User talk:Yann/archives 50

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



Film posters from India

The same discussion is going on on User:Túrelio's talk page. Kindly don't delete any more files. अंजना सेठ (talk) 09:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@अंजना सेठ: नमस्ते, Yes, I saw that discussion. As mentioned there, copyright is automatic when a work is published (which is obviously the case of a poster). Files can be undeleted when the permission is received and validated by a volunteer. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are many other posters without such "permission" uploaded years ago and still undeleted. As I mentioned on Túrelio's talk page, producer died years ago, from where shall I bring the "permission"?
@अंजना सेठ: If the author is dead, the copyright rests with heirs for 60 years (in India) after the author's death. I know it is a difficult situation, but that's law. And yes, there may be other posters (or other files) not yet deleted. If you know any, please tag them, or write the filenames here. Also you don't need to ping me on my own talk page. Thanks, Yann (talk) 10:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The heirs of producer are in other profession and production house was shut 20 years ago.
@अंजना सेठ: It doesn't matter. Yann (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me another thing- You told that copyright rests for 60 years. So if I upload the poster of a film released 70 years ago, will it be deleted?अंजना सेठ (talk) 10:17, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@अंजना सेठ: If the poster is signed, the copyright lasts for 60 years after the author's death. If the poster is anonymous, it is 60 years after publication. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So according to you, there is no way to upload those 2 posters? अंजना सेठ (talk) 10:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@अंजना सेठ: Only with the permission of the copyright holder. Yann (talk) 10:25, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I thank you sir for your cooperation.अंजना सेठ (talk) 10:29, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Enable translation templates for Commons campaign

Namaste! We are glad to start the campaign cum contest - Pune Nadi Darshan 2022 - to document the rivers in Pune district. This is a pilot project with Rotary and will be scaled up in future. I kindly request you to enable translation templates for all the event pages. It would be great to seek your guidance in this project. Thanks, -Subodh (CIS-A2K) (talk) 06:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sref

Sir, kindly export this template to hiwiki so that it can be used there. I don't know how to do that so I am requesting you. Thanking in Anticipation117.234.77.98 01:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Germinal 01 zola 128kb.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked Warning

Hello Yann, I've recently started using this space and I'm still learning how to use it and be compliant. I can assure you every image I've uploaded I have exclusive rights and permission to use. I know the photographers personally, I also know the Musician I'm writing about well and have proof of this. If there was help for me to show that I am compliant properly i'd appreciate it greatly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CatDog2020 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CatDog2020: For any document of which you are not the sole copyright holder, a formal written permission is needed. Please ask the photographer to send a permission via email following instructions on COM:VRT. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked warning

You sent me a message of possible blocking because of my last upload. File:BettyVakalidou.jpg The file has OTRS licencing and all rights had given to wikipedia. You are wrong. The site that you mention "Cosmopoliti. com" has not the exact same picture and if so, was after my uploading, copying from here.

The other photos had been upload 5 or 6 years ago, and by my mistake, because i didn;t known the policy good enough.

But the Vakalidou.jpg has been upload through photographer's permission. Pleace, check it, again. I had use Wikimedia VRT release generator. ΔώραΣτρουμπούκη (talk) 02:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ΔώραΣτρουμπούκη: The picture is here: https://cosmopoliti.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/BettyV20_08.jpg
And there is currently no permission in the file description. Do you have a ticket number? Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I upload the photo 25 April 2020, almost two years now. of course i had ticket number, but i dont have until now. The permission for this particular photo has given by photographer John Mitropoulos. (Γιάννης Μητρόπουλος)
This is the conversation i had with Betty Vakalidou, in greek unfortunately.
ο φωτογραφος Γιαννης Μητροπουλος (Jochn Mitropoulos) ο οποιος μου εκανε πριν λιγο καιρο καποια πορτρετα, δεχεται να μου παραχωρησει τα δικαιωματα για 1 φωτογραφια. Πειτε μου σας παρακαλω τι χρειαζεστε να κανουμε.
Anyway, perhaps i didn't follow the instructions by mistake bue not on purpose. I am 10 years user of Greek wikipedia i am not a vandal. ΔώραΣτρουμπούκη (talk) 18:42, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Histoiresextraordinaires 01 poe 128kb.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you speedy delete these files?

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Shwn nash are all blatantly OOS and probably copyvio

Thanks, Dronebogus (talk) 12:52, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 13:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The edit war on the File talk:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg and user blockings

Hi. I saw the edit war on the talk page and the 1 week of block you made to the @Gaeilge181, @Argut and @Eoiuaa. These 3 users are very active on the map. Not only did they edit the controversial situations of the front line and settlements, but also they provided many helpful changes, like those names of settlements, geographic locations and other icon fixes. So I think the duration of 1 week might be too long for them, which would potentially damage the enthusiasm and motivation of them. I think these users did not breach the three-revert rule policy and they did follow the rules of en:WP:DR and discussed the issue on the talk page.

But there is another user @Iconicos consistently uses aggressive words on the talk page, suggesting the above users were "web brigades", "trolls" and "cyberwarriors", which I think could be detrimental to the discussion on the topic. I am not sure whether the wording of @Iconicos might be more of a hindrance than a help, but this behaviour is against No personal attacks and would also be blocked as per Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Protection. Besides @Iconicos is one of only two users did the three-revert within 24 hours. The other one is the creator of the map @Viewsridge. Wo.luren (talk) 09:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Wo.luren: I requested other admins' opinions. See [1]. Thanks, Yann (talk) 11:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help.Wo.luren (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Warofworlds b1 ch01 wells.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some OOS junk I need speedied

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:1

Thanks, Dronebogus (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Essential Language Habits- A New Edition in Color. Book Two (IA essentiallanguag00char 0).pdf

File:Essential Language Habits- A New Edition in Color. Book Two (IA essentiallanguag00char 0).pdf 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!
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 ∙ +/−

De728631 (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Teachers' Manual for Modern Science-Book III Our Environment- How We Use and Control It (IA teachersmanualfo00wood).pdf. I notified you because you closed the UDR or original DR discussions for these files. De728631 (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:JoJo's Pitter Patter Pop! icon.png

Why is a file like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JoJo_Diamond_Records_icon.png allowed but this one isnt? They are both by the same publisher, same type of image (cover art for an app) etc.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FishandChipper (talk • contribs) 20:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FishandChipper: As mentioned in response to your request, fair use is not allowed on Commons. You have to upload your file on the English Wikipedia. Please read the rules there first: en:Wikipedia:Non-free content. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Sir, are you a "global" pending changes reviewer? If yes, then kindly review the last change on hi:अलका नूपुर. I am asking to you because none of local reviewers is active on Hindi Wikipedia. At least answer.117.234.73.126 21:21, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You don't have to ping me on my own talk page. My written Hindi is not good enough to review articles. Sorry, Yann (talk) 08:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Les Chants de Maldoror, par Lautreamont, chant 1.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valued Image Promoted

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Semnopithecus dussumieri (Southern plains gray langur).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OpenRefine and SDC updates: user survey and monthly office hours

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for updates about the Structured Data on Commons (SDC) features that are currently developed for OpenRefine.

