User talk:Yann/archives 38

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search


copyright images deletion

Thanks Yann for inform me. I was bit confused about copyright issue and have uploaded others work. Sorry for that. Please help me to delete those images and i will never upload such of others work.

Thanks, Ramjit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramjit Tudu (talk • contribs) 12:06, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Глинистый сланец

Hi yann, I'm writing to tell you that on the COM: UDR, there have been made lists of file material for painted portraits etc. In short, all the issue that would concern the PD license, I would like to ask for your support for the following file recovery, since Sanadros has also published the original sources of the following files, "I ask what you hold down," I would like to ask Your help for immediate restoration,,, I obviously do not ask you to restore any cited files in the user upload list, but at least those included in the following list please?,,,, You know, I would never hurry, but I would like to remind you if you are the greatest maker of the deletions of the following files, "I would like to ask for help for their restoration" ahahahahahaha--Andrassy66 (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Photos

Please delete those. I don't recall ever uploading those. I have changed my password as a precaution. Thanks for notifying me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SydneyNSWAus (talk • contribs) 21:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SydneyNSWAus: Hi,
Which files are you talking about? I tagged several of your files. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image derived from a file which has since been deleted

Hello Yann, I noticed that you deleted Elodie et Eloise - Compagnie Rions Noir.jpg awhile ago, which I had previously used as the basis for this derived version. Since the original was deleted for copyvio, I assume the derived version should be deleted as well. If that's correct, would you please arrange to delete it? Thanks! Lambtron (talk) 19:46, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done OK, DRed. Yann (talk) 20:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:A young Burmese with Thanaka.jpg

Yann and Moheen Reeyad, it was discussed here. She was uploding rare photos per request. Only using mobile upload tools and from her Facebook collection. Shyamal can say more. Jee 12:56, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not much more to add, just that I know her personally and had introduced her to Wikimedia Commons Android app in a workshop as being an easy alternative to uploading. Since she uploads using the app and finds the whole idea of communicating with strange colons and tildes via talk pages as beyond her. She does post images to Facebook and then uses them via android to upload to commons. I know for a thing that these are her own images and she does not see why commons needs to go in the "do not accept good faith" direction and has more or less given up thanks to several deletion notices! Shyamal L. (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jkadavoor and Shyamal: Hi,
I could assume good faith, but I am quite against allowing anything from Facebook. Technically, all pictures posted on Facebook belong to Facebook. It would be much better if she would upload her pictures to Flickr. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, I think you may contact her and mark her account as verified. We can't ask people to follow a particular way (like Flickr); instead, we should follow what they prefer. I'm not in OTRS now; otherwise I myself handle it. Jee 16:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]


This DR

If someone has any idea on this complex DR, feel free to make a reply. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:29, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inquiry about adding copyright on commons.wikimedia

Please let me know whether my copyright information on the file is correct format and guide me the correct copyright tag for this file

  • Link of the file:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Repeater_Talk_around_channel.png

Please also understand that I am new user of the commons.wikimedia.org, I need to learn the copyright information from commons.wikimedia.org

Goodtiming8871 (talk) 02:36, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nature of Slovenia.webm

Hello Yann, je pense qu'il y a un problème sur le média du jour : il me semble très douteux que la musique symphonique soit l’œuvre du photographe. Je pense qu'il faudrait supprimer la bande son et retirer la version initiale de l'historique. Cordialement, — Racconish ☎ 09:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Racconish,
Il n'y a pas de son avec cette vidéo. Par ailleurs, il existe des enregistrements de symphonies dans le domaine public (pas beaucoup il est vrai). Cordialement, Yann (talk) 19:18, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mille pardons ! J'ai dû regardder sur YouTube et non sur Commons. Merci d'avoir vérifié ! Cordialement, — Racconish ☎ 19:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Coluche

Hello et un grand merci, Yann ! J'ai l'impression que certains usent et abusent du copier/coller et ne lisent même pas les messages qu'on leur adresse. L'intéressé n'en est pas à son premier copyvio. J'ai corrigé la page fr sur Coluche en réintroduisant (non sans mal), l'image qui figurait avant. Bonne (fin) de journée. 2A01:E35:2FDF:4D20:216:CBFF:FEA7:C51A 19:12, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Louvre Pyramid

Salut Yann,

Certaines images dans la récente DR me semblent de minimis, qu'en penses-tu ?

Cordialement. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 07:53, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Thibaut,
J'ai supprimé toutes les photos où la pyramide est l'élément central. Dans celles qui restent, on peut argumenter que la pyramide est inévitable (cf. jugement à propos de la place des Terreaux), ou un élément secondaire. Je ne pense pas qu'ils y ait des droits sur les fontaines. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 09:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

a1cb3

Hi, I am writing to you because I noticed that recently canceled the views of the restoration requests to the COM: UDR, accusing the files required to be copyviol loaded with sock a3cb1, so dear yann that the user blocked by name Глинистый сланец, , has nothing to do with these copyviol uploaded by this user, had it been blocked, it's because of the cultural arguments of photo portraits, and so on. were compatible with the oddities of this user, but if you analyze the way these files are not from the source point of view, but from the point of view of the structure, you will notice that there are big differences for which Глинистый сланец has been involved in this question, I know that well I know A3cb1 is one of the worst copywriters and sockpuppet creators of the whole project, which has led to total misunderstanding in its contributions, but this time it is different, for this blocked user (Глинистый сланец) has nothing at all do, I tell you why in the tiny restoration that you administrators have run on this user, you are the one who has lost some confidence, since you just restored you did not hesitate to immediately check the licenses, ehehehhehe

I send you the list of TRUE sock of a1cb3:

if you notice the files of Lûgnûg and those of Глинистый сланец as far as they are the same in the arguments you will see the differences that distance them from each other ,,,, I only confirm that Lûgnûg is the true souckpuppet of A3CB1--79.17.31.100 10:42, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for assistance

Greetings: After having the problems listed at the Administrator's Noticeboard [1], I noticed that the user's contributions start with cataloguing from "media needing categories" and devolve to deletion nominations and copyright violation nominations in the space of two days. It appears to me that this individual may have had prior experience on Commons, but I don't deal with a lot of socks and blocks and am asking for your help. We may not always agree on everything, but I trust your responsible judgment. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copie d'écran de France 2

Salut, vous êtes vraiment d'une aide précieuse et d'un esprit de tolérance extraordinaire. France 2 utilise un de mes upload et moi je ne peux afficher une seule seconde une copie d'écran insignifiante. N'ayant aucune image à fournir, toute discussion s'avère impossible aussi bien sur Commons qu'envers France 2 que j'avais justement contacté, ils m'ont répondu mais n'y comprennent rien puisque les liens ont disparu. Merci encore de votre coopération, c'est pas grave, si je gène quelqu'un sur Commons autant me le dire clairement - Siren-Com (talk) 00:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Siren-Com,
L'image n'est-elle pas disponible ailleurs ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 10:41, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cette histoire est anecdotique, j'aurais espérer qu'un délai, accordé d'habitude à beaucoup d'images litigieuses aurait couru, mais me l'effacer sans procès, j'ai pris ça comme un manque de cordialité. Je n'ai pas plus de temps de consacrer à ça, j'avais pris la façon la plus rapide. Tant pis. - Siren-Com (talk) 12:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inquiry for the proper copyright

