Zzyzx11

This user is currently busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting -- ~~~~ at the end.

Start a new talk topic.

Commons:Babel
en This user is a native English speaker.
es-1 Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español.
fr-1 Cette personne peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.
GT This user uses Google Translate. Dieser Benutzer verwendet Google Übersetzung. Este usuario utiliza Google Traductor. Cet utilisateur emploie Google Traduction. 이 사용자는 Google Translate를 사용합니다. Questo utente usa Google Traduttore. このユーザーはGoogle Translateを使用する Este usuário usa Google Traduzir.
Search user languages

Image:BUELL Firmenlogo.jpg

You are right.

You can delete the picture.

--M Peinado 16:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

re Image:PeriodicoTrazos.jpg

They give me permissions to distribute this image but not to modify it, so i think that it is ok to be deleted, does there is not anohter license that grants distribution but not modification? Thanks.

--Jgmylm 17:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Western Bulldogs image

Hi,

I thought, that since the image is used on en: was o.k. to use it in commons.

Dedee73

COM:TUL

TUL? TUL???? That's the worst shortcut ever, dude. :) How about COM:TOOLS? I always think shortcuts should be obvious above all else. Otherwise they're not very short. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 06:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Just copying the person who created en:WP:TUL... but thanks for reminding me about COM:TOOLS :-) Zzyzx11 06:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Dare I suggest that person is a FUL ;) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 07:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Monteros Image

Hi I saw you tagged a photo I uploaded as "unknown source". I made a mistake. I thought "all rights released" and "public domain" were the same. I took the photo and I've already deleted "public domain" in the picture's page. Is there anything else I need to add? Jlazarte

No, it's my mistake. I misread it, thinking you wrote "all rights reserved" (the opposite) instead of "all rights released". And because of me copying and pasting text into the edit summary, I did not catch my error until now. Sorry. Zzyzx11 20:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Aichi Expo 2005 Hamasaki Ayumi.jpg

I've already added the sources for image Image:Aichi Expo 2005 Hamasaki Ayumi.jpg, I though that saying that was GNU material from the english wikipedia was enough but i was wrong obviously. Clouded 23:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

On en:Image:Aichi Expo Hamasaki Ayumi.jpg, you cited the source as http://japan.people.com.cn/. So far, I do not see anything that says that this image has been released under the GNU Free Documentation License. Unless I see it, I might have to put it up for deletion, both here and on en.wikipedia. Zzyzx11 00:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Cosmo y Wanda.jpg

Lo que pasa es que yo La obtení de La Wikipedia en Inglés, recién después de subirla leí algo así como que era copyright de historietas y dibujos animados (No sé mucho de inglés), pero si está allá, ¿Por qué no acá?. Walterzum (Nota:Aunque no me he registrado sí soy yo, no me registré por falta de tiempo.

Cosmo y Wanda.jpg es una imagen de "fair use", un concepto de la legislación estadounidense que permite bajo circunstancias especiales el uso de material protegido con derechos de autor. Porque: Cosmo, Wanda y Los padrinos mágicos son copyrighted (todos los derechos reservados) por Nickelodeon.

La Wikipedia en Inglés permite imágenes de "fair use" [1]. Para Wikimedia Commons y Wikipedia en Español, no [2]. Gracias. Zzyzx11 01:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

IMAGEM ENVIADA (UPLOAD OF IMAGE)

OLÁ! MEU NOME É JOÃO VIEIRA SANTANA FILHO. ESTOU ESCREVENDO ESTE E-MAIL PARA VOCÊ PARA AVISAR QUE TODAS AS INFORMAÇÕES SOLICITADAS SOBRE IMAGEM "aviao2.jpg" FORAM ENVIADAS. A IMAGEM DE SIMPLES DIVULGAÇÃO "CIRRUS DESIGN" É DISTRIBUÍDA GRATUITAMENTE PELO PRÓPRIO FABRICANTE PARA SER USADA LIVREMENTE. OK? OBRIGADO ... TCHAU ... (HY! MY NAME IS JOÃO VIEIRA SANTANA FILHO. I AM WRITING THIS TEXT FOR SAY OF YOU THAT THE IMAGE "aviao2.jpg" WAS MADE BY THE INDUSTRIES CIRRUS DESIGN IN YOUS LABORATORIES FOR DISTRIBUTION FREE HOW IMAGE FOR SIMPLE DIVUGATION. THANK YOU ...)

Are the images free content? Can they be used by anyone, for any purpose? If not, then it cannot be stored here. Thanks.

São as imagens conteúdo livre? Podem ser usados por qualquer um, para qualquer propósito? Se não, então não pode ser armazenado aqui. Obrigado.

Zzyzx11 09:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

RESPOSTA: ACREDITO QUE A IMAGEM "Aviao2.jpg" É DE CONTEÚDO LIVRE E PODE SER USADA POR QUALQUER PESSOA, PARA QUALQUER PROPÓSITO, COM A EXCEÇÃO ÓBVIA DE VANDALISMO ... OBRIGADO ... TCHAU ... (ANSWER: I BELIEVE THAT IMAGE "Aviao2.jpg" IS OF USE FREE, BUT WITH EXCEPTION OBVIOUS OF VANDALISM ... THANK YOU ...)

Web link or a citation, please?

Um web link ou uma citação, por favor.

We cannot assume that the image is free without a citation.

Nós não podemos supor que a imagem está livre sem uma citação.

Você vê Commons:Licenciamento#Informações de licenciamento, por favor.

Thanks. Obrigado. Zzyzx11 17:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

RESPOSTA: OK ... VOU TENTAR SER O MAIS DETALHISTA POSSÍVEL : A IMAGEM FOI CAPTADA POR MEIO DE UM PROCESSO EXTREMAMENTE SIMPLES DE ESCANEAMENTO E ESTAVA DISPONÍVEL EM PÁGINAS DE REVISTAS ESPECIALIZADAS EM AVIAÇÃO, COM A PEQUENA INSCRIÇÃO PARECIDA COM ESTA, NA LATERAL DA PRÓPRIA FOTOGRAFIA "ORIGEM: CIRRUS DESIGN (DIVULGAÇÃO)" ... OBRIGADO PELA ATENÇÃO ... TCHAU ... (ANSWER: THE IMAGE IS GRATIS AND FREE , FOR SIMPLE DIVULGATION, THANK YOU) ... CIRRUS (DIVULGAÇÃO)

about 元住吉

Hi　ZZYX１１ Ich machte dieses Foto von mir in 2006.｛｛GNU｝｝ —the preceding unsigned comment is by Tokyo Watcher (talk • contribs)

Image:Magdalena Margulewicz.jpg

Author of this picture agree to use it. I have write source: |Source=http://www.jolalipka.com/magdalena_margulewicz/magda_margulewicz.html What more can I do to be ok?

New OTRS email address

Yes, this is a new address. I hadn't gotten around to changing the others, by all means, do where you can :) Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 01:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Image: Oprzezow1.jpg

I read a mail from you, but I still do not know what should I do. I am begginer in Wikipedia and this photo was my first. I has permission to publish it from my neighbour, who made it :)Please give me some further instructions. and about Uuk you are propably right, you can delete it.

--User:Kasiajulka 30 November 2006

Re: Image:Logo_commonpedia.png.