Short survey for SDC features in OpenRefine

OpenRefine logo

OpenRefine is running a short survey to learn about user needs and expectations for its new SDC features. If you upload files to Wikimedia Commons and/or edit structured data there, please help by filling in this survey!

Monthly OpenRefine and Wikimedia office hours

OpenRefine's community meetup of February 22 was very well attended. You can see its recording, slides and notes here. The team now hosts monthly, informal office hours for Wikimedians (online, via Zoom). Upcoming office hours are:

The Zoom link of the next office hour will be posted on OpenRefine's info page on Wikimedia Commons. Please drop by and say hi!

All the best! SFauconnier (talk) 14:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New information about Bach Cantatas Website

Dear Yann, following the discussion about audio recordings of Cantata No. 56 by J S Bach, I sent an email to Aryeh Oron, the webmaster of bach-cantatas.com (BCW), asking information on the five mp3 audio files featuring the Orchestra of St Celilia, Dublin (OSC). He has very kindly replied to my request for info. The response was very rapid. He has written that the mp3 files of the OSC Bach recordings were presented to BCW by permission of Lindsay Armstrong, the retired artistic director. He has said that I would have to get his permission to present the mp3 files on this website, so either en.wikipedia.org (restricted) or commons.wikimedia.org. Aryeh has privately given me the new gmail address for Lindsay Armstrong. Although there are no copyright issues, the five audio files would have to be deleted while I found out from Lindsay Armstrong what he thinks. It might be possible to do something using a form of ORTS certificate; Graham87 would be the normal person to ask, given his experience with audio files and as an administrator on en.wiki. Does that seem reasonable? Regards, Mathsci (talk) 06:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathsci: Hi,
For a music recording, there are 3 copyrights involved: the composer, the performer, and the recorder. For each of them, we must either have a proof that the copyright expired or have a formal written permission for a free license. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:08, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: bonjour.
As Aryeh Oron has mentioned, all of the licenses, where required, were made by Lindsay Armstrong;see also. I have yet to write to him in Ireland. The recording was part of a Bach Cantata Project at St Ann's Church, Dublin. It has now been officially archived at Dublin City Library and Archive in en:Dublin.
  1. The composer was en:Johann Sebastian Bach, the work was cantata en:Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56 and was composed in 1726. It is in now in the Public Domain, so not subject to copyright.
  2. The performer is Lindsay Armstrong's the OSC, the Orchestra of St Cecilia, Dublin, founded in 1995 and disestablished in 2014. After his retirement as founder and artistic director, Lindsay Armstrong bequeathed his documents and recordings to Dublin City Public Library & Archives, where they are now stored. Lindsay Armstrong still has the rights to the mp3 recording, so written permission would come through him and gmail correspondence. Although Holy Week started last Sunday, I will ask him about the recording when and if he has time.
  3. The video recordist was Fred Harle for the final cantata performance on this vimeo recording, now administered by Dublin City Public Library and Archive. The sound and video recordings were organised by Lindsay Armstrong; there is a vimeo recording of a pre-performance lecture of en:Christoph Wolff, introduced by Lindsay Armstrong. All information about the technical recording of the cantata originates in Lindsay Armstrong, as the recordings were organised at St Ann's Church, Dawson Street, Dublin. Please see the listing here.
The OSC is listed in "The Encyclopaedia of Music in Ireland" (2013) edited by Harry White and Barra Boydell, en:University College Dublin Press. The recordings are not listed in discogs or allmusic; apart from information supplied by Lindsay Armstrong himself, all further documentation is listed by Dublin City Library and Archive in this pdf file, with no documents after 2001. I hope this is helpful. Mathsci (talk) 15:50, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on Ukraine war map

Can you block this account please, thank you. [3] Viewsridge (talk) 12:38, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 12:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Houndofthebaskervilles 01 doyle.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion needs closure

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anti LGBT.jpg has stagnated since early March with a consensus of 3d (including nom) 1k. I think the file can be deleted with minimal controversy at this point. Dronebogus (talk) 15:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:22, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Utilisateur no mariage homo.jpg has been stagnant for the same amount of time. Consensus has clearly changed to delete. Dronebogus (talk) 15:24, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Yann (talk) 10:07, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kunwar_Raghuraj_Pratap_Singh_कुंवर_रघुराज_प्रताप_सिंह.jpg

Hi, You have deleted the above file on copyright violation, however, it was sourced from *.gov.in website under Template:GODL-India May I know why you deleted it without seeking explanation? User4edits (talk) 03:18, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @User4edits: I restored it, and created a proper DR. Yann (talk) 10:06, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Why did you block me? 70.172.194.25 15:45, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Sorry about the bluntness of the above message, if you check my talk page on Wiktionary you can see I'm normally more polite. I was just very startled and a little upset. But now I checked the logs and see that you unblocked me within a few minutes and it was obviously just a mistake.
I do see how having made like 50 edits to a page in a row looks suspicious if you don't look too deeply, but I assure you they were all in good faith. If you think I should post the requests somewhere else so as to not clutter the page, I would be happy to do so. The reason I'm using that page is because it was suggested to me: [4]. 70.172.194.25 19:21, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Sorry that was an error. I unblocked you immediately. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:38, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious

Hello! I just want know why my uploaded images were deleted when the linked image below remains uploaded. I basically did same thing of filtering creative commons videos on YouTube and getting a screenshot of them. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nicola_Coughlan_Vogue_Taiwan,_April_2021.png Maxen Embry (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this one is under a free license. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And this one isn't? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdAunlVFeBw&ab_channel=ELLESingapore
I typed Jonathan Bailey in the search bar, then filtered the results to Creative Commons. So, according to this https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797468?hl=en, it has CC Attribution 3.0 Unported which can be uploaded on here. Maxen Embry (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No free license there. In addition, it is written "Video: Courtesy of Netflix", so it can't be free. Yann (talk) 21:06, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So which of the images you deleted has a free license per your message on my talk page? Can you reverse your actions on it please. Thanks. Maxen Embry (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

deleting my own pictures why? Alexander Klimokhin

Hi! Why did you delete my paintings? I am the author of these works and sent a letter to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

Why didn't you look at the article before deleting it? My personal website is listed there. I am an honored artist of Russia. Why would I insert other people's paintings into my article? You also wrote "You may be blocked soon" For what??

