User talk:Asclepias

English: Welcome to the Commons, Asclepias!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki ‒ it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

--SieBot 01:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Unnecessary comment

Could you please explain the sense of that unnecessary comment? Everybody else was able to see that the deletion request to those three images are withdrawn since several days because the fotographer was able to proove that the museum considers its inner courtyard as public place. If you want to comment to deletion requests then please to those images that are in the danger of being deleted and please next time use real arguments that can be taken serious. -- Cecil (talk) 20:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be glad to explain the comment. My wording may have been unclear. The meaning is that the courtyard might be considered an «outdoors» space, due to the configuration that can be observed more easily when viewed differently. I could be mistaken, of course, as I certainly do not claim to hold the truth, just giving my impression about it. Still, to me, it is a real an honest argument. I cannot see why exactly you are of the opinion that it cannot be taken seriously. You more or less seem to leave the impression that you might consider a similar point relatively to another picture, although the comments leave room to interpretation. Merely saying that other people's arguments are not serious according to your view doesn't do much good in a discussion, I'm afraid. Regards, -- Asclepias (talk) 23:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The question was why you would state unnecessary comments. If was already prooven days ago by a few good contributors that hat this court is not outdoors, but still is a public place and thus is FOP. That's why the images are not on the deletion request anymore. By the way, many windows don't mean that a room is outdoors. -- Cecil (talk) 09:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Manège militaire de Québec

J'ai changé le nom et supprimé le fichier, remplacé par un fichier bien nommé. Cela faisait longtemps que je voulais le faire mais j'ai eu la flemme :) notafish }<';> 22:09, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

File:Château Frontenac vers années 1900.jpg

---

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

• Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
• State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
• If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
• Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
• Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 06:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Château Frontenac vers 1924.jpg

---

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images and other files on Commons must be under a free license and should be useful to the Wikimedia projects. To allow others to use your files, some additional information must be given on the description page. Most importantly:

• Describe what it is about in a short sentence. (What does the image show?)
• State the author and the date of creation. If you made it yourself, say so explicitly. If it is from another Wikimedia user, link to the person's local user page. Best to use CommonsHelper.
• If you did not create the file yourself, state the source you got it from.
• Add a copyright tag - images without an appropriate license tag will be deleted.
• Add the image to one or more gallery pages and/or appropriate categories, so it can be found by others. To find out where an image belongs, you can use CommonsSense.

If you copied the file from another wiki, please copy all information given there and say who uploaded it to that wiki. Use CommonsHelper.

It is recommended to use Template:Information to put that information on the description page. Have a look at Template talk:Information for details of the use of this template.

You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file.

Please add as much information as possible. If there is not sufficient information, the file may have to be deleted. For more information, follow the Commons:First steps guide. If you need help or have questions, please ask at the Help desk.

Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 07:19, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Blobfish2.jpg

Thank you for the further information on the copyright status of this image; seeing this, I agree that it did not meet the Commons' requirements. However, I wonder if this was not a case for a deletion discussion rather than speedy deletion, just so that the full reasoning could be documented for the confused, like me. BTW, File:Blobfish1.jpg clearly seems to be a derivative work of the copyrighted image. I'll plan to nominate it for deletion as well. —Werewombat (talk) 00:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I, had wanted the subpage deleted as obsolete because the image was deleted, but fine, an admin can close it later as well. Hekerui (talk) 22:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

Afrikaans | العربية | ‪Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‬ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | ‪Deutsch (Sie-Form)‬ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬ | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Српски / Srpski | Svenska | தமிழ் | Українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | ‪中文(繁體)‬ | +/−

---

Hello, Asclepias!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations"). Pro-tip: The CommonSense tool can help you find the best category for your image.

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• Image:Hans-Jürgen Greif 2010.jpg was uncategorized on 12 April 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
• Image:Philippe Girard 2010.jpg was uncategorized on 12 April 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Renommage

Pour File:Napoleon Eugene Louis Bonaparte.jpg, j'espère juste que l'IP 82.237.218.242 savait de quoi elle parlait et qu'on n'a pas gaffé. ;) -- Asclepias (talk) 05:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour. Je crains en effet de m'être trompé en renommant, vu les contributions de l'utilisateur qui avait mis cette photo. Et "Louis Bonaparte" me semble un peu "bateau"... Jack ma (talk) 05:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done Après examen des photos existantes (Google Images) et au vu des contributions de l'utilisateur d'origine, j'ai reverté toutes les modifs Prinz Wilhelm von Preußen.jpg tendant à la faire passer pour Louis Napoléon. Sauf le nom que je n'ai pas réussi à remettre, car la redirection File:Prinz Wilhelm von Preußen.jpg existe. La prochaine fois je serai plus prudent après un verre au bistro. Jack ma (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