Many thanks for your interest. I have specified where we found the image: now there exists a link to the website where we got it, and the terms of use for it. With respect to the license, please, notice that the image is a logo. Thank you very much. Best wishes. --EizoOlderog 18:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Answering your comment on Ravanchol talk page, as you haven't answered me at my user talk page: We know that your policy doesn't allow a CC by-nd, but please note that we are claiming for the protection given by the mention right. This universal right allows us to mention even protected work in order to comment or talk about it, mainly in educational and research environments as Wikipedia is. So perhaps we've got the wrong way; perhaps we must directly upload this logo to Wikipedia without Wikimedia Commons taking part. Please, is this the right way? Thank you very much. Best wishes. --EizoOlderog 16:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Piratey transparent background.svg

Why GFDL? I mean: if the original was donated to the public domain and there is no original artwork involved in this version, it must be under the public domain. Or am I wrong? --Dodo 12:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the original image, en:Image:Piratey.jpg, is in fact tagged as PD. However, I used Image:Piratey, vector version.svg as my direct source, and therefore copied and pasted directly from that image description page; that is currently marked as GFDL, so I also made Image:Piratey transparent background.svg GFDL too. Zzyzx11 15:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

All right. I still think that vectorizing the original PD image is not original artwork and it should be considered PD, but alas, it's not your fault. Thanks. Regards. --Dodo 15:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

With respect to the comment by Dodo in some cases the archive format is an essential part of the artwork. --EizoOlderog 16:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Friedrich Silcher

The picture of Friedrich Silcher and his wife was created in 1829. As the painter as dead since over 100 years I doubt there is a copyright infringement at hand.--Tresckow 03:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

If that is the case, please indicate its license status by entering one one of the specific copyright tags listed on Commons:Copyright tags. Thanks. Zzyzx11 05:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

admin

You will be running for admin sometime soon... right? I am sick of seeing your name on my watchlist :) (if you want a nominator) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 15:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Good stuff, and good luck :) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 10:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Image Image:Igreja S. Sebastiao.JPG

Thanks for your contact about this image.

I add this information to the image

Description=S. Sebastian Church in Braga Portugal Source=Own Work Date=December, 10 2006 Author=Jose Goncalves

So I think it specify who created the content: Me, Jose Goncalves.

Oh, now I see what you did: You accidentally removed all that information when you added [[Category:Churches of Braga]] to the page. It has been fixed. Thanks. Zzyzx11 18:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

Zzyzx11, congratulations! You now have the the rights of administrator on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and Commons:Deletion requests), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other SYSOPS, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons @ irc.freenode.net.

Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 14:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Well done! As always, if you ever feel like some advice, questions are welcome at my talk page or via email. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

ZOMG YOU DIDN'T LEAVE ME A GENERIC THANKS MESSAGE, DID YOU???! This is the first commandment of the newbie commons admin. I wish you better luck on the rest. :P --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 15:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Copying English Wikipedia Images

Sorry, but the Image there's i need isn't avaible to my lenguage wikipedia, so i uploaded it on commons and everytime one admin deleti it, the image is Suzuka.jpg. I'm trying to use it on the portuguese translation of the article: en:Suzuka (manga) Thanks GatunoRox 09:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:IPS.png

Ok, but this is an institution logo. What is the problem with that? JanusDC 23:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, already I understood. JanusDC 23:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Delete my Image

Please, can you delete my imae again? I didn't readed the log's legend, so i uploaded again, can you delete? —the preceding unsigned comment is by GatunoRox (talk • contribs)

forgot to add licensing

hey, yes i messed up because I forgot to put the licensing on there when uploaded who can i fix this?

oh i forgot the other ones thats has a bit different with the attribute is it going to get deleted?

—the preceding unsigned comment is by Ricky212 (talk • contribs)

flickr review

can please you review the following pictures please so I can use them.

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

thank you ---Ricky212

yes thats me Ricky212 02:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

most of them are my work and the ones that aren't have the source link with all of them. there's the link on my works as well. Ricky212 02:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Carquinez Bridge.jpg

Image on http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/carquinez.htm has alternative text: "Photo: Bill Hall, Caltrans Distric 4 Photography"

And the Conditions of Use at http://www.dot.ca.gov/conditions.htm says "OWNERSHIP In general, information presented on this web site, unless otherwise indicated, is considered in the public domain. It may be distributed or copied as permitted by law. However, the State does make use of copyrighted data (e.g., photographs) which may require additional permissions prior to your use.

So I thought you wanted to be able to check it out for yourself, and then you can delete the image...

Fred Chess 12:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Carquinez_Bridge.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Carquinez_Bridge.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Fred Chess 18:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

"Caltrans" stands for the California Department of Transportation, a government agency in California. If that is not "a work of the state of California", then I do not know what is. Zzyzx11 19:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Besides, it might be worthwhile having it all discussed COM:DEL, or at least some policy page on Commons rather than rely on something from enwiki. Zzyzx11 19:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Gold star

Wow, Zzyzx11, fast action! You deleted Image:WikiAFC.jpg before I could even figure out what to do... so, thank you very much! ~MDD4696 08:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Knout-fragment.jpg

The Image:Knout-fragment.jpg is no longer on the English Wikipedia DYK. I went an unprotected and deleted the page, but I found you had protected it here and I just wanted you to remove the mprotected template from the page. Nishkid64 20:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the RFA vote

Thanks for the vote --Tarawneh 00:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

sorry

I'm sorry because of BMW pic.

I'll try to be more carefull.

Nice to meet you...

(Sorry my english)

Quet ef ollen, soc apu yo, tont olos coj ones.

Tronch 01:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

About BirjandShokatiyeSchool

I corrected the tag for Image:BirjandShokatiyeSchool.jpg, as you rightly pointed to. I hope this is ok. Sorry for my late action, as I don't visit my page frequently. Aliparsa 12:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Commons Picture of the Year 2006 Competition

Interested in honouring the best of the best? Vote now in the Commons Picture of the Year competition 2006 Voting to select the finalists is open until 14th February. Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 日本語 | Nederlands | português | svenska | 中文（简体） | 中文（繁體） | +/−

The arrangements for the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition are now complete, and voting will start tomorrow, Feb 1st. All Featured Pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As a past contributor to Featured Pictures, we invite you to participate in the competition (but please wait until tomorrow to vote). --MichaelMaggs 20:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Blue_Screen_of_Death.jpg

What? What? You dare defy my picture! Bastique sends lightning down from above... Just kidding, of course. I uploaded this so another user could help diagnose my pc. It was totally acceptable to remove.  :) Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 18:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Trolley Square Mall.jpg

Hello! I'd like you to delete this image. I uploaded it thinking it was attached to the CC-by-sa-2.5 license in the page 20minutos.es, but I further read and the image was not originally from the website. Thus, it's copyright infringement (to a local newspaper of Utah, can't remember well..). Thanks Rock 'n Roll 22:34, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Redundant pic

Could you delete this?[12] I hadn't realized it was already uploaded. Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 15:26, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh in that case save it, as I saw it when I went to add it the Wikipedia Smashing Pumpkins page and assumed it was already on Commons. Thanks. Quadzilla99 05:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Waskotorowka_Mrzezyno.jpg

Zdjęcie jest własnością publiczną ponieważ prawa autorskie do niego wygasły - zdjęcie jest przedwojenne i autor nie żyje. Czy cos jeszcze ?