Tell me how to fix this misunderstanding? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klimokhin (talk • contribs) 09:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

@Klimokhin: Hi,
Please sign your messages with ~~~~.
The files I deleted have no permission. We need a permission for each of them. If you already sent a permission, please ask on Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:26, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I contacted the volunteers and they said they would restore my paintings. Please, remove the message from my account that I am allegedly a violator. "This is your last warning. The next time you upload a file that violates copyright, you will be blocked." Klimokhin (talk) 15:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Purim AngKaew.png and File:TW 0068 Purim.jpg

Hi. Could you check why the above files were deleted? If I remember correctly, weren't they claimed as own work? (See also User talk:Túrelio/Archive16#File:TW 0068 Purim.jpg.) --Paul_012 (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul 012: Hi, These are small size images of a personality, as usually found on social media, so very unlikely to be own works. Yann (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Rimbaud-Une-saison-en-enfer-part1.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DR on File:RedStarNewspaper56.jpg

Hi, may you explain why you has deleted this image: [5]? You do that despite the fact that after request of the user, the source of the photo was clarified and was generally indicated correctly. What I has made wrong in this situation? --Kursant504 (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kursant504: {{Mil.ru}} only applies to images created by them. It is clearly not the case of this one. Since the photographer died in 1992, it is not in the public domain. Yann (talk) 09:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
May you explain how it works? The photographer was a war correspondent of the "Krasnaya Zvezda" newspaper and serves in the Soviet army. Taking these photos was his job, his duties in military service. And the results of his work belong to the Soviet army (as a newspaper owner) and now to its legal successor - the Ministry of Defense of Russia (as the current owner of the newspaper). 1) Why Mil.ru can't use them as they want? 2) Which man can make a fotos for mil.ru for they can use them? On your logic - if "mil.ru" will indicate the author - they can't use it... I understand it correct? Very strange... Kursant504 (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason why the photograph's copyright, active on Soviet times, would have been transfered to the actual Ministry of Defense of Russia. It may be used under some fair use-like rationale, but Commons doesn't accept fair use. Yann (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is, you believe that all works that were created or published by the Soviet army before the collapse of the Soviet Union and whose author is unknown (for example, absolutely all manuals published before 1991 and illustrations from them, if the author is not specified) now do not have a copyright holder (since you do not recognize the Russian Ministry of Defense as such) and it is in the public domain now? Right? Kursant504 (talk) 05:32, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. Except state symbols and signs, no work under the public domain before 70 years after publication if the author is unknown, or 70 years after the author's death if it is known. Please see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Russia for the details. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request to reinstate File:Narantsetseg designs folk costume for Mongols in Gansu, China.webm

You recently deleted File:Narantsetseg designs folk costume for Mongols in Gansu, China.webm on the grounds that "Media missing permission as of 13 April 2022". Actually, the "missing permission" has already been added on 13 April 2022 by myself, but I just leave the "no permission template" there for an independent user to verify the permission. The source of the file is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJqaCEWLVac , if you go to the "caption" of that video on YouTube and click "show more", it explicitly shows the line "Licence: Creative Commons Attribution licence (reuse allowed)". I already stated this fact on the permission section of File:Narantsetseg designs folk costume for Mongols in Gansu, China.webm on 13 April 2022. Would you reinstate the file? Lovewhatyoudo (talk) 08:26, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lovewhatyoudo: OK fine, but actually the license was wrong. The right license is {{YouTube}}. I fixed and reviewed it. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for quick response! Oh it should be {{YouTube}}, i'll bear that in mind. Lovewhatyoudo (talk) 05:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

humans.txt license

Licensing is given for the humans.txt logos. Please read "Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike" for the relevant discussion. Nicole Sharp (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nicole Sharp: Non Commercial licenses are not accepted on Commons. Please read the discussion you liked above. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saint-Sébastien Tournoi de maîtres 1911.jpg

Bonjour Yann, Cette image est une image dérivée créée à partir de Galica (https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5526547r/f12.item.texteImage). L'auteur est inconnu. Que dois-je faire pour qu'elle soit maintenue ? Cordialement. --Cjldx (talk) 16:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cjldx: Il faut ajouter une licence. Dans ce cas, {{PD-old-70-expired}} convient. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:40, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pardonnez mon ignorance. Où dois-je mettre ce code ? Cjldx (talk) 16:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cjldx: Comme ca. J'ai créé une catégorie et un modèle Creator pour Henri Delaire. Il faudrait ajouter des catégories pour l'image. Yann (talk) 16:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Un très grand merci ! Je vais essayer de trouver une catégorie. Bien cordialement. Cjldx (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:U.S.G.S Hydronamics Of Lake Houston.jpg

Hello, I want to thank you for the time you took to correct my error, I had no idea about the copyright rules for uploading images, and now I know, and will not make that mistake again.

Many thanks,

dalderman) 2600:100D:B009:9BFA:9076:BAFF:AA99:E5FC 17:00, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot to provide a license, I did it for you this time. Yann (talk) 18:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

photo deleted

I added a picture into an article that I created and edited, but it was deleted by you. It was actually a picture from a public page (http://climatechange.boun.edu.tr/prof-levent-kurnaz/)

Could it be possible how I could reload and provide permission for this? Should I write to an email address from this page or try to contact Kurnaz?

(deleted pic: File:ProfLeventKurnaz.jpg)

Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maymooncuk (talk • contribs) 18:18, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Maymooncuk: Hi,
Please sign with ~~~~.
You are not allowed to upload pictures from the Internet without a formal written permission from the copyright holder. If you have such a permission, please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kim Beazley and Daniel Pocock.jpg

Hi Yann, it seems to me this file File:Kim Beazley and Daniel Pocock.jpg does not have the usual OTRS permission to reuse under cc-by-sa- by the initial photographer or am I mistaken ? Nattes à chat (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, right. Most probably a copyright violation, deleted. Yann (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Distributed winding

Hey bro you messaged something regarding the copyright status of the above mentioned (distributed winding) image. Unfortunately I am not able to see message from you. Let me know on email: <redacted> 106.76.156.2 03:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't answer by email. Please log in. Thanks, Yann (talk) 05:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Libro de Agricultura (كتاب الفلاحة), traducción de 1802 por Josef Antonio Banqueri.jpg

Hello. The author died 204 years ago. Isn't this considered public domain in Spain? – El Mono 🐒 (talk - es.wiki) 14:41, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@El Mono Español: Yes, it is in the public domain, but you have to mention that in the license, which is now missing. Please add {{PD-old-100-expired}}. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. With your permission, I remove {{No license since}} – El Mono 🐒 (talk - es.wiki) 15:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: File:Olivia Zuniga.png

Hello, Yann,

File : Olivia Zuniga . png

I suppose the image/file will have to be deleted "as late as possible" or as soon as possible. I do not own copyright ©️, I do not know who took the photograph. I just copied it from a Facebook wall/page.