Thank you for your guide. I updated with the tag below but if it is incorrect, Can you please guide me the correct right of the U.S. Government agencies - public domain work? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goodtiming8871: The IAEA is not a US government agency. It depends of the United Nations, and is based in Vienna, Austria. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :Yann: I agreed with you, it is copyright law under the Austria.
I researched the copyright law in Austria. From my understanding, it would be under the term below under the copyright law of Austria : {{PD-AustrianGov}}.
It was such a big task to find the details via another language :) - Austria (translate line by line) .
Please let me know your feedback whether it is correct. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 00:32, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goodtiming8871: Sorry, but no again. The IAEA is not an Austrian government agency. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Yann

Thank you for your reply, The IAEA - Is it under U.N ? would you please guide me the location of the proper copyright under U.N.? Goodtiming8871 (talk) 13:54, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Copyright is a national issue, so the UN do not have their own copyright. A publication by the IAEA is subject to local Austrian copyright und must be considered non-free. I. e. we cannot host any such works unless it has an explicit disclaimer that publishes the work under a free licence. De728631 (talk) 14:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Now that Yann has linked the two files in question (merci !), one could actually argue that these texts are public domain because they are a work of the US Federal Government which is party to both these agreements. De728631 (talk) 18:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. That's tricky. Better to ask on COM:VPC#US-NK join agreement in IAEA. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suppression d'une version de File:Bombe amande.jpg

Hello,

La première version contient des amandes dont le copyright n'est pas clair (copyrighted derivative work) selon le ticket OTRS. Pourrais-tu supprimer que cette version stp ?

@Kvardek du: FYI

--AntonierCH (d) 12:28, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 13:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NASA Europa image

Hello, can you give me insight into why File:PIA19048 realistic color Europa mosaic.jpg was not featured after the unanimous positive vote? In general, I think in such cases explanations for why pictures are not suitable to be featured would be useful, to help others avoid wasting time in nominating images that will not receive consideration (as well as to avoid the appearance of arbitrary judgments). Thanks, WolfmanSF (talk) 02:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@WolfmanSF: Hi,
You need 7 support votes to get the star. The count is done automatically by the bot. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I screwed up and there was a 32-hour delay between nominating the image and adding it to the candidate list. Can the clock be reset? Thanks, WolfmanSF (talk) 18:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@WolfmanSF: Hi,
You could nominate it again, but I don't think it would pass. The size is quite small. You better find other candidates, there are plenty on Commons. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:43, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Medal 50-lecie ZNTK Mińsk Mazowiecki.jpg

Dear Admin Yann,

If you can confirm the Polish CC BY SA license of this image...from a Belarus site, please feel free to mark it. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:39, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 13:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

restore request

Hi Yann, please restore File:Diana-menschig.jpg, OTRS permission received. --Stepro (talk) 22:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stepro,
Which ticket number? Regards, Yann (talk) 10:26, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's Ticket#2017081710008905. Of course I would check the licence specifications and answer the ticket, I just need the file restored. --Stepro (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Stepro: ✓ Done Yann (talk) 14:56, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, all done. --Stepro (talk) 15:24, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi there. All files uploaded by RaymondOly (talk · contribs) as "own work" seem to be already present in the internet. I tried to make a mass deletion request -for the first time- and got no good tresult. Can you have a look? Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 15:22, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:30, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Virgile L’Énéide Traduction de Jacques Delille - Tome 1.djvu

Pourrais-tu stp vérifier la création de ce fichier stp, pas sur d'avoir correctement rempli tous les champs. Même si le fichier est inexploitable en M&S, autant qu'il soit bien importé ici. --Le ciel est par dessus le toit (talk) 12:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,
Pas tout à fait, mais presque... ;) Yann (talk) 13:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merci --Le ciel est par dessus le toit (talk) 17:39, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Wikipedians

Hi. User:IndianWikipedians must have done something wrong when opening a DR for File:Sachin atulkar in sagar.jpeg. Can you have a look at it? S/he has also done something strange at User talk:Heerentanna (while informing the DR of a file, also proposed the deletion of the user's TP :). Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 07:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Fixed and deleted. Yann (talk) 09:34, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, but the issue in User talk:Heerentanna is still there. I really don't know how to fix those things. Have a good day. --E4024 (talk) 11:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Double check please

Eat some pumpkin dessert all and enjoy life... :)

Yann, I made a mistake promoting this photo: File:Church of Saints Clement and Panteleimon (Ohrid).jpg

See: User_talk:PumpkinSky#Fix_please

I fixed everything I can think of. Can you double check it please? Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 11:16, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PumpkinSky: Hi,
I don't get it. I didn't promote anything, and I didn't even vote or edit anything about this. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:36, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
He's asking you to check that he promoted it properly. Its a compliment! --GRuban (talk) 11:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yann. Look at the history of the FPC nomination, here. I had put a "no" when I should have put a "yes", so the FPCbot did not promote it. On my talk page Mile asked me to fix it. I tried to do that this morning and I was asking you to check to see if I missed any steps. GRuban, you misunderstand, thank you though. PumpkinSky talk 12:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@GRuban and PumpkinSky: OK, understood now. Yes, it is fine now. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. PumpkinSky talk 12:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense

Hey there Yann,

Thank you for calling my edits nonsense. I really appreciate that(being sarcastic).

See you later Admin,

--Talk to Kong of Lasers 23:25, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Bhopal image

Dear Yann;

I have used your image here: http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/ioc-appoints-dow-chemical-carbon-partner/

And have credited you as requested. I hope that this is OK. If not, get in touch on andy.brown@the-sii.com — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.34.20.205 (talk) 09:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fine. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:50, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I Want To Reupload the File:E.M.E.A College Main Building.JPG

I want to reupload the File:E.M.E.A College Main Building.JPG which you once deleted by citing small size.If You Give Permission i can reupload it which is now larger sized and suitable for Wikipedia Articles.Please Inform That To Me. Rishad Pkn (talk) 04:57, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Very Much Rishad Pkn (talk) 05:44, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suite ancienne discussion

Bonjour Yann. Faisant suite à cette discussion, j'ai créé la category:War memorial of Espalion et j'y ai téléversé deux de mes photos montrant la signature du sculpteur. J'ai apposé un bandeau mais y en aurait-il un autre plus précis indiquant qu'en 2043, les téléversements seront autorisés ? Père Igor (talk) 16:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Block User:Jennifer6969