Help with daily-image-l

Hey, I want to ask you a favour. I'm going to be out of town from Thursday (22nd) to Saturday. I was wondering if you would mind making the daily posts for this mailing list?

You can see today's post; if you have cygwin/Linux + Python installed, the code to generate the email is here. (You still have to send it manually.)

Please let me know. thanks, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 04:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Scottie Pippen

Could you delete this pic? I think the flickr user either changed the copyright status or I just screwed up because it says copyrighted. Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 12:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

This pic. I can't remember for certain but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have dl'd it otherwise. I could have just made a mistake though and since it was never reviewed, I would suggest to delete it. Quadzilla99 02:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Since you are unsure, I have to follow the proper guidelines of tagging it as a possibly unfree Flickr image. Zzyzx11 02:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

...because the image is being used on other Wikipedias, such as the French and German versions. Zzyzx11 02:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Mistake

I mistakenly gave this pic the wrong title, it was taken in 2006 not 2007 could you move it to Ovechkin 2006.jpg? Also while you're at it, would you mind looking it over and verifying it? (checking the license against it on flickr I mean and cetifying it as correct) Quadzilla99 08:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Never mind I just uploaded it again with the correct title, can you just delete the old one? Quadzilla99 08:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it was taken care of by MesserWoland [13] Zzyzx11 16:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Vince Lombardi Trophy.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Vince Lombardi Trophy.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from BryanBot. 20:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:StanleyCup.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:StanleyCup.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from BryanBot. 20:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:StanleyCupAvs2000-01Engraved.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:StanleyCupAvs2000-01Engraved.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 image, 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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from BryanBot. 20:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Saint Peter

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Disputes#Saint Peter FYI. --Evrik 12:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like I forgot about Commons:Language policy#Summary of proposals. If I had remembered, I would have not have moved it. Sorry. Zzyzx11 15:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think the policy is as had and fast as he makes it seem. He also made the move without discussing it with anyone. --Evrik 05:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree that he should have discussed it with you first. On the other hand, Commons talk:Language policy/Archive1#People shows that the naming convention for Popes, among others, was proposed and settled around December 2004 to January 2005. Zzyzx11 15:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
• Looks like the discussion has grown ... --Evrik 15:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

HOF

Could you approve this pic of the Baseball Hall of Fame? I want to get it approved so we can use it in a template:[14] Quadzilla99 00:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like another admin beat me to it... Zzyzx11 13:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

NPWillis.jpg

Just curious about an image that was deleted. Could you take a look at the page Image talk:NPWillis.jpg‎ and let me know if my reasoning on copyright is way off base? I asked another editor and suggested I go back to you as the person who deleted the file originally. Many thanks!! -Midnightdreary 17:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you ...

for fixing Commons:Featured picture candidates/. Usually I am not that awkward when working with web-pages and templates. --Tsui 19:13, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Zzyzx11/En main page

Smart! Nice job. howcheng {chat} 16:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The images of User:TonyWWE1

I have tagged each of his images for speedy deletion because near as I can tell he just did a google image search for images and then uploaded them under non-existent free licenses.

You reviewed one of his images from flickr as having an invalid license however in the process removed my tag for deletion. The image was uploaded only a day ago along with his other images and near as I can tell all of them are copyrighted. Can you take a look at his uploads and give a second opinion?

In addition to which it seems he had another account at User:TonyWWE who, judging from his wiped talk page, also uploaded a tonne of copyvios while the last image remaining that wasn't purged is sourced to a wikipedia fork.

Seems a couple of other admins "dealt" with those images. Thanks. Zzyzx11 15:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

the gasworks gang and its deletion

somebody watkins who worked for beano magazine in britain wrote a strip called the gasworks gang for another british outfit called cor!! comic in the 1970's and like the Giles cartoons in one of the british newspapers there was a clever parody of all things british . My in-laws are a living testament to Watkins' wit and skill and many others who have married into an english family would doubtless appreciate this ... this isnt vandalism its an information request for scanned images, the copyright must surely have expired. please allow time for someone to respond before this effort is deleted too --144.138.115.81

What image(s) or page(s) are you specifically referring to? I frequently delete and/or revert a number of images and pages frequently, so unless you can give me the specific image or page name, I cannot help you at this time. Thanks. Zzyzx11 04:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

If you are referring to the The Gasworks Gang page, please remember that the Wikimedia Commons is targeted at media files such as photographs, diagrams, animations, music, spoken text and video clips. Wikimedia Commons does not contain text articles like encyclopedia articles, textbooks, news, word definitions — or in this case, personal essays and such. Please read Commons:Project scope for more information. Thanks.

Zzyzx11 04:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Warburgs gallery

A good idea. Thanks a lot. Gregor Bert

deleted page

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Permission_to_use_Global_Network_against_Nuclear_Power_and_Weapons_in_Space_materials&action=edit

You deleted the above page. Can You tell me why? If it does not belong here, where should it go? Pedant 19:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Edward VI

Beautiful painting, but two things should be noted: The artist mistakenly added at least 20 years to Edwards'age by giving him the muscular legs of a 20 something man and then topped it off by endowing 8 yr old Edward with a huge codpiece shown poking out through all his finery! Frank 3/14

Which particular Edward VI of England image are you referring to? Zzyzx11 16:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Protecting images referenced from EN main page

Thanks for your efforts to protect these images from vandalism. I'm surprised images inside of the articles on the main page aren't also vandalism targets.

In the long run, this whole process of identifying and protecting things because they appear or are linked to from the main page needs to be automated. Davidwr2 15:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

missing protection notice

Hi, it would be nice if you could put a protection notice (like the one on User:Zzyzx11/En main page) on the image description pages. I, a normal user, reworked the poor picture Image:Alvin Meyer3.jpg and tried to upload it. It failed with an error about missing permissions. Work for nothing... Nevertheless I will replace the image when it's unprotected again... Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 18:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the inconvenience, but that does essentially defeat the purpose of using the cascading protection of User:Zzyzx11/En main page to automatically protect images rotated onto the "Today's featured article", "On this day", and "Today's featured picture" of the main page of the English Wikipedia without having to maintain the protection/unprotection of images here on a daily basis. For a complete explanation on why I created this page and how it works, see User talk:Zzyzx11/En main page.

What do you suggest? For me to add the protection tag when I update the list every few days or so ... even when it will not appear on the en.wikipedia main page for 48-72 hours or so? Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Semen.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Semen.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 image, 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. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 17:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I forgot

to add this image Image:Ficus obliqua trunk.jpg to the gallery on Ficus obliqua which you deleted. Casliber (talk) 23:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Studienseminar Neuss

Well I created this page, because I will make some photos at the end of august and for wikiversity I will create a subpage 'material'. At the end of august I will start working there. --Michael Reschke (talk) 00:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It is basically the same speedy deletion rule that other wikipedias have: you cannot create a page with little or no content to "save your place" so you can actually add your content a few weeks later. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean with save your place? The "Studienseminar Neuss" is something like a school... --Michael Reschke (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a metaphor, as in saving or reserving your spot at the table several weeks before you are actually going to appear and actually do the minimum required work. Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Please

Could you delete this as a copy vio?--  † ChristianMan16  03:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind--  † ChristianMan16  03:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Smith System

Could you please explain why this image classification structure page was deleted? I moved this information off Category:Pteridophyta to parallel all the other such pages that are used in conjunction with Template:Taxonavigation. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

It seemed to me that it was purely a page in the main gallery namespace that did not have any images or media files on it, just a bullet list of links and concepts (It is one of the options listed on MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown). Remember that Wikimedia Commons is a "media file repository" and that mere text articles and lists are not allowed.