Best regards, Heterotrofo (talk) 23:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Heterotrofo: You are not allowed to upload images here if you don't know the copyright status. Thanks, Yann (talk) 06:13, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by Cesar David MP

This is enough he is now attacking me personally. Deal with him before I do that myself.--Sakiv (talk) 11:18, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sakiv: I didn't see that. Can you provide a diff? Also if you don't agree on a color, new versions should be uploaded as separate files. Valid references for color can only be on official documents and websites. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:18, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
calling someone a scoundrel even you are at odds with them is totally unnacceptable. [6]--Sakiv (talk) 13:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Tulipenoire 01 dumas 128kb.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete new files at Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:1

All of them are OOS as personal photos by non-contributors except for one which is OOS as low quality and indeterminate purpose Dronebogus (talk) 00:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:09, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grant's Canal 1962 USGS topo.png

I uploaded this awhile back and then determined it was too illegible to be used, so I tagged it for G7 as it's not ever been used and the names on the map aren't readable (at least on my screen). Surely G7 would apply here as I was the uploader and nobody else has used it, so I'm not sure why you declined the G7? Hog Farm (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: G7 is only applicable within one week of upload. You can still fill a regular deletion request. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:11, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Invisibleman 01 wells.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Putin is terrorist.jpg

What is the reason for deleting the file? «as per COM:SPEEDY» - According to which point of the rule? --Микола Василечко (talk) 18:14, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Restore my file! --Микола Василечко (talk) 16:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Микола Василечко: See COM:DW. There is also the issue of scope. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This file is free. Restore my file! --Микола Василечко (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Caricatures of Vladimir Putin. Yann (talk) 07:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
«Probably not»??? THIS MY WORK! The same File:Stop Ruscism.jpg and File:ПТН - ЗДХ.jpg and File:PUTIN IS MURDERER.jpg (this file republik from Commons in Berliner Gazette). You made a mistake. Restore my file File:Putin is terrorist.jpg! Explanation «as per COM:SPEEDY» there is no specificity - According to which point of the rule. --Микола Василечко (talk) 18:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. Yann (talk) 20:24, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pacha Tchernof's requests

hi Yann! could you plz help User:Pacha Tchernof with Template talk:Motd/2022-05-04 (en) File talk:Responding to a Massive Measles Epidemic in DR Congo.webm? thx! RZuo (talk) 11:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of File:Henri Kuijpers 1931.png

Hello Yann, I see that you have deleted this file because you were uncertain about its copyright status. I am afraid that I do not know in which form to provide this information. The picture was taken in 1931 by an unknown photographer. The person in the picture, Hendrik Kuijpers, died in 1946. The museum that currently owns the picture is perfectly happy with its appearance on Wikimedia and its use in the Dutch-language wikipedia. Please help. --Lieven Smits (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lieven Smits: No license was provided, that's why it was deleted, not by me, but by Fitindia. I suggest you write a request on COM:UDR. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:1

Junk files need deleting again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dronebogus (talk • contribs) 12:18, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Grandmeaulnes 01 alainfournier 128kb.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image for restoration

I understand that you restore pictures and are generally interested in India and South Asia-related pictures, if you think it is worthwhile, I think this 1980 image from Bhutan could use some restoration. I apologise if I'm making assumptions that I shouldn't or if I shouldn't be writing here or if this image shouldn't (or cannot) be restored. I just thought you might be interested. --UnpetitproleX (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UnpetitproleX: Hi,
Yes, I do some restoration, but I am rather busy at the moment. This one is also difficult. You could also ask Adam Cuerden. He may be interested, and much more competent than me. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That’s alright, thanks for responding. I did think it might be particularly tricky (or even impossible) to restore this image. I’ll just ping @Adam Cuerden: here instead of posting on their talk page. I hope that is ok. UnpetitproleX (talk) 09:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Problem

Dear Yann, you need to stop deleting pictures with a not so certain copyright status. PLEASE, just stop. //Krõps (User talk:Krõps) 07:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About File:Γραφομηχανή.jpg

I took this image from a user on Rixabay but this user has written on the description of that photo on pizabay that it is free. You can see it yourself here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Πέτρος Μπροτζάκης (talk • contribs) 14:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Πέτρος Μπροτζάκης: You forget to add a license. Please see the note on Category:Unreviewed files from Pixabay. Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:20, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:1 junk 4 u

Someone’s uploaded OOS crap again, please speedy delete. Dronebogus (talk) 12:08, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Dronebogus: But you don't need to tell me. Yann (talk) 13:58, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About the delete of main visual

Hi Yann

I got the permission to use the main visual of unframed/semantic error/damn good company/double trouble for making wiki content from Watcha Japan. Please tell me the reason you deleted these pics. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linling424 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Linling424: Commons is a repository of files of educational use. And we need a formal written permission for a free license from the copyright holder for any document you didn't create yourself. Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re picture you deleted of Colette Aboulker- Muscat

All photography in Algeria that pre-dates 1987 is in the public domain as per Wikimedia Commons Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Algeria Please restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venndiagram8 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venndiagram8: Hi,
Please sign with ~~~~.
The license was not inserted in the right place, but I fixed it. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two photos deleted

Hi, I'm not sure why two images that I uploaded were deleted, please may I ask why? They were: File:Hyundai i20 N Rally1.jpg, M-Sport_Ford_Puma,_Croatia_Rally_2022.jpg. Thanks. --Rally Wonk (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, There were wrongly tagged as copyvios by a IP. Sorry for the deletion. I undeleted them and added the correct license ({{YouTube}}) and a license review. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other files I uploaded and might need deletion

Jean Dubuffet has also another artwork on Commons not uploaded by me which I add below.

Of Christoph Merian there are several other images of his bust in black and white and I thought I add 2 in color. Also after searching for the artist, I didn't find the artist of the bust, therefore I guess they don't have valid license.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ups, well as you see, I am not really experienced:). All the files can be added a brackets for a wikilink and then they appear very big. So I took away the brackets. I hope you'll know how to fix this issue.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:04, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well for the two Jean Dubuffet I found now a way how to delete them. For the Busts of Christoph Merian of which exist many uploads on commons but I couldn't find out who is their artist, I leave it at your discretion what to do.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I also found a copyright for the Christoph Merian Busts, I also added the copyright to the other ones not uploaded by me.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Paradise Chronicle: {{FoP-Switzerland}} is for the copyright status of the statue, but you also need a license for the picture itself. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I'll do that.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:25, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dans un genre TRES TRES diffèrent...