Inappropriate username(if you know what it means) and possible sock of INC because behavior is similar to INC's other socks, User:Kasey1996 and User:Jessy Walters for example. And now INC wants another edit war with me at Admin's Noticeboard. This edit is also pretty damning: [2].--Talk to Kong of Lasers 22:56, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hi Yann - I've been answering questions and defusing potential conflicts here and there over the years, (hopefully not causing too many myself), mostly with users on en.WP who aren't familiar with our day to day operations on Commons. Most of the issues are copyright related which I have a fairly extensive background in, so I've been entertaining the thought of possibly helping out a bit more as an administrator here, if that's even feasible. I'm familiar with the process of adminship elections on en.WP and was wondering if it's as grueling a process here, and if so, do you think I'd even be a worthy candidate? Atsme 📞 17:55, 17 September 2017 (UTC)add-on 18:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Atsme: Hi,
You are certainly fit for adminship, and we need more. I don't know the details about the process on the English WP, so I can't compare. But go, ahead!... Regards, Yann (talk) 18:50, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Yann. I went ahead and jumped in the deep end without any scuba gear. 8-( Atsme 📞 19:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Atsme: Hi,
Sorry, it didn't work. Contribute and come back later. You could ask for other status after sometime. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:28, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, what are some things I can do to increase my contributions and be useful to the project? Atsme 📞 16:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Atsme: Hi,
See Category:Media needing categories for a start. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advise

Hi yann please take into consideration the contributions made by Ralph Hammann (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) and at least grant it the Filemover right so the user gets its filemoving done easier. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiven2240 and Ralph Hammann: Hi,
If he wants the right, he needs to ask on the appropriate page. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rouge Park and Category:Rouge National Urban Park

Hey, I found these categories, which are about a certain Rouge Park and Rouge National Urban Park. These locations are the same, Rouge Park was the name of the park before the park became a national urban park (of Canada). What should happen to these categories? Regards, Zhangj1079 (Bonjour!) 23:01, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zhangj1079,
Sorry, but I have no idea. Please ask on the Village Pump. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks anyway! Zhangj1079 (Bonjour!) 21:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your license review on File:Topics Covered (6.002x-3).webm

Hi Yann... I'm a little disappointed that Sj didn't even mention in his undeletion request my reason for declining the request on my talk page. But should we also now upload the Elsevier textbook from that course, given that it is also transcluded onto an edx.org page with a cc-by license template? If not, could you please elaborate on why you believe the video is different, given that it is clearly marked as unfree at its ultimate source? Storkk (talk) 10:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Storkk; the natural way to interpret that license is "material produced by these course instructors". That applies to the video and images produced by them; to their own linked docs (problem sets, syllabi); but not to materials with explicit external copyright such as the textbook. Regards, --SJ+ 14:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And I am curious: how is this video "clearly marked as unfree" [presumably on youtube]? --SJ+ 14:33, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Storkk and Sj: Hi,
I trusted Sj that his claim is OK. If there is any issue, please create a deletion request. Since these were speedy deleted, a restoration to have a proper discussion is legitimate anyway. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:51, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sj: When I originally wrote that, it was clearly marked as having a Standard Youtube License, which is not considered free enough for Commons. In the interim, Youtube seems to have changed their interface such that I can no longer find the license. I would have considered this, in your words, to be an "explicit external copyright" - but I currently have neither the time nor inclination to pursue this further. Hopefully they did intend to license the video files as you presume, and re-users and remixers that get it from us aren't going to have problems. Storkk (talk) 08:16, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Storkk: Hi, You can check the license on YouTube in searching for this video with the filter "free license", i.e. [3]. It doesn't seem to be under a free license on YouTube. Not very convenient, but it works. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

photo copyright

Hi Yann. You've deleted some of the photos I have uploaded on the Commons, knowing that I am accompanied by authorizations and have permission from those who own the work. Thank you ?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rama.Bsha (talk • contribs) 09:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rama.Bsha: Hi,
For any content not directly created by you, you need a formal written permission from the copyright owner. Please see COM:OTRS for the instructions. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

Thanks, now i think it's ok --fedaro (talk) 13:02, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Raul Caarvalho

Hi, Yann. Please answer something to Raul Caarvalho's unblock request. Taivo (talk) 11:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 18:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright for dr osama fawzi / and Arab Times

Hi Please be advised that we gave permission to Rama.Bsha to use photos and graphics from the website www.arabtimes.com for use in Wikipedia If you have any question you can contact me through the published emails as follows: <email>

Thanks you Dr Osama Fawzi www.arabtimes.com — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.169.81.9 (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
We do not contact people to confirm copyright issue. You have to prove that the files are under a free license, and have a valid permission. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Yann . thank you for geting back to me as I can see that you are very busy . I just want to ask you as I am a new wikipedian , how can I proof that the files are under a free license as you can seethe files who belong to they wrote permission to me to published on Wikipedia  ! what is the best way to prove it ? many thanks and sorry if I gave you so much headache .--Rama.Bsha (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rama.Bsha,
Please see COM:OTRS for the instructions how the copyright owner can send a permission. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:EU28-further enlargement map.svg

Hi! You may remember there's been some controversy over the file last month. I am initiating a discussion to settle the matters. Please comment on the issue at File talk:EU28-further enlargement map.svg#Coloring Russia and Kazakhstan. In addition to that, it'll be great if you suggest any Commons users who could comment on this issue. Thank you! --R8R (talk) 16:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi R8R,
I don't see any value in such a debate. If you think there is any use, please create a new map. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:11, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that this (I believe, incorrect) map is commonly used as encyclopedic content as various Wikipedias. Changing them manually in all articles would be too tedious a task, not to mention all of those changes could be reverted just as easily. So it is best to establish some consensus on the matter.--R8R (talk) 18:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi R8R,
It is not for you to decide which map each Wikipedia wants to use. Some of them obviously don't want a map with Russia. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't quite understand the sentiment. What Wikipedia said that? A Wikipedia does not want anything; it's the editors who may want or not want something. I am one editor. I am not going against an established consensus (there is none to the best of my knowledge) or claiming some authority over others; I am initiating a discussion between editors and seeking to invite as many editors as possible. (Even if I made a single go-over to change all maps -- which, as you can see from my response, I am rather not willing to do -- then, I believe, it could qualify as a bold edit if I didn't edit war on it later; but again, this is what I would rather not do at all.)--R8R (talk) 19:19, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
R8R: Some people do not want a map with Russia. Probably some of them edit Wikipedia, but it doesn't matter who are they, or where they come from. So you have to create a new file, and convince each Wikipedia to use your map. That's how it works. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:34, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am not particularly used to this thinking myself. I am primarily a Wikipedia editor, and if there's something you don't find correct in an article, you don't create a new one; you edit the existing one so it is correct. If there is disagreement on what is correct, you discuss it.
I'm ready to change my perspective, however, if you show me a particular rule that supports your vision.--R8R (talk) 13:09, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
R8R: Wikipedia and Commons rules are different. On Commons we do not change an image if there is any objection to it. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:40, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As I have said, I find it hard to take it for granted. If the picture said it was the uploader's opinion, I'd believe you. If we were talking about a matter of preferences (I don't like that green, make it yellow), I'd believe you. However, we're talking about a factual error. I do not believe that the Commons rules protect that. Again, you're free to prove me wrong by quoting a rule that does say errors are okay.--R8R (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
R8R: I didn't invent this, it is an official guideline on Wikimedia Commons: Commons:Overwriting existing files. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:01, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not replying for so long. Yes, it does appear you are indeed correct; thank you for sending the link. This rule seems a little bizarre to me, but a rule it is, so I won't argue. The discussion has been useful so far, though; in particular, it revealed an interesting legend for a separate file I hadn't figured until I've been suggested it. Possibly I'll continue the discussion, but I'll know from this point on there should be a separate file here per rules as a result of the discussion. Thank you! Cheers--R8R (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re