However, I might be willing to restore it if are there any other similar image classification structure pages – without any images, sounds, or other media files – that have existed for some time. That is the first time I have seen one before (which is why primarily why I deleted it), and I do not recall any description of it on a Commons namespace page other than routine disambiguation page with {{Disambig}} tags. As I take a quick scan of Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Taxonavigation, the pages in the main namespace listed there seem to have at least one image or media file on them. So it would be helpful to explain what your objective was. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 23:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

But did you look at the bottom of the Template:Taxonavigation description page itself? This is where there are several other such guides. There are many competing systems of plant classification, and a guide delineating where items are classified is thus an index useful for users looking to categorize an image. That is why all these pages exist. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the main namespace pages listed on Template:Taxonavigation#Which classification, the Cronquist System page has at least one image file posted, and APG II has several ... so those two pages would qualify IMO.

As for Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy, I noticed in the deletion log and the page history that I originally deleted that page at 08:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC) for not following COM:PS. The page was then recreated on 30 December 2007. A few hours later, based on this discussion, another admin deleted the page for the exact same reason as mine, then was persuaded by the creator to undelete it.

I disagree with the undeletion of that page; or the explanations provided either on that admin's talk page, Talk:Cronquist System, or Talk:Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy. This the Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia. IMO, the content should either be moved to a subpage of Template:Taxonavigation, images or media files should be posted on those gallery pages, or the links on Template:Taxonavigation#Which classification should be converted to interwiki links pointing to the respective Wikipedia articles.

Since we disagree on whether the text alone, without any media files, should be in the main namespace, the proper course of action would either to pick one of the options I suggested, or post a request on COM:UNDEL for a full discussion. Because even if I blindly undelete Smith System, there might be another admin who will delete it again citing COM:PS, just like what has happened to the Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy page. Regards. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, moving to Wikipedia would not help Commons classification. The links are designed to allow users to browse for the location the image should be placed, then make one click to get there for verification. They also serve as a handy one-page navigation, rather than having to floow down individual links in the taxonaigation at the tops of pages. Moving everything to subpages of Taxonavigation sounds like a good idea, but I still can't make any of the necessary changes. An admin will have to do it all because of page protection. Of course there are images here that could be added to the page as well, making it a gallery page, but it would have to be undeleted first. (And then an admin would still have to link in the taxonavigation). --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I have added the four images of the Smith system phylogeny. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

edit conflict Looks like this was also a problem in mid-2007 too, see Commons talk:WikiProject Plants#Deletion of the Cronquist System article.

Nevertheless, as you saw, I have undeleted the page and moved it to Template:Taxonavigation/Smith System. I also moved Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy to the template namespace, and made what I hope the necessary changes to Template:Taxonavigation/classification. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I moved Smith System back now. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 00:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Olympic rings.svg

Can you protect Image:Olympic rings.svg here? You can delete the enwiki version when you're done, obviously. RockMFR (talk) 16:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably best to leave the {{C-Uploaded}} version saved locally on enwiki since I currently do not have any idea on what specific time it will be removed – immediately following the closing ceremonies or one day later. Cheers. Zzyzx11 ( ) 20:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

From time to time I look in the new page patrol log. I usually only see you & me :) Thanks for the work! --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately, it only seems like it is you and me. Then again, it seems like there is a current average of about 30 newly created pages a day. But if Commons gets more and more users, more help will eventually be needed. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 15:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I guess you will see it but...

This may be worth bearing in mind. Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Picture Martin Luther King

Hi! I'd like to upload a new version of "Image:Martin Luther King - March on Washington.jpg". Now it's blocked. When will I be able to do that? Greetings --Sir James (talk) 05:42, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Should be unprotected by now. It was protected because it was posted on the main page of the English Wikipedia. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that. But at the time I wrote my mail, it should have been unprotected as well. It's okay now-pic is changed. Thanks & Greets --Sir James (talk) 00:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Restoring List of Fabaceae species

The assumption I make here that I am not comfortable with is that you have an experience with taxonomy. To know if something fits into the project scope implies knowledge of the something (being the basis for my assumption), let me know if this is an incorrect assumption. Please see Template_talk:Taxonavigation#classical_.2F_phylogenical_classification and explain what parts of that extra list (too many to go onto the category page) do not fit within the project scope and keep in mind that the Cronquist system is being used on several of the wikipedias. -- carol (talk) 12:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

"Acrocarpus" could you look on that list and see if that genus is there? I need to know if the old yet still in use taxonomy should be included so I can add the correct conditionals to the template. Thank you for your patience, assistance and understanding which will be required until the point that "links to" also shows things at the other wikipedia -- although that will be a pain as those are typically articles and not simple lists of things that should go into catagories or galleries.... -- carol (talk) 12:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I find requesting that a human visually look at a list to tell me that something is there so that I should know how to put all of the phylogenical classification categories upon them to be eh, kind of funny for a way to work in the 21st century but since the taxonomy is within the scope (as it is being used on several of the wikipedia including English wikipedia) I will work with your decision here. Please look for Acrocarpus, Cercidium, Erythrophleum, Erythrostemon, Heteroflorum, Mezoneuron, Mezonevron, Poincianella, Pomaria, Sclerolobium, Tara (Fabaceae) also. There is 430 genera on that list, btw. It seems as if the software should be allowed to function. In my mind, the Commons should reflect the decisions that were made by English wikipedia that cause articles to exist and not the way that decisions were made <-- my opinion which is all too easy to now have the time for as I am asking that a human look at a list when the software would have just showed me this information. -- carol (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• No, Commons essentially operates as an independent project from the English Wikipedia, the Spanish Wikipedia, or any other Wikipedia site owned by the Wikimedia Foundation. As I basically said in a previous discussion above, if I am going through Special:newpages and I see a page in the main gallery namespace that is full of text and does not have any images or media files on it, I am speedy deleting it no matter what the subject is. Looking at the list I deleted, I still do not see how it passes Commons:Project scope/Pages, galleries and categories#General pages, galleries and categories. Could you explain to me how it could? Or would you like the page restored and moved into some other namespace? Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 14:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

It would be included on the category page if it contained less than 200 genera/items. One system has those items linked directly to the family and other systems have nested them. In addition, one system has some families that do not exist any longer in the newer systems and this family is one of them. So the list is of genera (or should be) that were included in a family which has become much larger now in newer systems. About self-promotion, I did not make the list which is what makes it wrong for it to be included in my personal stuff. Similar to Category:Ayacop/Blanco which that User uploaded a lot of impressive, valuable and needed images here -- the category makes it look as if that upload is actually authorship? I suspect that a similar problem occurred then where the reason a category kept being deleted was due to a gallery existing. It seems very immature.

I also am of the mind that slapping a few images onto a useful page should not qualify it educationally. If there were words explaining the reason that the list exists other than the fact it was made by a person and used here and other places then it would be an article. If it had less than 200 items it would be included where it is more useful on the category it represents. However, 430 items is just too much even with the javascript that hides them -- I usually have javascript un-enabled. Also, there seems to be some administrative conflicts of self in play here -- one of the administrators whose hand has been in this has 1)recently become an administrator 2)showed signs of not being available due to real life things 3)after showing those signs, forgot how to do some of the manual tasks the user used to know how to do.