Tu crois que cette vidéo pourrait intéresser Media of the Day ? File:Dream_Home_Wiki_Loves_Africa_2022_By_Green_Wilfred_Somoni.webm

Bises

Anthere (talk) 22:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Anthere: Certainement ! Très belle vidéo. MotD a surtout besoin de diversité. 90% des documents viennent d'Europe ou d'Amérique du Nord. Ce qui est important, c'est aussi d'avoir une explication ou une description. Si tu peux compléter... Yann (talk) 08:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ou bien File:The_Weaver-1.webm

Autre idée ? File:LifeJanja_(An_evening_at_a_Maasai_home).webm

Intéressant. Il serait vraiment bien d'avoir une transcription et une traduction des paroles. Yann (talk) 08:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ce que je vais faire est d’améliorer descriptions, catégories et données structurées. Je fais ça dans les jours à venir. Anthere (talk)

Et tant que j’y suis... j’aime beaucoup ces trois vidéos de Bouba Kam. Je les signale car couvrent différents thèmes mais tous en Afrique. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Videos_by_Bouba_Kams

Anthere (talk) 14:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Anthere: J'ai proposé la première. Il serait de donner plus d'informations sur le lieu et le contexte. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
J’ai vu qu’elle a été acceptée pour début juin. Je ne suis pas certaine que je dispose de plus d’info que ce qui est déjà là, mais j’ai regardé toutes les vidéos, ajouté une caption en français, et des données structurées. C’est mieux que rien. A voir si on peut faire mieux. Merci ! Anthere (talk) 16:03, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Paradiselost 01 milton.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Troismousquetaires 01 dumas.mp3, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

deleting file

Hi. You deleted the file https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ivan_Danishevskiy.jpg. The owner of copyright permissions sent a confirmation email on Wikimedia commons. Can you check it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Швец Виталий (talk • contribs) 13:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Швец Виталий: Hi,
Please sign with ~~~~.
I am not a member of the Volunteer Response Team. You will have to wait for the permission to ba validated. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"No valid reason for deletion"

I thought that "at the request of original author/uploader" was a valid reason to delete just about anything (save for things like user talk pages, etc.) Nick Boppel (talk) 00:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Boppel: Could you tell me which file you are talking about? Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These five requests that you recently closed. Again, I thought that the request of the original author or uploader is a valid reason to delete just about anything as long as it hasn't been substantially contributed to by others, and isn't a vital part of the internal project (i.e. user talk pages). Nick Boppel (talk) 16:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick Boppel: You can request deletion without a reason within one week after upload (cf. Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion). After that, a valid reason is needed. Thanks, Yann (talk) 16:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

suppression de l'image Annn Tiné dans son atelier

Bonjour,

Pour quelles raisons avez-vous supprimé l'image que j'avais mise dans le domaine public ? Ann-TINÉ-atelier-Paris-1966.jpg

Je suis bien l'auteur de cette image. La sculptrice Ann Tiné est ma mère que j'ai photographiée dans son atelier lorsque j'avais 20 ans. Merci de remettre en place cette image sur Wikimédia Commons ou de m'expliquer clairement votre décision. Cdt --Jhussenot (talk) 09:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jhussenot: Bonjour, Cette image avait été proposée à la suppression par une adresse IP. Restaurée. Désolé. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 09:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merci Jhussenot (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD Notification
⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐

File:Mahatma Gandhi Arrives in the U.K. (1931) - British Pathé.webm, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Fma12

Can you please participate here to resolve this? Hekerui (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright images

Hi, Yan. For this images

This is official cover for albums and photo of music band Brem Stoker (Ukraine). Please, explain me, why you delete this files w/o discussion? Lyaschuchenko (talk) 18:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lyaschuchenko: For any document previously published elsewhere, we need the formal written permission from the copyright holder for a free license. If you have such a permission, please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge deletion requests

So, this 220.246.141.82 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RBL • abusefilter • tools • guc • stalktoy • block user • block log) has made too many requests to be dealt with separately. Can you merge them in Mass deletion request so we can discuss whether it is copyrighted or not? He mentions only point (e) but the images fall under point (b) which states: (b) inventions, legal, administrative and judicial acts, as well as other official creations and their collections, presented in order to inform the public; and the definition of "public information" is given to another law which I mentioned here. Thanks in advance. --Bes-ARTTalk 20:00, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bes-ART: OK, thanks. I blocked this IP. Yann (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!!! -- Bes-ARTTalk 20:04, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann Hello again. You recently deleted all the images which I was referring in previous comments. I don't know if it is by mistake or something else but I already explained here that those images are public domain as they are published, made and owned by the Government of Albania through Albanian Telegraphic Agency or by contacting private photographers. I contacted many of them by DM and they confirmed me that thos are owned by the government or in some cases they work in Press related offices. Bes-ARTTalk 17:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The images were deleted by mistake. Can you please revert them back as they are placed in important articles? Kj1595 (talk) 18:43, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I asked confirmation on COM:VPC#PD-Albania-exempt. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:45, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: Hi Yann. Can you restore the deleted images which were wrongly proposed for deletion by the IP account you blocked? The images that need to be restored are found here.

Need Help

Hello Yann,

I just recently heard that one of my images was removed due to an alleged copyright violation and some of my other ones might be removed as well.

Can you please provide me with some instructions on how to properly get the copyright licensing on Wikimedia Commons for images so I don't try to make any further violations?

I'm trying to use each portrait of the Governors of the United States on a Wikipedia page to make the page as neat as I possibly can and I still don't know how to get the appropriate licensing for each image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squazyzilla (talk • contribs) 15:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Squazyzilla

@Squazyzilla: Images by US states are not automatically in the public domain. It depends on the states. In addition, the images you uploaded lack a license. You are responsible for providing one, otherwise they will be deleted. For more information, you can ask on village pump about copyright. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:32, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You delete images without proper verification

You recently deleted the infographic «NATO scales up its eastern defences.png» uploaded from the Imhograph channel without checking the license. The distribution license is indicated in the description of the Imhograph, and some other images downloaded from it have a "license confirmed" bar. Please do your job more carefully. Because of your mistake, I will have to re-configure everything. If this happens again, I will submit for discussion a request to deprive you of the right to administer. --RASPBERRY VIBE (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RASPBERRY VIBE: Threats won't lead you anywhere, except being blocked. File:NATO scales up its eastern defences.png was tagged as speedy deletion (SD) by BFD-69. In this case, you can contest the SD in changing it into a regular deletion, but do not reupload deleted content. I reviewed the license. Sorry about the deletion. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm sorry. I was outraged and allowed myself too much. Thank you for your cooperation! — RASPBERRY VIBE (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cloves Marques.jpg

Por que apagou Cloves Marques? O trabalho é próprio, meu. Eu respondi que é meu. Paulo Camelo (talk) 21:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC) Why did you delete Cloves Marques.jpg? It is may owner photo. I answer that. Paulo Camelo (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Paulo Camelo: This is a small image without metadata (EXIF). Could you please upload the original image, or send a permission following the instructions at COM:VRT? Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very simple building?