Regarding you comment here. You are right that the thread derailed from the nom but I just can't believe how naïve you sound regarding childrens rights and how adults can coerce kids to do things. I suggest you read up on that. --cart-Talk 16:18, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi W.carter,
Thanks for your message. I am not so naïve, and I am well aware of potential issues, but I just assume good faith. I am upset by moralist arguments, which are quite hypocritical. And the critics about sharpness are complete bullshit. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Yann, I don't wan't to quarrel with you and I'm not a moralist and certainly not an hypocrite. I could take offence at being called such a thing but I choose to let it slide since I respect you and the work you do here on Commons. I work at a publishing house and sometimes I assist at photo shoots where models are used, sometimes young models/kids. One of my functions then is to look after the interests of the kids and make sure everything is ok and keep their parents up to date. It is very easy for kids to be starstruck by the attention they get in such a situation and they will often do anything to please the photographer. Thankfully most serious publishers take steps nowadays to make sure no untoward photos are taken, things were unfortunately different back in the 70s. Legislation here in Sweden regarding the well-being of children is very strict, it may be different in other parts of the world.
I never said anything about sharpness regarding your nom, that was another user. Don't take everything out on me! My argument were purely about light, composition, post-processing and crop. --cart-Talk 13:32, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
My comments are not for you, but expression of my feelings in general. I appreciate this discussion. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File

Thaks, Yann, for my unblock. Now, I'd like you to evaluate a file I uploaded. It is this and was made available on this page. I would like you to see if everything is correct and if it does not violate copyright authors. If it violate, I will propose the elimination myself, to avoid a new block. Thank you. Sorry for my bad English. Raul Carvalho (talk) 16:35, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting entries without providing valid reasoning

Hi, you’ve deleted my commentaries from Macaca nigra discussion and from your own talk page without providing any reasoning. May I ask you to elaborate on your edits? 92.40.248.86 19:30, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My first block. Enjoy. Guanaco (talk) 20:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can you elaborate on the block please? 2A02:C7D:C59:4500:3D96:2E70:6C84:4B6B 21:05, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Could you find another hobby than trolling here? Yann (talk) 22:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trademarked

Hi, you are more familiar with the processes at FR wiki than me. Could you have a look at fr:Modèle:Marque déposée? FR community apparently assumes that Commons does not accept {{Trademarked}} files. Jcb (talk) 12:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jcb,
This is for logo under fair use, which are trademarked most of the time, so it is included in the template. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I came accross the template because they pasted it to File:1Up Studio Logo.jpg and nominated it for speedy deletion here. Jcb (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File deletion

Hi, you deleted this image File:SigurdBergmann.jpg, uploaded in March. The owner (Sigurd Bergmann) of the image sent an email with permission on March 24th, so I do not realize why you deleted it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Areopagitis (talk • contribs)

@Areopagitis: Hi,
When I deleted it, there was no permission. Do you have the ticket number? Regards, Yann (talk) 17:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: , Hi, here is the ticket number: ticket:2017032410015296. Yann (talk) 10:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Permission added. Yann (talk) 10:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Translation admin?

Hi yann i had translated Template:OTRS/Users/mr. But it reads .... and have to be approved by a translation administrator. Is there any translation admin for Marathi language?. Do assist me with the same. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 09:38, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
+Can u please add here. Template talk:PermissionOTRS/lang.--✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 10:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Yann (talk) 10:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Barry Prescott (AC, FTSE).jpg

Thanks for your efforts. Other entries of relevance:

Possibly others - sorry, I got distracted & lost concentration. Cheers (& thanks), Pdfpdf (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gallica images

Hey, Yann! Has anything been discovered for downloading images from Gallica now that the tool died a couple years back? Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam,
Yes, the tool is not needed any more. Gallica uses International Image Interoperability Framework, so any high resolution image can be downloaded directly (when Gallica is not down, which happens quite a lot lately). In short, URL looks like http://gallica.bnf.fr/iiif/ark:/12148/btv1b10415131v/f1//full/full/0/native.jpg Regards, Yann (talk) 21:33, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

En voyage / Travelling

Hi, I will be travelling until October 20th at least. Do not expect any answer before that date. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, Je serais en voyage jusqu'au 20 octobre au moins. N'attendez aucune réponse avant cette date. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Violaciones de los derechos de autor

Con respecto a las fotos que subo del Dr. César Lozano. La última que subí la descargué de su instagram personal. ¿El que este montado en una red social no le quita los derechos de autor?

User:Blakebs re-uploading deleted files

Yann, you recently deleted File:Kirstjen Nielsen.jpg due to copyright violations. I wanted to bring to your attention that it is the third time that this file has been deleted for the same reason and uploaded by the same user. I have tried numerous times to tell User:Blakebs on my Wikipedia talk page (see here and here) that we cannot use this file. No matter how many times they're told that we cannot use this file, he tends to re-upload it. I don't know what you want to do about it as I don't know what options to take, but I figured I needed to bring it to an administrator. Thanks, Corky Buzz by the Hornet's Nest 23:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted file

Dear, you agreed to delete the file https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Kerkhofstraat_28,_Smetlede_(achterkant).jpg#File%3AKerkhofstraat_28.2C_Smetlede_.28achterkant.29.jpg. Can you please explain me which actions you took to verify the position of the picture ? Did you visit the place in person ? Did you try to find the access permissions for the path by contacting e.g. Trage Wegen ? Or did you just accuse me of trespassing from behind you desk ? Funkyxian (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, I deleted the image, the only tool I had was google street view. I found both the main house, the main subject, and the house that corresponds to the wall on the left. As far as I was able to see with google street view there is no public way directly on that side of the photographed house, and it seems that the photo was taken from the garden of the house that corresponds to the little piece of wall on the left, I found this house it is at 50.967195, 3.928123. By precautionary principle I chose to delete it, though it indeed exist a possibility that you took the photo from the public way in front of the other house I mentioned before the vegetation of the private gardens cut the view. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pour info

-> Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Posters of May 1968 from France. --Noelbabar (talk) 11:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Noelbabar,
Malheureusement, ces dessins ne sont probablement pas dans le domaine public. La législation est vraiment stupide dans ce cas, et tout le monde s'en fout en dehors de Commons, mais c'est une autre histoire... :( C'est pourquoi je n'ai importé que des affiches tres simples, sans dessin. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Children dancing, Geneva.jpg

Dear Mr. Yann, very gladly I would use the above photo for my own purposes. How exactly do the conditions for a license-free use of this image look like? I thank you in advance for an answer and remain with kind regards. A. K. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanishining (talk • contribs)

@Sanishining: Please mention "© Yann Forget / Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY-SA-3.0." near the picture. Remember that you may need the permission from the children's parents for any commercial use. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Calottelln.jpg

Hi Yann. fr:Fichier:Calottelln.jpg was deleted. Could you please check, whether the file on Commons would need to get deleted, too? Thanks in advance. --Leyo 22:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 14:11, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image Deletion; banga

The images uploaded were provided by Banga and his company. They were free to be used through wikipedia. tweidle

See my answer in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bangajaz.jpg. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:50, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FOP is Saudi Arabia