In summary, 1)I did not make the list so it hardly belongs in my personal space; 2)The tradition here seems to be a gallery vs category war and not anything involving education and the plant taxonomy reflects this; 3)Just because an administrator showed a knowledge of taxonomy a few months ago should imply that they have a knowledge of it now but other things have been forgotten so I suggest that this is not a good default if that is to be considered.

Also, the only thing I read here was Herby thanking you for watching the Recent Changes list. Probably, most of your decisions, I would thank you also. -- carol (talk) 14:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• Based on your reasonable reason that the file size of the list is currently too big to be including onto another category page, I will restore it temporarily for now, but I cannot guarantee that another admin will come along, disagree with me, and delete it again. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Apodora speedy delete

I disagreed with this idea, as I'm under the impression that creating empty categories at Wikimedia Commons is a common and accepted practice. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it be helpful to create such categories in advance, so that anyone who eventually contributes such images that we do not yet have will have a place to put them? BTW, if you keep to the rules, disagreeing with a Speedy Delete request is certainly more work than creating one! Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 11:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Where did you get that impression? My understanding, as specifically stated on COM:D#Speedy deletion, is that a category with no content or containing only a parent category can be speedy deleted. Zzyzx11 (talk) 14:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

You're right that a "category with no content or containing only a parent category" can be a candidate for speedy delete, but I suppose the question should be whether deleting an empty category is always a good thing or not. I got the idea of creating empty categories from carol. She recently showed my how she uses custom templates to create the taxnavs and category tags for categories, although I've now also used them for gallery pages. She has apparently created very many empty categories for plants using a system that supports multiple taxonomies. It's impressive! I haven't gone that far yet, but the idea seems appealing. Her arguments for creating the necessary categories in advance, based on taxonomic structures, were good enough for me, so I've done a little experimenting, but nothing systematic yet. --Jwinius (talk) 21:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

There is a software that will move images into a category if it exists. This software is running now even though the categories do not exist or are being deleted due to some rules that were suggested in 2004 (or perhaps because they are strictly enforced for no good reason other than enforcing as occurs on other wikipedias). So, the category is perhaps being deleted before the software is allowed to fill it. For my plans and from what I see (a simile is about to occur in this text), this is not unlike putting several tablespoons of jelly onto a slice of bread and then attempting to spread the stouter peanut butter upon the jelly which is on single bread slice sandwich -- terrible and poorly considered construction design. All I can honestly say is that the way things are working at this point in time, I am really really happy that I do not have to claim that I was one of the people who was in a leadership position while it happened. -- carol (talk) 17:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Euphorbiaceae genera

Hello again. Apparently this list of genus that was too long to be on the category page (of expected genus and of the older classification genera) was not on my watchlist.

My reaction to the deletion of the List of Fabaceae species was quick (I was using it when it was deleted), early in my day (not my best time) and well, now there exists a List of Fabaceae species and a Genera of Fabaceae and the fact of that whole delete, recreate, move and discuss the usefulness of the list as a separate thing neglected the fact that it is not a list of species but a list of several genus. The upload software that is used here only suggests existing categories -- the effect of this is that I think that I had to create a category for one of the states of Mexico (don't hold me to this claim, it is presented as an example of the problem) even though there were maps that belonged there already and several other images. The plants are worse, I have found some families who have one taxonomy for one genus that goes all the way through a subfamily, tribe and then to the genus and the same family might have galleries for another genus in the family category. If the category exists, then the upload software will be able to suggest it as a destination for images.

Beyond making it easier for the upload software to place images into the category it belongs to, reflecting three taxonomy trees reduces the arguments of the science of taxonomy greatly. Users from any where and any schooling have a choice of three systems to navigate through and the ability to add a new system to the templates exists as well. The system that put them from family directly to genus was/is not so workable for some of these larger families. Another thing about making the genus categories with the expectation that there will be images to populate them is that it will make commons into one of the most flexible databases for plant genus that I have seen online. Every other site I have seen uses one taxonomy tree -- sometimes an attempt to describe how other taxonomy places the genus but never an option or the ability to display what genus belongs to one order in one taxonomy and to another order in another taxonomy. That list also has the information that a software needs to create the genus categories, apply the template that places them into all of the taxonomy and turn whatever the fraction of the 3 million images that are hosted here which are of plants into the best species name server available online right now.

It is difficult to filter my enthusiasm and it is also difficult to summarize what I have learned and seen in this field over the last 8 to 9 months (I think I started this education with the question "Why is a tribe smaller than a family?", heh). I watch uploads here of images from English wikipedia and where the license information should be is a lesson in defensiveness which is a sad sad commentary on methods being used there. If a person does not understand how the fuel injection works in their automobile, should it be removed? I don't think so, but there are several who are in charge of deletion and moving things that seem to think that way. I always appreciated that things like fuel injection and power steering worked (I drove a vehicle without power steering enough to know what the power steering has provided, btw). Please consider this analogy when deleting things; I am disappointed in myself for not having this list on my watch page but I am perhaps more disappointed in a user instance with "x11" in their name who didn't realize that it was the same thing and restore that at the same time.

Unrelated to taxonomy but related to x11, I have been watching a new flatscreen television and when the display ratio has been changed from using the whole display to using the 4:3 -- the padding is "thistle" or "thistle2" of the Named Colors. I just think that "Black" or "Dark Slate Gray" would have been so much better or even a choice of padding colors like gtk+ has in the last few years. If you would prefer discussing things like this over taxonomy, my talk page is always open for you. If you have no idea of what x11 or the Named colors are (or access to a palette) please change your user name!! Heh :) -- carol (talk) 17:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Since you have been active since I wrote this, I am just going to restore the page myself -- I don't think that I had the (family) names there yet. I am going to suggest that restoring one page like this and not restoring the other page like this is not a good sign. At least for myself, I would start to question if I was doing too much or that (perhaps if this is what is going on) it is best for one user to manage one user instance. -- carol (talk) 21:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I apologise. I was a little busy and got a little distracted so I could only do a few things earlier today. Again, restoring the page by yourself is not a big deal as long as the admin who originally deleted it (me) does not object (as I stated above with List of Fabaceae species); and you can persuade any other admin who comes along, disagrees, and deletes it again. Zzyzx11 (talk) 00:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

That was an interesting day, actually. That list List of Fabaceae species is not of "species" and can safely be deleted. I am actually juggling more names and ideas than the "powers that be" in the history of the "Plants of" things here are able to juggle, so I actually forgave myself of this name problem and think that others can also.

