks, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Pi.1415926535,
There is either no evidence that it was not published before 1923 (as if it would have come from a personal archive). Claiming that it was not published is way beyond "suspicious doubt" required for copyright violations. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:21, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I missed that you corrected the date from 1922 to the 1890s. 1890s makes it much more likely that it was either published before 1923. Sorry for missing that! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Coreus marginatus01.jpg

Hi, I very much disagree with the closure of this deletion request. We have no proof the image was uploaded with email permission; it was apparently uploaded to a website but there are no archived versions that prove it. It doesn't fall under grandfathering because of this, either. I urge you to reconsider. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:04, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

It was uploaded in 2006. Move on. Yann (talk) 06:07, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Anarchyte, DRs are not votes. You need to find another hobby that creating useless DRs (and I notice that it is not the first time you do that). Do not reopen closed DRs without a new reason, or you might be reported and/or blocked. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Of course DRs are not votes, I never said so. It is not useless to create DRs for files that do not have proper licensing because that's what DRs are for. Also, I followed the way to appeal a decision to the letter. I contacted the closing admin (you) with a polite message asking you to reconsider, you declined, so I opened a new one with clarification and new information. Additionally, would you be able to guide me to DRs I've opened where I have failed to provide adequate reasoning (not ones that have been closed as keep because consensus was against my nom)? I'm fine with seeking an external opinion at ANU if need-be. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Horthy Miklós (1).jpg

Why did you write that no valid reason for deletion? It is not true. The author was alive in 1940. In 1944 very likely he was still alive, see {{PD-HU-unknown}} (URAA). And you ignored this: Commons:Anonymous_works#No_author_information, "For example, a organisation may release photographs it has purchased under its own brand name without specifying the individual photographers who were involved. For these reasons, it is typically not correct to assume an author has intended anonymity." What can I do if I think you was mistaken? --Regasterios (talk) 09:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

protection of talkpage of User:Reguyla

Hi Yann, as you were the last legitimate admin protecting the talkpage of banned User:Reguyla, would you mind if the admin-only protection is changed to autoconfirmed-level protection per the request at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections#User_talk:Reguyla ? --Túrelio (talk) 21:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Green Giant did it. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:42, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Comment by David Adam Kess

i have got to say people in wikipedia are not nice at all..:!! love the negativity!! code is great....50 50 on the crazy side

thanks for the negative comments..ǃǃ have a great day ǃ proves my pointǃ

Yann is trying to help you by explaining how you can make pictures of your paintings fall within project scope, just please try to listen to him and improve on his suggestions. Unfortunately kindness isn't common for the volunteers here, but if you simply adapt to deletion requests they will become a rarity and the negative will also decrease. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Revision delete

Hi Yann. Could you delete this revision of my talk page special:diff/286069201? Thanks. --Wcam (talk) 14:56, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

  Done Yann (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - What gets stored where (Ontology)


There is a new feedback request for Structured Data on Commons (link for messages posted to Commons: , regarding what metadata from a file gets stored where. Your participation is appreciated.

Happy editing to you. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 22:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Yann".