Hi, Now you can request undeletion of Category:Saudi Arabian FOP cases/deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sir, Please guide me how to initiate the requisition ? Ammar shaker (talk) 15:24, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rambla_de_Montevideo.ogg

I would be happy if you promoted that video as featured video candidates. If you think it convenient. --fedaro (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by HIAS

Hello, Yann. Could you also delete File:Pakistani troops Kemkaran 1.jpg for the same reason? Thanks, MBlaze Lightning (talk) 05:50, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MBlaze Lightning,
Could you please create a DR? Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:53, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Commons newsletter, October 25, 2017

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates
Things to do / input and feedback requests
Presentations / Press / Events
Audience at Structured Commons design discussion, Wikimania 2017
Team updates
The Structured Commons team at Wikimania 2017

Two new people have been hired for the Structured Data on Commons team. We are now complete! :-)

  • Ramsey Isler is the new Product Manager of the Multimedia team.
  • Pamela Drouin was hired as User Interface Designer. She works at the Multimedia team as well, and her work will focus on the Structured Commons project.
Partners and allies
  • We are still welcoming (more) staff from GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) to become part of our long-term focus group (phabricator task T174134). You will be kept in the loop of the project, and receive regular small surveys and requests for feedback. Get in touch with Sandra if you're interested - your input in helping to shape this project is highly valued!
Research

Design research is ongoing.

  • Jonathan Morgan and Niharika Ved have held interviews with various GLAM staff about their batch upload workflows and will finish and report on these in this quarter. (phabricator task T159495)
  • At this moment, there is also an online survey for GLAM staff, Wikimedians in Residence, and GLAM volunteers who upload media collections to Wikimedia Commons. The results will be used to understand how we can improve this experience. (phabricator task T175188)
  • Upcoming: interviews with Wikimedia volunteers who curate media on Commons (including tool developers), talking about activities and workflows. (phabricator task T175185)
Development

In Autumn 2017, the Structured Commons development team works on the following major tasks (see also the quarterly goals for the team):

  • Getting Multi-Content Revisions sufficiently ready, so that the Multimedia and Search Platform teams can start using it to test and prototype things.
  • Determine metrics and metrics baseline for Commons (phabricator task T174519).
  • The multimedia team at WMF is gaining expertise in Wikibase, and unblocking further development for Structured Commons, by completing the MediaInfo extension for Wikibase.
Stay up to date!

Warmly, your community liaison, SandraF (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 14:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Madame Léon Bertaux

Bonjour Yann, User:Thynouss vient d'importer une photo peux tu regarder si c'est ok? C'est une novice des sans pages. File:Anonyme-1889-Madame Léon Bertaux (1825-1909).jpg. --Nattes à chat (talk) 10:22, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Thynouss and Nattes à chat: Bonjour,
Oui, ça me semble bon. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 11:38, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Comedywithlife

Hi, Yann, can you take a look at the uploads from this user? IMO they are out of scope. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:19, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Already deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:43, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possibilité de débattre d'une éventuelle suppression

Bonjour Yann,
le 14 octobre 2017 vous m'indiquiez ceci :

  • 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!
Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, Yann (talk) 14:12, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ce qui n'est pas une procédure immédiate (les fichiers en cause doivent avoir d'ailleurs plus de deux ans ?) mais dès le lendemain 15 octobre 2017 ils ont disparus et ne sont plus accessibles (a fortiori par le téléverseur que je serais)... Pourriez-vous faire nécessaire pour qu'ils réapparaissent et puissent être ainsi débattus par la communauté.
Merci et Cordialement. 6PO 13:34, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour 6PO,
Ces fichiers ne sont pas acceptables suivant les règles de Commons. J'avais créé la catégorie Paul Boyer, et importé la plupart de ces images. C'est donc en partie de ma faute, mais à l'époque, je ne connaissais pas la date de décès. Vous pouvez demander la restauration sur COM:UDR, mais je doute que cela soit accepté.
Merci de corriger votre signature pour que le lien vers votre page fonctionne. Cordialement, R2D2 ;o) (talk) 09:38, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour R2D2,
merci dee votre réponse. Effectivement je vais demander au moins à voir ces fichiers car je ne mesouviens pas de la mention de Paul Boyer et à quell titre. Ce moyennant quoi, s'il intervient comme auteur, la suppression se justifie.
Par ailleurs, j'essaie de modifier ma signature.
--Cordialement. 6PO (talk) 14:11, 25 October 2017 (UTC) Troisième essai.[reply]
Oui en effet la date de décès était inconnue voire erronée sur certains sites, ce qui explique notre méprise, sachant que Paul Boyer a vécu 91 ans et sans laisser de signe de vie entre 1908 et 1952. Bref, j'ai importé 2 photos de lui qui dataient de 1892 et bien entendu, il faut malheureusement les supprimer. Noyeux (talk) 19:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just one more question

Hi Yann, its EbenCoded, thanks for your reply and suggestion to my request, I have just one more question, am I supposed to upload the unmodified pictures through the same medium as the former ones like am uploading for the contest all over again or to an user talk page or group talk or somewhere else. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 197.242.99.132 (talk) 23:09, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yes, please upload the images as you did before. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Images de l'Institut français de Florence

Bonjour Yann,

Merci de m'avoir contacté.

Je suis celui qui uploade depuis quelques jours les fichiers que me donnent l'Institut français.

Ils ont bien compris les licences libres et ils ne me donnent a priori que les photos dont ils ont les droits (cela fait longtemps qu'ils demandent aux photographes la session des droits).

La directrice de l'Institut, Isabelle Mallez, va faire remplir la Déclaration de consentement et l'envoyer à permissions-fr@wikimedia.org mais doit-elle le faire individuellement pour tous les fichiers déjà téléchargés ? Il y a déjà une bonne soixantaine, toutes dans cette catégorie.

Ces images peuvent être classées en 3 catégories : celles dans le domaine public (publiées avant 1923), celles, la grosse majorité, dont l'Institut a les droits, le nom du photographe et trace de la session de droits, ces 2 catégories ne devraient pas poser problème a priori.

Mais une dernière catégorie concerne les images qui sont dans le fonds de l'Institut, dont l'Institut a les droits d'auteur, mais dont on n'a perdu le nom du photographe, typiquement celle de Marie Trintignant, qui s'est déjà pas mal diffusée sur les projets. Que faire dans ces cas-là ? (je leur ai demandé de tout faire pour retrouver le nom de l'auteur de la photo, ils m'ont dit qu'ils demanderaient à l'archiviste)

Je me demandais aussi si l'Institut ne pouvait pas s'inscrire officiellement dans un projet GLAM afin d'obtenir la confiance de Wikimedia et d'éviter à l'avenir de devoir remplir à chaque fois une déclaration de consentement ?