Do you think that it is in the best interest of the commons for it not to become the most versatile and enabled species name server that is available? Taxonomy is the base of the study of botany (at both secondary level education and above); unless I am mistaken. -- carol (talk) 00:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and btw -- can you easily grab the text file that is included with the x11 source for the named colors? Any person can find it on English wikipedia, but not just anyone can grab it from the versioning server. Any nick with x11 in it should (seriously) be easily able to do this. I can do the second and would never have a nick with x11 in its name. It is a respect thing. -- carol (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the words on the talk page for that file. With the allowance of the duplication of images here, it seems kind of not on scope for the quickness of the deletion of useful and educational ways the database here can be used. Education like that enhances textbook information and college course content and high school course content and ways the science is going; I realize that the information and the database here can also be used for other things -- that should not interrupt that more honest scope I just tried to outline. Sigh. -- carol (talk) 02:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

If you are looking for a versatile and enabled species name server, you might want to try Wikispecies, also owned by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Also, my user name is named after Zzyzx, California, a settlement in the southeastern area of California. Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

It is unclear which taxonomy they follow and I don't think the decision to follow a single taxonomy makes sense due to the international parts of the wiki projects (this one in particular) and also due to the fact that technically, it is unnecessary due to the fact that wiki seems to be made for this. In addition, wikispecies is a snapshot of whatever taxonomy they are following -- when all the species are sequenced, they will need a complete rewrite (they nested the templates, it is a mess). In one of my conversations here, templates were called "data" and they are not data just like the blueprint is not a building and a printed recipe is not a meal.

The "science" itself gets stuck in their own problems before it can happen as the discussion of which taxonomy to follow is a dead end road. I have no opinion about this stuff and am not enabled to make an opinion (I don't have access to the sequencing equipment and if I did, I do not have enthusiasm perhaps). What commons is getting is a snapshot of three of the dead ends that have been followed, heh, in simple terms. It is the study of a science that is 300 or more years old by now with what they were doing in 1980, what they did in 1998 and what the Germans are trying to do. Oh, and the orchids -- a new taxonomy which doesn't seem to give a damn about where anyone thinks it goes, heh.

I really have no opinion about this taxon stuff -- it is more interesting to see the attempts and it actually uses the wiki frame work usefully. Commons serves images to wikipedias that use all of the taxonomy I represent here. Wikispecies isn't doing that either. I am not certain what wikispecies is doing but I do know that if they want to do things differently, it is going to take a lot of work -- much more than should be necessary. The nested templates are a mistake and one that I could have made myself if I hadn't seen that one.

Then about x11 and California. I grew up in the "Midwest" which is actually more east when looking at a map of this country. I had so many images of California that were taken in Southern and coastal California in my mind and "experience" that I was surprised by the cooler temperatures that can be found in the Bay area here. The local Californians like to think that they have a more international culture thing occuring here than anywhere else -- they are really wrong about this in my actual experiences in other places. x11 is really an impressive and long lived set of display software, being started in the early 1980s -- it should be possible, with a little technical knowledge (more than I have) to get computer displays from the 1980s working using that software package. Many *nix have used this software. IBM opted to put DOS on personal computers in the early eighties and then in eh, 2003 (with XP) they finally stop crashing?

When I first got access to a home computer that was "mine", I was kind of new or ignorant of things while I was learning. Like, I built my own web server (the instructions then were kind of complicated and modules had to be installed or not) but could not find where it had installed itself on my computer. Heh. I attempted to build the x11 software then and just simply failed. I knew others who could get it to build and understood that enough to determine ways to optimize and improve it for their own installation and equipment. That is what is good about the *nix operating systems. It is also with such an experience getting into this shared information environment that it is such a disappointment when the software is not utilized especially when it can be used to escape the problems of others (like politics and opinions about one taxonomy tree or another).

The x11 in your nick is cooler than I would ever think I could be (even having built it for this new a year or so ago computer at least once). -- carol (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Please unprotect file

Will you please unprotect this picture so I can edit its file? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:55, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

As stated on User:Zzyzx11/En main page, the image is cascade protected because it is currently on the main page of the English Wikipedia. It should fall off that main page and thus cascade protection at 00:00 (UTC), about 20 minutes from now. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 23:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

"Ich machte dieses Foto von mit in 2006."

...äääähmmm... please have a look at this ;) . Regards, abf /talk to me/ 14:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not use a translator when doing patrol that day. Regards. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

WHY DID YOU ERASE MY NEW ENTREE SHIT?????

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.201.241 (talk • contribs)

The article you wrote was outside the project scope of the Wikimedia Commons. It was a pure text article without any images or other media. Such textual material should be placed elsewhere like Wikipedia's article on that subject. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Apologies - I reverted rather than reading it (& assumed it was a friend you'd made on en wp :)). --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

At first glance, it looked like it was ... but I then was curious at that user's previous contributions, including the deleted ones, and found it was actually one of those "newbies or drive-by vandals who get mad when his/her stuff is deleted without paying attention to the policies". Since this is the case, I am not sure if a three day block is warranted now, but you make the call if you think it was a newbie or just an average vandal. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah agreed & unblocked. I took it as a normal en wp attack one without looking further (wrong!) and so will do the full AGF :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

re User talk:Zzyzx11/En main page

In response to your latest post at User talk:Zzyzx11/En main page, I wish to say "heck yeah!" The weird thing about the frantic discussion at en AN is how everyone was asking why the situation was so much worse than before the bot started and nobody seems to have had the slightest idea that you were handling the "planned" images for over a year. In any case, I'm grateful you've picked the burden up once again until someone figures out how to make one of those newfangled bot inventions work. - BanyanTree 04:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I myself was not keeping up with the activities and block of en:User:MPUploadBot, and so I sort of got complacent too – until I spotted the large discussion on en:WP:ANI. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Italybombing4.jpg

Hi - if you could make the edit I've mentioned on the talk page of that image (added location and overlay), that'd be great. Particularly if you could do it while it's still on the En main page. While it's great for preventing vandalism, protection does tend to prevent legitimate users making legitimate changes while the iron is hot. Cheers anyway! - gobeirne (talk) 09:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I see you have done this already. [15]. And yes, I fully know that protecting images directly on Commons has that disadvantage, and its not my preferred choice, but no one there at en.wikipedia has the time or the energy to temporary upload local copies and protect there on a regular basis. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 12:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Transfer to Commons

Dear Administrator, I've seen there are some images in wikipedia that should be transferred to commons. However, I don't have the CommonsHelper. Could you please do it? In concret, these are the images:

• Lauren Bacall and Hawks
• Elena Paparizou
• Anna Vissi
• Anna Vissi
• Humphrey Bogart
• Judy Garland
• Charlton Heston

Thank you very much.--Aylaross (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Done.

If you would like to use CommonsHelper, it is at http://toolserver.org/~magnus/commonshelper.php (You will have to register first at Toolserver User Screening Control ) Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 11:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Smith System

Hello,
I just discovered that some cat and articles of Wikicommons now follow Smith System.
But at the same time Smith System has no interwiki.
Don't you feel it strange ? Is this classification really interesting that it should be followed even if it is unknown from wikipedia?
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 10:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is that the content about the Smith System is currently on en:Fern#Evolution and classification. If you insist, an interwiki link can be made here and a redirect created on en.wiki]]. Zzyzx11 (talk) 18:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I did add your link as en

Cheers Liné1 (talk) 20:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Jamaica

How do we provide information about Jamaica's primary source of MSME information. it is supported by the government and other public and private entities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SBAJ (talk • contribs)

Could you be more specific about the material you wish to upload? Keep in mind that the Wikimedia Commons accepts only free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Although material may supported by the government and other public and private entities, that does not mean that it is free and not copyrighted. For example, all web pages on the http://www.sbaj.org.jm/ website has "Copyright © 2005 - 2009 Small Business Association Of Jamaica" on the bottom. Thus, anything copied from there to here on the Wikimedia Commons would be deleted as a copyright violation. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 21:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Ray_Jay3.JPG

File:Ray_Jay3.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Trixt (talk) 19:27, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Nothing personal, but I would not rather engage in another debate with armchair lawyers about what is and what is not permitted under the laws of freedom of panorama and derivative works. I have already participated in too many of those and those on en.wikipedia regarding fair use images. Besides, its not my image; I only transwikied that image from en.wikipedia using the CommonsHelper tool. So if it is not free content here, than it is not free content period. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Question...