Yesterday, you closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nikoo-build.jpg as kept, saying "very simple building", I wonder how could those things within File:Nikoo-build.jpg can be very simple? Are they really all De minimis?

  1. A yellow and a pink background artwork flag, covering its 4F windows;
  2. On its 2F, left of the steps, advertises of this school;
  3. balloons between steps;
  4. colored guardrail of 2F.

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: Hi,
Yes, most of the flags are very simple, and the yellow and pink flags are certainly de minimis.
Idem for the advertising boards, certainly de minimis.
Balloons are not covered by copyright, as well as the guardrails.
Nothing prominent here has anything original or creative enough to have a copyright. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering

Is "my me" a historical typo, or was it intended? Purely curious here. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 03:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, a typo. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by FkMohr

Hi Yann, want to ask: You recently closed the complete Deletion Request Page but deleted only the files from the first section, the rest of the files in the other two sections are still pending (mostly). Do you want to process&close the other two sections too?--Wdwd (talk) 04:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I intended to close only the first part. I will look into it. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:23, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The rest of the discussion is in German, so I will let another admin deals with it. Yann (talk) 09:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Hellenistic Kingdom 301 BC.png

Hi Yan, you deleted the image Hellenistic Kingdom 301 BC.png on the Commons due to its disputed license, which has been verified and found to be OK for the Commons. So I'm asking to get him back to work. A verified license is available at [7] Sincerely --Zemanst (talk) 08:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Zemanst: This license is Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike, which is not sufficient for Commons. We need a license which allows comercial use. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Yan, the image will only be used for Wikipedia in the article [8], so the license for this case (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) is absolutely fine, I'm sorry.
Sincerely Zemanst (talk) 12:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Zemanst: No, it doesn't work that way. All images on Commons must under a free license, i.e. which allows commercial use. Yann (talk) 14:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1995 stamps of Argentina

Hi Yan, you deleted this category. Please return it back. And return file File:Argentina 1995 variable value stamp Mi 1.jpg to it. This is Adamant1's hooliganism. --Matsievsky (talk) 16:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I deleted the category is because it only contained one file that is extremely likely to be deleted. Even if it isn't though, there's almost zero chance of the category ever having any more files in it and having a category with a single file is rather worthless. Your free to disagree but you should be able to do so without insulting me in the process. If Matsievsky is unwilling to give a valid reason why the category should be recreated outside of insulting me then I'd appreciate if it stays deleted. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever happens to this file, categories should not be deleted before the file(s) it contains. Yann (talk) 05:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The file being deleted or not aside, I was under the impression that the general consensus is categories should contain multiple files or at least have the potential to or they can be deleted. Is that wrong? I assume it isn't since categories like Category:1995 stamps of Argentina have plural names, which insinuates they don't contain single images. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you are wrong. A category can contain a single, if there are potentially more. Yann (talk) 16:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No I'm not. It's almost like you can't be bothered to read my messages or something. What part of "there's almost zero chance of the category ever having any more files in it" makes you think I don't get that a category with one file is fine if there are potentially more files to put in it later? In this case, stamps of Argentina from 1995 aren't in the public domain. So there's almost zero chance of the category containing anything else. Unless Matsievsky decides to upload more of them based on the same nonsensical reasoning that stamps create themselves. It's not like the category can't be recreated on the off chance that he does though, but there's zero reason to the category in the meantime just because you don't feel like doing the minimum amount of effort it would take to find out there's realistically no chance of the category containing anything else. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stamps of Ireland

You deleted this category but there are over 100 links to this category. On this page Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates I see all category links are similarly named. If you are going to delete any or all, please make sure all links are corrected to the new category name. Thanks. Ww2censor (talk) 23:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. Yann (talk) 05:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the case is with Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates, I moved the files in the category to Category:Postage stamps of Ireland. So what's the alternative to deleting the category? Because just leaving an empty duplicate of another category doesn't seem like a good alternative. Just because there's a template for something shouldn't stop people from being able to move files. Wouldn't the correct thing to do be nominating the template for deletion if it's not being used anymore instead of just keeping random, useless categories? BTW, I don't think the links should just be fixed either because frankly the copyright templates are garbage, don't help anything, and I rather not see them transferred over to the new categories just because Ww2censor is unwilling to nominate them for deletion or whatever. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:54, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Adamant1: I'm not the one making any category changes. It seems that the category "Stamps of foo"" is the original setup but now some people are also using the category "Postage stamps of foo". We should either use one or the other. Would it not be better to come to a consensus in a wider forum before making changes to these categories, as someone will have to fix all the entries into whichever category is decided upon. Ww2censor (talk) 09:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are making changes to the categories if your getting in the way of me renaming the country categories by having my edits reverted. Outside of that, I'm not against the general idea of getting consensus about it but like you state there's already a bunch of categories besides the ones related to countries that are called "Postage stamps.." and the naming seems to follow Wikidata/wikipedia. So it seems like the conensus is already there for the categories to be named "postage stamps of foo.." In the meantime there's other serious problems with the current naming scheme that warrants it being changed. For instance, a lot of categories for things that aren't postage stamps being put in Category:Stamps because there isn't any other option since it's being used for postage stamps. It would be ridiculous to ignore all that and go through a protracted discussion that will probably result in the categories being renamed anyway just because of a template. I much rather just change the names, turn Category:Stamps into a disambiguation or whatever, and be done with it. Or I guess the other option is that we have clearly nonsensical crap like Category:Rubber stamps being in a category that clearly isn't for rubber stamps just because of a template that isn't helpful (if not downright useless) to begin with. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect can be created, but any massive change should be discussed first. Yann (talk) 16:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not really that massive of a change since there's already a lot of other categories called "Postage stamps..." Otherwise, I would have discussed it first. In the meantime the only reason not to rename the country categories is because of the template and I have yet to see a valid reason why that alone warrants a broader discussion about something that's already being done, not just by me. Honestly, this whole thing just comes off like bad faithed concern trolling. If there was really an issue with the whole thing then the time to discuss it would have been before half the categories or more had "postage stamps..." in their names. It's massively pointless and just comes off like bad faithed targeting to single me out and have the discussion now though after the fact. Especially since neither one of you have given a single legitimate reason why there should be one. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aljs Vignudelli Günter Rexrodt (cropped).jpg