Amicalement, --FramaKa (talk) 21:03, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour FramaKa,
Oui, il faut le faire pour tous les fichiers, mais il suffit de faire la liste dans un seul mail.
Il est possible de faire un mail générique indiquant par avance que l'Institut a les droits sur toutes les images. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 21:29, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour Yann,
Ok j'ai demandé à la directrice de l'Institut d'envoyer le mail et en attendant j'ai mis "ORTS:pending" sur toutes les images concernées (il est possible que ce mail ne soit pas envoyé tout de suite, j'espère que dans l'intervalle les fichiers ne seront pas effacés)
Pour ce qui concerne le "mail générique indiquant par avance que l'Institut a les droits sur toutes les images", existe-t-il un modèle-type de mail ?
Merci
--FramaKa (talk) 11:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour FramaKa,
Il n'y a pas de modèle spécifique. Il faut adapter le texte présent sur COM:OTRS/fr. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour Yann,
Merci pour la réponse. J'ai une dernière question désolé. La déclaration de consentement se trouve au service juridique de l'Institut et malheurement cela peut prendre un certain temps (une dizaine de jours je pense) avant envoi. Combien de temps tolérez-vous un "OTRS:pending" en attente de la déclaration avant de décider de supprimer les fichiers en question ? --FramaKa (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
FramaKa: Les fichiers avant {{OTRS pending}} ne sont pas supprimés avant un mois. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 18:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This category

Dear Yann,

If you wish to be anonymous, you may wish to change the name of this category to Yann or Yann F instead. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:26, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leoboudv,
Why? Everything I do is public. I have nothing to hide. ;) Regards, Yann (talk) 10:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grisélidis Réal

Coucou,

J'écris ici au contributeur des Sans Pages et à celui du mois du funéraire :) Je me souviens que l'année dernière tu avais fait des photos au cimetière des Rois. Si tu y passes à nouveau, ce serait super d'avoir la photographie de la tombe de Grisélidis Réal qui est inhumée là bas. En fait je ne la connaissais pas et j'ai entendu cette émission récemment [4] dans laquelle sa tombe est (furtivement) évoquée. Wikipédia en parle également : elle est enterrée au cimetière des Rois à Genève, malgré la polémique soulevée par ce transfert, l'indication "prostituée" est gravée sur sa tombe sous son nom et la polémique a continué au sujet de la stèle qui devrait être placée sur sa tombe..

Bien à toi, --Benoît Prieur (d) 16:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Benoît Prieur,
Il me semble qu'on avait fait la photo de sa tombe. Je vais regarder. Tu as cherché sur Commons ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oui bonne mémoire ! File:Grisidélis Réal - Cimetière des Rois.jpg, merci ! --Benoît Prieur (d) 17:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with a video

I'm having issues with File:Alligator gar large mouth.webmhd.webm and need to trim it to remove the black space or redo the conversion. I'm thinking it might be better to delete the file until I can get it figured out. Atsme 📞 12:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update - I uploaded in standard but the ? remains, and there's no thumbnail. Any idea how to fix that? Atsme 📞 13:15, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Atsme, Sorry, I don't know. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, Yann - I got it fixed. Atsme 📞 17:42, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Magazine cover

Since you deleted this, may want to check out this. Can't argue that it was indeed uploaded to Flikr October 3, 2017, but given that I can find things like this from 2013 means the Flikr upload is probably not correct. GMGtalk 12:29, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yes, right, obvious copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File deletion of Revista Anabel Cover Genta Ismajli.jpg

Hello, Can you please tell me the right way to do this. I uploaded the file here and the file was deleted. I uploaded the file to flickr, with file as public domain, and it is still no good. WHat do i have to do? I am the owner of the cover, but what should i do to upload it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bledarsema (talk • contribs) 12:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bledarsema: Hi,
Are you the photographer? The publisher? Anyway, the file is NOT in the public domain, and you are not allowed to upload it here without a formal written permission. Please see COM:OTRS for the instructions. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:38, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake of myself

File:Wapenschild van Joris Six.jpg, I uploaded a new version of the previous (deleted) image, it's a mistake of myself, you can delete it. --Livenws (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All the photos I uploaded have been deleted

ب — Preceding unsigned comment added by JanbazkhBasir (talk • contribs) 16:05, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JanbazkhBasir: Hi,
Yes, the images were deleted because they are copyright violations. Please do not upload any such image, or you might be blocked. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


All the photos I uploaded have been deleted. You can do anything

--JanbazkhBasir (talk) 16:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This should be applied to all users, not just a few users

  • This has not been deleted
  • examples

File:MEET.jpg and also this File:Latif Pedraam.jpg --JanbazkhBasir (talk) 16:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JanbazkhBasir: Why these should be deleted? Yann (talk) 16:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

because of copyright violations My files were not more invalid then these photos.

--JanbazkhBasir (talk) 17:03, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JanbazkhBasir: How do you know that they are copyright violations? Regards, Yann (talk) 18:24, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
JanbazkhBasir:
  • This is like my file that was deleted. There is a very big doubts about these files.

Which should be deleted sooner than my files. Up-loader can not be the author of files. If there is not any valid description about ownership of these files.

--JanbazkhBasir (talk) 18:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

can I Upload Photos?

--JanbazkhBasir (talk) 21:02, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JanbazkhBasir: Only if you are the photographer, or if you have a written permission from the copyright holder. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:03, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From Angeliquerock

hello These requests have been cancelled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angeliquerock (talk • contribs) 14:40, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Angeliquerock: Hi,
What do you mean? Regards, Yann (talk) 16:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Template:Yan The uploads have been deleted. Your message was unnecessary. Template:Angeliquerock — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angeliquerock (talk • contribs) 12:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Angeliquerock: It was necessary to remain you not to do it again. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Leire Cano (13)

Hi Yann! Last June some files (basque literature's book covers) uploaded by Leire Cano were deleted because they didn't have any OTRS permission. Now we can assure that all publishers holding the copyrights have sent the OTRS permission emails. Nevertheless, the book covers have not been restored yet. Could you please check the situation of those files and give us a hand? Here you have the link to the mentioned files. Thank you very much in advance!--Xabier Cañas (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xabier Cañas,
Do you have the OTRS ticket number? Regards, Yann (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conseil d'attitude

Bonjour Yann
Je me permet de te solliciter de tes conseils pour savoir quelle attitude faut-il avoir envers un utilisateur : William C. Minor (je le notifie pas sur ta page puisqu'il s'agit d'un conseil !) qui retire les auteurs de photographies pour y placer les auteurs des sujets photographiés ?
Son compte global indique qu'il contribue depuis mars 2015 mais n'a établi aucun dialogue (commons, wikidata et fr.wikipedia). Son attitude n'est pas vraiment du vandalisme mais plus une méconnaissance de confusion, avec presque 2 000 contributions à vérifier. Faut-il être pédagogue et essayer de nouer le contact afin d'apporter le contenu d'apprentissage ? ou annuler les modifications inopportunes en masse en espérant que la leçon soit acquise ? ou de faire le petit poucet en modifiant chacune des contributions ?
Je te remercie par avance de tes indications. Bonne journée ! Cordialement, —— DePlusJean (talk) 09:52, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Petit ajout d'oubli : Je présuppose qu'il confond la dénomination auteur du Template:Information avec celle du Template:Author.
Pardon pour le petit oubli ! —— DePlusJean (talk) 10:03, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour DePlusJean, Peux-tu donner un exemple ? La première chose à faire est évidemment de lui parler. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 11:26, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comme exemple, il y a : France Gard Aigoual - Le Vigan - IMG 5051.jpg - Nicolas Louis d'Assas.jpg - Lafayette - Gatteaux - verso.jpg - Malherbe medaille 1815 AV.jpg en regardant les modifications du mois de novembre 2017. Tu as raison, privilégions le dialogue en premier ! Merci de tes pensées en partage ! —— DePlusJean (talk) 12:02, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour, désolé d'intervenir. J'ai déjà annulé certaines actions de l'utilisateur, et j'ai mis un message sur sa page de discussion. Cordialement, Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:25, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merci de m'avoir devancé Christian Ferrer Merci à vous deux de vos actions au quotidien ! Cordialement, —— DePlusJean (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sw0

can you check this request by this blocked user? Thanks! --valepert (talk) 18:01, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

import d'une image ce matin qui pose souci

Bonjour Yann

Ce matin, j'ai importé une image trouvée sur internet d'une oeuvre d'Hélène Bertaux (jeune fille au bain, 1873, plâtre, musée Vivan Denont à Chalon-sur-Saône).