Sorry for the inconvenience, but where can I make a request to a user ceases to be administrator here? Vítor&R™ ^{(Live Your Life!)} 15h39min de 9 de Maio de 2009 (UTC)

Information can be found at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship (the Portuguese version is at Commons:Administrador/Revogação) But if you are thinking about User:Martin H. and the deletion of Rihanna images, I do not think he "is acting against policy and routinely abusing his or her status." If he believes that the Flickr user MiKeARB is actually making copyright violations by incorrectly marking his images as Creative Commons, then he has the right to delete those images here on the Wikimedia Commons. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:01, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, and I know what I mean, if it is images of Rihanna the user in question does nothing, even after the evidence shown. Vítor&R™ ^{(Live Your Life!)} 19h36min de 3 de Junho de 2009 (UTC)

Correction in File:Reference ranges for blood tests - by mass.png

There was an error in this image, which is being put on display tomorrow on Picture of the day (interva --> interval in legend box). However, I couldn't update it because it was protected by being transcluded on a subpage of yours. So I uploaded it as a separate image (File:Reference ranges for blood tests - by mass (July 12 update).png), and I'll appreciate if you upload it so that it won't be the "wrong" version that will be put on the main page tomorrow. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Corrected file has been moved. Zzyzx11 (talk) 18:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Ice_hockey_puck.jpg

File:Ice_hockey_puck.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Svgalbertian (talk) 18:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Rename a file

Ok no problem

File:Vkhutemas.jpg

The main discussion about this can be found at w:Talk:Main Page#Non-free image on the main page?. In brief, the author of the image is El Lissitzky (1890–1941), and the image is still copyrighted in Russia until the end of 2011 (70 years pma). As the file is protected here, I can't add the {{Copyvio}} template myself: could you sort it out for me, or contact me on enwiki if you have any questions? The file has been transferred to enwiki (w:File:Vkhutemas.jpg), as it is PD in the U.S. Physchim62 (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I have been offline for the past couple of days. The file should be unprotected by now, so you are free to update the licence tags, post it on COM:DR, or whatever you were planning to do. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Your assistance please

You deleted File:The Hudson's Bay Company in Nunavut.jpg I uploaded a non-corrupt version of the file. But the image faces deletion because it has no source and liscensing metadata.

Please restore that metadata.

FWIW I think your deletion was premature.

FWIW I think it is a mistake for administrators to delete material, without prior warning -- and then to not inform the good faith contributor of the deletion afterwards.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 19:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Since you seem to only log in intermittently [http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AVillage_pump&action=historysubmit&diff=36230536&oldid=36230113 I followed up at the Village Pump[. Geo Swan (talk) 18:31, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that. As Justass mentioned,[16] corrupt images qualify for speedy deletion. And I should have informing you. Cheers.

Thanks for getting back to me. I think I have been pushing my computer too hard, and some of my larger uploads are (silently) failing because I am continuing to work after I have been warned I have used up most of my RAM. Geo Swan (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

We need your help at the Wikiproject medicine

Hello, Sorry for spaming your talk page, but this is very important. On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images. As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents. Also they believe that common's policy is not so clear regarding the issue. And since you are the experts please join us at this very important discussion -- MaenK.A._Talk 14:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

A spoiler

I work on a background article for to understood a ethnographic Category. A category as you do not have in your culture. But you deleted that because you despise strange cultures (racist?). But if Commons do not have place for strange cultures, what is so the substance of a encyclopedia? If the article had home in wikipedia so move the article to wikipedia. Now is the Category intelligible and you had spoiled this Category. haabet 11:39, 24 May 2010 (UTC) "Page is out of project scope: appears to be a normal text article" If the text was project scope a other project have need of the text.haabet 09:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Commons is not an encyclopedia. It is a media file repository to store images, video clips, and other media files. Your page was deleted because you were trying to write an encyclopedia or some other text article. As a general rule, it is not my job or any other admin's job to move it to one of the over 270 Wikipedias or any of the many other Wikimedia project sites. This is because, at the time we delete the page, we usually do not know what the original author's intention is or was, or which one of the numerous Wikimedia project sites was preferred.

Therefore, feel free to add it to your preferred Wikimedia project site. Since you were the only major contributor to that page, the text as it was when the page was deleted is copied below:

{{delete}}
speedy|out of scope -- 
*This is not a Gallery
*The text here gives information that is not supported by the description attached to the image -- there is no indication there whether these women are marriageable or not.
[[File:Sea_dayak_women_corset_rings.jpg|thumb|400px|A lining up of marriageable Iban girls.<br>Note, the special head dress for unmarried girls.]]
In many cultures been women married at an early age, shortly after her first menstruation, from at age of 12 years old. In some of that cultures been women married by unfamiliar single guests. For the marry the girls be show for explorers and been photographed. Many old photos are from that show of unmarried girls. But only if the dress show the unmarried status or the explorer understand the point this show been identified. Often the girls had a worried, shy expression or cheerful smile, but that is normally for girls in that age.
[[Category:Marriageable girls]]

Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I had set a "{delete}" sign on the page as you be able to discuss the page. But you had no time for that. And now I have time for go

As per COM:SPEEDY, a page can be immediately deleted, without any discussion, if it is "A page that falls outside of Commons' scope". This is what I did. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Text:Adagio_de.pdf

I inserted a short poem in the article "Fausto Cercignani" on wikipedia.de. It was removed by an administrator and I was requested to license it. I licensed it as "public domain". But then another administrator informed me that it was not correct to insert it in that particular article and suggested a link to Wikisource, after uploading the text in this project. The poem was originally inserted as normal text. Now I have it as Adagio_de.pdf. May I upload this file to Wikisource now? Thank you very much for your help! -- Karlhillmann (talk) 10:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not familiar with WikiSource, so I cannot fully answer your question on how to link PDF files from here on the Wikimedia Commons to there. So you might need to ask a WikiSource administrator for assistance. But you can definitely upload "public domain" PDF files here on Commons as if it were a "public domain" images. Make sure you put {{PDF}} on the file description page. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:36, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Davis-head-statue.jpg

File:Davis-head-statue.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

BrokenSphere (Talk) 20:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration

Category discussion notification

Category:Images from the National Archives and Records Administration has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--BcNARApix (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

File:UCSD-Sungod.JPG

File:UCSD-Sungod.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day

Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day 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 gallery, 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. 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!

Azizfaisalaziz (talk) 10:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Use of image

Hi Zzyzx11, I would like to use the image on the page http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Shenzhou_front_white_shadow.png. I would like to ask whether you own the copyrights of this image? Thanks.