This is a crop from File:Aljs Vignudelli Günter Rexrodt.jpg which you deleted per my DR at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OX. In the DR, I suggested to delete that crop as well if the source file is deleted. I think you could delete it now, too, for the reasons given, without an extra DR? As the nominator, I'm not deleting it myself, of course. Gestumblindi (talk) 16:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I overlooked this one. Thanks, Yann (talk) 16:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Soviet Union 1970 lapkin 70-30 cover with stamp CPA 3864 (All Union Philatelic Exhibition).png

I gave a reason why the file should be deleted. I would appreciate it if you allowed other people besides Matsievsky an opportunity to give their opinions next time. Since Matsievsky was the person who uploaded the file and he has a history of trying to steam role deletion nominations of his files by using bulling tactics and outright lying. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trolling? Yann (talk) 09:27, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. What part of my comment makes you think I am? --Adamant1 (talk) 09:32, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then read again the discussion and the pages linked to it. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:35, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I nominated the file for deletion because it was a blurry duplicate of another image. Matsievsky, the only person who participated in the discussion, said the image should be kept because it wasn't a blurrier version of the other file. You closed it because supposedly "no valid reason for deletion." Matsievsky uploaded the file and has a history of using bulling tactics/outright lying to steamroll deletion discussions. So I think people, who aren't the uploader and don't have a history of using such tactics, should have had a chance to give their opinions before the deletion request is closed as keep. What's trolling about that? It seems like a pretty reasonable request to me. As a side to that your assertion that there was "no valid reason for deletion" is simply wrong. The guidelines clearly say redundant, lower quality duplicate images can be deleted on a case-by-case basis. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, you haven't read or understood the discussion. This image is the source for the other one. It seems to be blurry, because it is a PNG file, and the other one is a JPEG. Yann (talk) 09:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how you can say that when Matsievsky literally said "This file is not blurred" and he was the only participate, but whatever. I'm not sure what your last sentence is about. "It looks blurry because it's a PNG file" is just nonsensical. PNG isn't an inherently blurry file format or no one would be using it. If you load both files next to each other the PNG file clearly has a smoothing filter or something applied to it that makes it look slightly blurrier then the JPEG image. If you want an example look at the dot above the postmark in both files. It's brown in the JPEG file and red in the PNG. So there's clearly a difference between the two images. It has nothing to do with the quarks of how Commons deals with thumbnails or whatever and I said as much in the deletion nomination. In the meantime trying to act like they are exact 1/1 copies of each other or that the PNG file isn't a lower quality, blurrier image just comes off like gaslighting. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:JMSDF Special Boarding Unit Insignia.png

Hello, why was this insignia removed? Because there are many insignia of the Japan Self-Defense Forces on Wiki Commons which are Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International. -Artanisen (talk) 18:53, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Artanisen: I restored it, and created a regular DR instead. You can add your arguments there. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:06, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About File:December 1983 One on One Dr J vs Larry Bird advertisement by Electronic Arts.jpg and File:November 1983 Pitstop advertisement by Epyx.jpg

May I ask the reason why those files were deleted? I proved a rationale about them being public domain here that I will copy here for convenience's sake.

/Start of the copied post/

Copyright assignment wasn't automatic in the United States until March 1, 1989, and a copyright notice was required for all works published until February 28, 1989.

Copyright notice was required for all works first published before March 1, 1989, subject to some exceptions discussed below. If the notice was omitted or a mistake was made in using copyright notice, the work generally lost copyright protection in the United States.

— https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ03.pdf

For works published between January 1, 1978 and March 1, 1989, there was a five year grace period to register the work in the U.S. Copyright Office. That didn't happen for any of those ads. Future copies didn't include any copyright notice either. Advertisements required a standalone copyright notice.

A general notice for a collective work as a whole covers the separate contributions that it contains (regardless of ownership), except for any advertisements inserted on behalf of persons other than the copyright owner for the collective work.

— https://www.copyright.gov/comp3/chap2200/ch2200-notice.pdf

The work needed to have a valid copyright notice or, otherwise, to be registred it with the U.S. copyright office within five years. None of those ads were registred with the copyright office and none of their subsequent copies added a copyright notice.

/End of the copied post/

Thanks in advance.

--Lugamo94 (talk) 19:51, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lugamo94: I restored them, and created a DR instead. You can add your arguments there. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:41, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Lugamo94 (talk) 13:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo l'engagement.png

Salut

Est-ce que le logo relève du copyvio ou non ? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:32, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Non, il est PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 08:33, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi, could you look at this website to ensure that the file i marked as copyvio, is found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work?. Thanks --Karim talk me :)..! 04:31, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Karim185.3: You don't need to write a message here. Just add information in the DR, and the image may be deleted after due time. BTW I don't see this image on this URL. Yann (talk) 08:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Appleton_1863.jpg

Can you tell me what this was? Perhaps temporarily restore it for review because maybe it can be rescued as the date seems to make it PD. Thanks. Ww2censor (talk) 16:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done @Ww2censor: But no source, no description, no license, and no category. Yann (talk) 18:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I found two of the original images, both of which were highly modified, used to create the uploaded file but not enough to verify it sufficiently. So you can just delete it again. Thanks anyway. Ww2censor (talk) 22:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:President Taur Matan Ruak.jpg

Hello Yann! I didn't see a notfication of deletion warning for this. I can not see, which photo it was or where it came from this way. Generally, these kind of pictures are from official Timorese sources, which are always free licensed. Could you give me the description text, please, so I can check the origin? Greetings, --JPF (talk) 20:58, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Or temporarily restore, if possible. JPF (talk) 20:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@J. Patrick Fischer: It is small image (302 × 365) from 2013 sourced "Pittwater friends of Soibada". It also says "Permission was sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org on 26th September 2013". Yann (talk) 21:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, Pittwater of Soibada. They had given me permission, but didn't send the eMail AFAIK. I will contact them. Greetings, JPF (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Image

Dear Yann,

I'm trying to have this image https://www.flickr.com/photos/195743037@N02/52111777930/ uploaded to Jamie Mcleod-Skinner. It recently was removed for copyright violation, but it is placed on the public Media Center page for a campaign that offers it up for public use (just without an explicit copyright release). What should I do to try and upload this image? Thank you.