Elle semble poser souci au niveau du copyright

Si tel est bien le cas, entendu pour qu'elle soit retirée

Cordialement --Thinouss (talk) 18:30, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Thinouss,
Il faut une autorisation du photographe. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of File:Glorious Day for a Spacewalk.jpg

Hello Yann, look, this problem came up, I uploaded this original NASA file without knowing that another version already existed, even though I did an image search on Google, it just did not appear at all, it was taken as a duplicate and my version was uploaded 15 days after the first, but mine is in better quality, I wanted your opinion about this. They have already deleted the image before I could give you this message, and I wanted to see if you restored it. Thanks

| Prismo (talk. | contr.) 02:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Your file is much smaller, so you have to compare at the same resolution. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:51, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trichoglottis background

Hey there,

Thanks for your comment at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dark purple Trichoglottis (70213s)c.jpg. I went ahead and withdrew that nomination, but spent a little time trying to play with the background to try to make it less distracting. Originally nominated version, new version. Do you think it's worth renominating the new one, or still too distracting? Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk |  02:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is better. Good enough? I don't know. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:53, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks. The encyclopedic value seems pretty good, so maybe I will try it on enwiki FPC instead of Commons. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  16:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to download high resolution images from the Réunion des musées nationaux at present?

Is there any way to download high resolution images from the Réunion des musées nationaux at present? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wujinlong1988 (talk • contribs) 06:15, 12 November 2017 (UTC) --Wujinlong1988 (talk) 06:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Probably not. This is a government agency which has a weird sense of its mission. There isn't even a clear link to its image databank on the main page of its website. And it claims a copyright on anything they have. :( Regards, Yann (talk) 10:03, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking into this, but I had a hard time finding the image databank. Could you point me to it, so I can dig at the technical stuff? Guanaco (talk) 10:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The link is under "professionnels". Here it is: [5]. You can browse either by collections, or by topic. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:09, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I was hoping for some kind of zoomify thing, but it looks like the images simply aren't there. It's possible they're somewhere on the server, but the URLs are hashed differently for each resolution. If they're even available on the servers, it looks like it would be a significant project even to identify the URL pattern. Guanaco (talk) 10:24, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had found some images from https://staging.artsy.net/show/chateau-de-fontainebleau-pius-vii-faces-napoleon-the-papal-tiara-in-the-eagles-talons. This website used many images from RMN-Grand Palais.I don't know whether these pictures in this website or referenced by API from RMN-Grand Palais. For example: https://staging.artsy.net/artwork/innocent-louis-goubaud-la-deputation-du-senat-romain-offrant-ses-hommages-a-s-m-lempereur-et-roi-16-novembre-1809-the-deputation-from-the-roman-senate-paying-homage-to-napoleon-1-on-16-november-1809 https://staging.artsy.net/artwork/pierre-joseph-celestin-francois-allegorie-du-concordat-allegory-of-the-concordat https://staging.artsy.net/artwork/hortense-lescot-le-baisement-des-pieds-de-la-statue-de-saint-pierre-dans-la-basilique-saint-pierre-de-rome-kissing-of-the-feet-of-the-statue-of-st-peter-in-st-peters-basilica-in-rome --Wujinlong1988 (talk) 15:31, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing FP's

When will a picture be an FP and when not? WikiZeven (talk) 16:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, It needs at least 7 support votes, and 2/3 positives. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rambla de Montevideo

Try to show what is the rambla of Montevideo, 22 km long.

Regards --fedaro (talk) 11:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Srinath Singh.jpg

Hi Yann! You've helped out with File:Srinath Singh.jpg in the past. The history is a bit messy, but basically, I tagged the file as missing permission in April, and you deleted it. The uploader recreated it out of process, I tagged it for deletion, and Jcb deleted it again. The uploader then requested undeletion, which you declined. The uploader requested undeletion a second time; Thuresson declined. Then in June, OTRS volunteer Arthur Crbz requested temporary undeletion, which you somewhat reluctantly (I think) agreed to. Based on your concerns, the file was re-deleted by a certain sockpuppeteer. There was some discussion about it, and the file remained deleted based on your input.

The author of the current version is credited as "Dr.P.S.Chauhan" (note the similarity with the original uploader's user name), but the name is linked to the uploader's own nonexistent userpage. The original account has been inactive for long enough that a checkuser request won't be meaningful, but based on what you can see (including deleted contributions), do you think there is enough evidence to suspect sockpuppetry with a reasonable degree of certainty?

Also, can you say if the version uploaded today is the same as the previously deleted one? You mentioned that the previous file was dated 1995, while this one is dated 1982. If it is the same, I think it should be speedily deleted. If it's not the same, I'm thinking {{no permission since}} or a deletion discussion is called for. What do you think? —LX (talk, contribs) 18:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LX,
The deleted image is not the same of the present image, and it doesn't even seem to be the same person. Now Srinath Singh is a fairly common name in India, so it doesn't mean much. Now the previous file had a valid permission, and I don't remember nor understand why it was deleted by DL/INC without a proper DR. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for looking into it. It's a bit odd that you say the subject seems to be different, because both versions were added by their respective uploaders to the same article (diff 1, diff 2). Also, the subject's name is common, but the attributed author's title and name also being the same as the previous uploader's username seems a bit too much to be a coincidence. I'll take it to a deletion discussion. Thanks again for your input. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Yann_and_bad_faith_closure_of_DRs_again

FYI. Jcb (talk) 17:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ROFL. You are the one creating issue, and reporting people. You should find another hobby. :/ Yann (talk) 18:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Hi Yann, I hope you are doing fine. I am contacting you in respect of your comment here. Is there a possibility for you to allow DRs created by Jcb or any other user to remain open for seven days per COM:Deletion request? I am requesting this so that your action will not give an impression that you are targeting this user. I do not think it would cause any damage to the project, if you allow those DRs to remain opened for seven days as required per policy. You could in fact, allow another user to close them. Contrary to your claim here, the DRs were clearly not disruptive for the reasons listed below:

  1. Valid reasons were provided for deletion
  2. It was not an attempt to end an editing dispute
  3. It was not created to harass the uploader or anyone else
  4. It was not created to change our policy on copyright
  5. There is no active ban preventing them from nominating images for deletion