Shshsh123 (talk) 09:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Full guidelines on reusing content on this site can be found on Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. The only reason you found my name listed on the File:Shenzhou_front_white_shadow.png image was that I had to revert it to an earlier version, and as an administrator on this site, delete a version that was uploaded by a vandal. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:27, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token a51e23b760113412c0ff7ee25b758ad6

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

IP 85.132.27.130

Salam. Mən və User:Vugar 1981 və digər bəzi iş yoldaşlarımız eyni IP-dən istifadə edirik. EnVikidə Vugar 1981-nin bloklanması nəticəsində bizim IP-də bloklanmışdır. Sizdən blokun götürülməsini xahiş edirəm. Və yaxud da mənə Ipblock-exempt istifadəçi hüququ verməyinizi xahiş edirəm. Təşəkkürlər! Hörmətlə, Cekli829 (talk) 08:35, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Steve Jobs and apple.com

A couple of screenshots of apple.com announcing Steve Jobs' recent death have been deleted here as a copyright violation per Wikimedia Commons' licensing policy. The "apple.com" web site is "Copyright © 2011 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.". There is still no indication that the web site is free content – especially with the inclusion of the apple.com navigation menu bar on the top. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

That's not nice. Please restore my picture so that I can upload it in de.wp. Thanks. -- ianusius ✆ Disk. 14:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that if I restore here on the Wikimedia Commons, then by the time you read this another admin might delete it for the same reason. A cropped screenshot of the German version of apple.com, File:Steve Jobs.png, is also currently marked for deletion, and may also be gone by the time you read this.

Do you still have the image on your computer that can upload? apple.com may also still have it up. If not, en:wp already has a version at en:File:Applecom homepage after death of Steve Jobs.png. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 15:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I still have the image on my computer. The file on en:wp is also marked, and there is the fair use, which is not allowed in de:wp. I think the File:Steve Jobs.png is okay. If it will be deleted, I will upload my version in de:wp. Cheers, -- ianusius ✆ Disk. 07:56, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Looking at the page history, the image was renamed as File:Steve Jobs tribute-de.png, and there is now consensus to keep it since it is only the message itself, and not the entire web page with the apple.com navigation menu bar. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:52, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

My profile page has been deleted today

Hi there

It appears to me that today you deleted my profile page that I was working on earlier in the day.

The page in question was located @

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Evarinaldi

To the best of my knowledge I had followed Wiki protocol in the creation and publishing of the page, and it also linked to other Wikipedia pages featuring some of my work.

Please advise how my profile page will be restored to how it was, or in a similar fashion.

I will appreciate a swift reply.

Thank you.

Best Regards Eva

Eva Rinaldi Director Eva Rinaldi Photography and Human Statue Bodyart e: eva@evarinaldi.com w: www.evarinaldi.com

The page that was deleted was actually at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Eva rinaldi – without the "User:" prefix. User profile pages require all page names to start with the "User:" prefix. Those without it are treated as a normal gallery page.

Your page has been restored, and now resides at User:Evarinaldi. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 15:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Normandy_American_Cemetery_and_Memorial_DSC_2515_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

deleted why? ... http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Normandy_American_Cemetery_and_Memorial_DSC_2515_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

— Preceding unsigned comment added by W.Rebel (talk • contribs)

Per reply at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#User Zzyzx11, Featured picture candidates should be at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial DSC 2515 2.jpg. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Vissi2007NYCNokiaTheater.jpg

File:Vissi2007NYCNokiaTheater.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Martin H. (talk) 02:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Architect_Saiman_Miah.jpg

Would you please have a look at the file here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Architect_Saiman_Miah.jpg. The image file has copyright issues. --Rossi101 (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

File:BCSTrophy.JPG

File:BCSTrophy.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Levdr1lp / talk 21:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Google Translate

Hello.You can develop and use Template:User Google Translate.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 09:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello there

For the Chargerswordmark file you used to take San Diego out, could you perhaps find a file with Los Angeles in the Chargers wordmark and replace that file with that for the Los Angele Chargers article? If not, thank you for your patience and time to read this. --GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 01:11, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Looks like what appears to be the making of an edit war, both here on Commons[17] and the article on en.Wikipedia.[18] I have uploaded File:Los Angeles Chargers wordmark.png here, but I'm staying out of adding it to en:Los Angeles Chargers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:04, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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

Affected:

• File:Ray Jay1.JPG

And also:

• File:Ray Jay3.JPG

Yours sincerely, Ytoyoda (talk) 20:36, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Please participate in the Universal Code of Conduct consultation on Wikimedia Commons!

Dear Zzyzx11

Thank you for your hard work to create the sum of all knowledge that is freely sharable to every single human being across the world. As our diverse community grows, we need a guideline that will help all of our work collectively and constructively where everyone feels safe, welcomed, and part of a team. That is why the Wikimedia movement is working on establishing a global guideline called the Universal Code of Conduct, often referred to as UCoC.

After the months-long policy consultation, we have prepared a policy (available in many languages) that has been ratified by the Board of Trustees. We’re currently in the second phase of the process. During this round of consultation, we want to discuss the implementation of this policy. As a member of the functionary team of Wikimedia Commons, your opinion on enforcement is of great value. We want to hear from you on how this policy can be enforced on the Wikimedia Commons community and what might be needed to do so. There are a few enforcement questions so you can easily outline your answers based on them. Please do not hesitate to bring any more questions/challenges you think are not yet discussed.

The discussion is taking place on Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation. You can also share your thoughts by replying to this message (Please ping me so I get notified), posting your message on my talk page. I am aware that some thoughts cannot be expressed publicly, so you can always share your opinion by emailing me as well.

As a valued member of the Commons community, please share your thoughts, ideas, and experiences that relate to UCoC. Let us know what needs to be improved so we can build a more friendly and cooperative space to increase editor engagement and retention of new users.

Wikimedia projects are governed by you. So, it is you who needs to step up to ensure a safe, comfortable, and pleasant working environment.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you! Wikitanvir (WMF) (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Please take a short survey regarding UCoC

Hello Zzyzx11,

I would like to inform you that we now have a survey in place to take part in the UCoC consultation. It is not a long one and should take less than 10 minutes to complete. You can take the survey even if you have already participated in the on-wiki consultation. It has a different set of questions and allows you to participate anonymously and privately.

As a member of the Commons functionaries, your opinion is especially essential. Please click here to participate in the survey.

You are still welcome to participate in the on-wiki discussions. If you prefer you can have your say by sending me an email. You can also drop me an email if you want to have a one-to-one chat.

Thank you for your participation! Wikitanvir (WMF) 13:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Cleveland Browns wordmark 2015.png

File:Cleveland Browns wordmark 2015.png 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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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) 20:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Sound Logo

Hello,

I am messaging you because a contest for a sound logo for Wikimedia is being developed and your opinion as a Wikimedia Commons admin is appreciated. My team would like to know if it is possible for the top finalist sound logos in the contest to have attribution temporarily hidden from public view until all the votes are final? The idea is to let the public judge the sound logo contestants based on the merit of the logo, not the person or people who made it. Again, any feedback is appreciated.

Thank you,

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

In my understanding of Commons:Licensing, I suspect hiding attribution temporarily might still violate the terms of some of those free licenses that require attribution. And even if such audio files are initially uploaded here, there is nothing that would stop others from immediately reusing the sounds, and the license would require them to provide the attribution. Zzyzx11 (talk) 11:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

De-adminship warning

Dear Zzyzx11, I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your admin rights on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2024 before 13th March (UTC), and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months, if you fail to do so you will automatically lose your rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you! -- CptViraj (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)