Best, Oregonian123 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oregonian123 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Oregonian123: A Flickr account just created last month with 0 view, and 2 images? No way. This is clear license washing. Yann (talk) 07:23, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The bot accidentally added delete template

Hello dear Yann. The bot accidentally added a deletion template to the files I uploaded yesterday, and today I saw that you deleted those files. The point is that I took the pictures from the Louvre website, and like the millions of photos on the site, the images I uploaded are copyrighte free. I also added detailed information about the copyright and origin of the works from the site. Would you please recover deleted photos? If I have made a mistake, please explain that I will not make similar mistakes in the future. Thank you in advance. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, --Sefer azeri (talk) 12:55, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sefer azeri: No, the pictures taken by the Louvre museum are not free. Beside you didn't provide a license, which is compulsory for all images on Commons. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:07, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, dear Yann. I read again the terms of use of the Louvre Museum. "Photographs representing works that are not protected by copyright" heading 4.1.1 states that "The downloading and re-use of medium-format photographs published on the collections website representing works that are not protected by copyright". You are absolutely right that I forgot to put the necessary license template on the pictures. Therefore, please restore the images so that I can put the information in the correct form. Thank you in advance. Sincerely,--Sefer azeri (talk) 07:22, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly reminding, I look forward to your regard. Thanks --Sefer azeri (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kit body tottenham2223h.png

The guy that nominated the image, now wants to keep it, also I think he messed up the page and doesn't know the whole process on wiki-commons, you might want to review and fix. Regards. Govvy (talk) 10:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 11:13, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong template

Hello, you used {{Kept}} instead of {{Deleted}} + {{Undeleted}}, see Special:Diff/640994921. Just so you know.Jonteemil (talk) 13:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the rest of the file talk pages from Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2022-03#Files uploaded by Ederporto as well.Jonteemil (talk) 13:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help to delete my photography work from Wikipedia because I am blocked from editing.

Can you help me to delete my photography work from Wikipedia. I am unable to delete or even edit these photos who are uploaded by me. Please, in good faith, please help me to delete these photos. Thanks. Photos -

It will be a good help if you delete them on my behalf, or proceed process to delete all 4 of them. Thanks. Jpsorts (talk)

@Jpsorts: Hi,
License is irrevocable, so we do not delete images uploaded more than one week ago, unless there is an issue with them.
These images are in the English Wikipedia, so you have to ask there anyway.
Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

election-posters in France

Hi Yann, as you are likely more knowledgable about copyright around elections-posters in France, you might help at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Affiche législative 10e Val d'Oise A Taché 2022.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 20:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Obvious copyright violations. No FoP in France, and not permanently displayed anyway. Copyright belongs to the photographer and/or to the political parties. Thanks for notifying. Yann (talk) 20:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Children's Cartoon Undeletion request

Hi. Could you take a look at this if you have the time? Thanks.

--KOsaurusrex (talk) 22:40, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Save the date: Commons Photographers meeting next week

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

Please save the date: on Saturday, June 19th, our next virtual Zoom meeting is going to take place. As you know, one goal of these meetings is to share knowledge about different types of photography. This time, we've lined up the following presentations:

  • Photography in Nigeria
  • Photographing vehicles
  • I started printing my images – here’s what I've learned so far…

If you'd like to participate in this event, please consider signing up on this page. Also, if you'd like to present at one of the next meetings, please send me a quick note. Sharing your experiences and learnings with others can make a huge difference!

I wish you, your family, and your friends all the best! Hope to see you on the 19th.

Warmly, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dell Chromebook 3100 2-in-1.jpg

Hi Yann. What do you think needs to be done with respect to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dell Chromebook 3100 2-in-1.jpg since the only reason the file seems to have been kept now is no longer applicable because of Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:PD Texas and Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-TXGov? -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: The logo may be de minimis. In any way, it can easily be blurred if needed. Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If your talking about the logo for the Frisco Independent School District it's likely PD since the logos for most government agencies in the United States are. That said, I'd still find out what the specific rules for Texas are before assuming it is though. but in most cases it probably isn't an issue. If you want some examples have a browse through Category:Logos of school districts in the United States. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:39, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: I don't think it's likely PD since the logos for most government agencies in the United States are is a correct understanding at all of en:WP:PD#US government works at all. Works created by US federal government employees as part of their official duties are, for the most part, within the public domain; things are quite different, however, for works created by employees at the subnational level (e.g. state, county,municipal employees) and it largely depends upon the copyright laws of the individual state. Some states like California and Florida have laws or statutes that are similar to US copyright law on the matter, but the vast majority do not. Some of the logos in Category:Logos of school districts in the United States which are not for schools located in California and Florida probably need to be examined; for example, File:Ambassador Public School in Deh No 22 Jamrao, District Sanghar Sindh, Pakistan.jpg isn't even for a US school and it's licensing then depends on COM:PAKISTAN, whereas File:Canton City School District Logo.jpg is almost certainly not "own work". Another example is File:Central-unified-high-school-district-logo-2015.png is probably OK as {{PD-CAGov}}, but is unlikely "own work"; it's also a COM:OVERWRITEten file. I would be careful assuming that a file is OK for Commons just because someone uploaded it to Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware. Which is why I said "most." I don't have an exact count, but I know the number of municipalities/states that have PD logos is more then just California and Florida. Like there's 9 versions of the Montana state flag on Commons and most flags for the towns/cities/counties in Montana are also on Commons. More relevant do a search for "Texas logo", there's thousands of results and a good percentage are for schools in Texas. It's not like I've advocated for keeping the image as is just because of other files though, but at the same time Texas seems to be pretty lax when it comes to logos of educational institutions. Either that or thousands of files should be deleted. I don't care either way. Which is why I said to research it and not just assume things, but if it were me I probably wouldn't worry about it unless there's obvious evidence that Texas has strict laws about it and I'm usually pretty hardline when it comes to not violating copyright. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:18, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A subnational government logo or flag might be PD because it's too old or too simple, but not because it was created by a government employee. The Montana state flag imagery (File:Flag of Montana (1905–1981).svg) seems to be PD because of its age, not because it was created by a state employee. In addition, the copyright status of Montana government works, in general, is unclear per copyright.lib.harvard.edu/states/. Once again, being on Commons doesn't mean something should be on Commons. Files are constantly being deleted from Commons for one reason or another, but many files with questionable licensing may go unnoticed for years before someone finally finds them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. I tagged some of these logos which should not be here without a permission from the copyright holder. Thanks for noticing, Yann (talk) 16:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yann/archives_50&oldid=668228751"