You are welcome to educate me on how the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikicology,
Sorry, but no. As I said, these DRs were disruptive, and that's why I closed them, and I will continue to do so. I am quite fed up with Jcb's incompetent and nonsense DRs, and these should stop. THB, your comment doesn't reflect of the discussion consensus, which is that there is no valid reason for these DRs. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting Natuur12 "Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's but certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings." Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's. This statement in fact implies that the discussion should not have been speedy closed and certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings implies that the closure was disruptive. Even though they believe it's not as disruptive as the DRs. Another commenter wrote As for no valid reason for deletion, I'm becoming more and more conviced that this should be declared an invalid closure reason.. I don't know who is behind the IP but they in fact implies that you did not provide adequate reason for your closure as requested per policy. Another user wrote That DR close was clearly done in bad faith and the stalking of JCB needs to stop, Jcb asked on the DR "please provide some evidence that this would be an anonymous work?" so as such the DR should've remained open until the question was answered - If Jcb agreed then it should've been closed,. This also suggested that your closure was inappropriate. The only persons that agreed with your closure were Fae and Ymblanter. I have provided multiple reasons above why the DRs were not disruptive yet you are yet to provide a single reason why you think the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you are trying to do, or want to say, but it doesn't make sense to me. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Hi Yann, I hope you are doing fine. I am contacting you in respect of your comment here. Is there a possibility for you to allow DRs created by Jcb or any other user to remain open for seven days per COM:Deletion request? I am requesting this so that your action will not give an impression that you are targeting this user. I do not think it would cause any damage to the project, if you allow those DRs to remain opened for seven days as required per policy. You could in fact, allow another user to close them. Contrary to your claim here, the DRs were clearly not disruptive for the reasons listed below:

  1. Valid reasons were provided for deletion
  2. It was not an attempt to end an editing dispute
  3. It was not created to harass the uploader or anyone else
  4. It was not created to change our policy on copyright
  5. There is no active ban preventing them from nominating images for deletion

You are welcome to educate me on how the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikicology,
Sorry, but no. As I said, these DRs were disruptive, and that's why I closed them, and I will continue to do so. I am quite fed up with Jcb's incompetent and nonsense DRs, and these should stop. THB, your comment doesn't reflect of the discussion consensus, which is that there is no valid reason for these DRs. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting Natuur12 "Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's but certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings." Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's. This statement in fact implies that the discussion should not have been speedy closed and certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings implies that the closure was disruptive. Even though they believe it's not as disruptive as the DRs. Another commenter wrote As for no valid reason for deletion, I'm becoming more and more conviced that this should be declared an invalid closure reason.. I don't know who is behind the IP but they in fact implies that you did not provide adequate reason for your closure as requested per policy. Another user wrote That DR close was clearly done in bad faith and the stalking of JCB needs to stop, Jcb asked on the DR "please provide some evidence that this would be an anonymous work?" so as such the DR should've remained open until the question was answered - If Jcb agreed then it should've been closed,. This also suggested that your closure was inappropriate. The only persons that agreed with your closure were Fae and Ymblanter. I have provided multiple reasons above why the DRs were not disruptive yet you are yet to provide a single reason why you think the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you are trying to do, or want to say, but it doesn't make sense to me. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Hi Yann, I hope you are doing fine. I am contacting you in respect of your comment here. Is there a possibility for you to allow DRs created by Jcb or any other user to remain open for seven days per COM:Deletion request? I am requesting this so that your action will not give an impression that you are targeting this user. I do not think it would cause any damage to the project, if you allow those DRs to remain opened for seven days as required per policy. You could in fact, allow another user to close them. Contrary to your claim here, the DRs were clearly not disruptive for the reasons listed below:

  1. Valid reasons were provided for deletion
  2. It was not an attempt to end an editing dispute
  3. It was not created to harass the uploader or anyone else
  4. It was not created to change our policy on copyright
  5. There is no active ban preventing them from nominating images for deletion

You are welcome to educate me on how the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikicology,
Sorry, but no. As I said, these DRs were disruptive, and that's why I closed them, and I will continue to do so. I am quite fed up with Jcb's incompetent and nonsense DRs, and these should stop. THB, your comment doesn't reflect of the discussion consensus, which is that there is no valid reason for these DRs. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting Natuur12 "Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's but certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings." Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's. This statement in fact implies that the discussion should not have been speedy closed and certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings implies that the closure was disruptive. Even though they believe it's not as disruptive as the DRs. Another commenter wrote As for no valid reason for deletion, I'm becoming more and more conviced that this should be declared an invalid closure reason.. I don't know who is behind the IP but they in fact implies that you did not provide adequate reason for your closure as requested per policy. Another user wrote That DR close was clearly done in bad faith and the stalking of JCB needs to stop, Jcb asked on the DR "please provide some evidence that this would be an anonymous work?" so as such the DR should've remained open until the question was answered - If Jcb agreed then it should've been closed,. This also suggested that your closure was inappropriate. The only persons that agreed with your closure were Fae and Ymblanter. I have provided multiple reasons above why the DRs were not disruptive yet you are yet to provide a single reason why you think the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you are trying to do, or want to say, but it doesn't make sense to me. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Hi Yann, I hope you are doing fine. I am contacting you in respect of your comment here. Is there a possibility for you to allow DRs created by Jcb or any other user to remain open for seven days per COM:Deletion request? I am requesting this so that your action will not give an impression that you are targeting this user. I do not think it would cause any damage to the project, if you allow those DRs to remain opened for seven days as required per policy. You could in fact, allow another user to close them. Contrary to your claim here, the DRs were clearly not disruptive for the reasons listed below:

  1. Valid reasons were provided for deletion
  2. It was not an attempt to end an editing dispute
  3. It was not created to harass the uploader or anyone else
  4. It was not created to change our policy on copyright
  5. There is no active ban preventing them from nominating images for deletion

You are welcome to educate me on how the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikicology,
Sorry, but no. As I said, these DRs were disruptive, and that's why I closed them, and I will continue to do so. I am quite fed up with Jcb's incompetent and nonsense DRs, and these should stop. THB, your comment doesn't reflect of the discussion consensus, which is that there is no valid reason for these DRs. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting Natuur12 "Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's but certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings." Perhaps Yann should have reported Jcb instead off speedy closing the DR's. This statement in fact implies that the discussion should not have been speedy closed and certainly the DR's are more disruptive then the speedy closings implies that the closure was disruptive. Even though they believe it's not as disruptive as the DRs. Another commenter wrote As for no valid reason for deletion, I'm becoming more and more conviced that this should be declared an invalid closure reason.. I don't know who is behind the IP but they in fact implies that you did not provide adequate reason for your closure as requested per policy. Another user wrote That DR close was clearly done in bad faith and the stalking of JCB needs to stop, Jcb asked on the DR "please provide some evidence that this would be an anonymous work?" so as such the DR should've remained open until the question was answered - If Jcb agreed then it should've been closed,. This also suggested that your closure was inappropriate. The only persons that agreed with your closure were Fae and Ymblanter. I have provided multiple reasons above why the DRs were not disruptive yet you are yet to provide a single reason why you think the DRs were disruptive. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you are trying to do, or want to say, but it doesn't make sense to me. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yann/archives_38&oldid=271218821"