J'ai quand même regardé toutes les images concernant Louis Bonaparte sur Google: pas la même forme de visage, yeux (semblant) foncés, plus écartés. Réciproquement, les photos du prince Wilhelm se tiennent aussi : yeux clairs, plus rapprochés. Pour le costume, ils se ressemblent; je n'en sais pas assez, et j'espère que l'Oracle pourra émettre un avis, c'est une bonne idée de le contacter (peut-être aussi le projet Histoire ?). Cordialement, Jack ma (talk) 17:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour Asclepias. Tu as l'air maintenant sûr qu'il s'agit de Louis Bonaparte. As-tu eu d'autres informations depuis hier ? Cdlt, Jack ma (talk) 05:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Please don't blank pages

Hi Asclepias,
Thank you for your contributions to Commons. I noticed you blanked File:Prinz Wilhelm von Preußen.jpg on Commons. I asume you meant for the page to be deleted, but blanking the page is not the right way to do this. I'd like to strongly recommend to use {{speedy| type reason here }} and add it on top of the page you would like to have deleted; This way it will be placed on a special list that administrators check regularly for deletion. Without this it might take a long time before it's noticed. Thanks again. 23:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC)–Krinkle^talk

French Diploma

I recently added many new information that you ignored while expressing your opinion. I beg you to look at and to reconsider it at Commons:Deletion requests/French diploma.Jirnov (talk) 07:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

This DR

Since you made a comment to one DR I made on a French sculpture of DeGaulle (it was suggested to me by an Admin to DR it) and are active here, would you care to make a comment on this DR? Maybe you missed it? Everyone seems to have missed it. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Millennium Tower San Francisco July 2008.jpg

I'm an en:wp admin, so I've restored the file as you requsted. Nyttend (talk) 13:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

revert

[1] Pourquoi, c'est pas ça finalement ? --Eusebius (talk) 21:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Pour les faits, oui c'est bien ça, c'est une photo canadienne, de Henderson, le pont est de 1931, etc. Mais pour la conclusion, je me suis aperçu que j'étais en train de raisonner comme si l'auteur était une société (auquel cas la photo serait en effet dans le domaine public au Canada du moment que sa création est antérieure à 1960). C'est fréquemment le cas, par exemple, pour les photos publiées dans les journaux, etc. Mais bien que Henderson agissait comme éditeur de ces cartes postales, en y pensant, je me suis dit que dans ce cas particulier, il est très plausible que l'auteur soit personnellement Henderson en tant qu'individu (auquel cas ses photos ne seraient dans le domaine public au Canada que 50 après sa mort). Or, je ne suis pas parvenu à trouver sa date de décès, mais un très mince indice sur un site pourrait laisser penser que ce pourrait être après le début des années 1960, juste pour que ses photos ne soient pas encore dans le domaine public. Bref, autrement dit, je me suis dit que tu avais raison de dire que nous n'avons peut-être pas assez d'information pour pouvoir conserver la photo hors de tout doute possible. Cela dit, je pense quand même qu'il y a de bonnes chances que cette photo soit antérieure à 1949, étant donné l'apparence de la photo et le fait que bien des photos de Henderson sont antérieures à cette date, ce qui ferait que cette photo serait quand même dans le domaine public au Canada de toutes façons, peu importe la date de décès de l'auteur. Mais puisqu'on ne dispose pas pour l'instant de mention explicite de la date de création de la photo, on ne peut rien affirmer avec certitude. Et ça me semblait un peu long et peut-être inutile d'expliquer cela sur la page de la proposition de suppression. D'où mon auto-revert. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Page deletion warning

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

   — Jeff G. ツ 03:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

{{Copyvio}}

Dear Asclepias, please only use {{Copyvio}} for obvious cases. Coins are not obvious, see the various very big deletion discussions. Could you please open a mass deletion request for these files? Multichill (talk) 15:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

My uploaded images

Hi Asclepias: I'm not sure why you've tagged my many (60 or so) uploaded Wikimedia images for deletion. They all have a Creative Commons license as required and it is listed as such on the photographer's Flickr account (which has his personal name and company name on the account -- the profile page). What else do you require? --Kathleen5454 (talk) 01:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Asclepias: I did have the photographer send an email as requested (re: permissions), and I did have him change the permissions from his Flickr account. I'm unclear still as to how to get FlickreviewR to review the 60+ images again. Please advise? (Your note on that regard was not quite clear to a newbie like myself). And thanks for your patience in this. Still learning.

--Kathleen5454 (talk) 03:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for the detailed explanation. That helps. re: the images that had to be rotated on the Commons. I'm not sure how or why that happened. The images were ok on my system and ok on Flickr, but rotated in the uploading to Wikimedia. The only difference from those (few) images and other images I uploaded (which did not rotate in the uploading) was that I used Chrome and not IE (could that be the issue?). In any case, happy to have someone more experienced take care of that issue and hopefully that rotation issue won't happen in future. May go back to IE for uploading. Thanks. --Kathleen5454 (talk) 13:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. All looks good and makes sense. --Kathleen5454 (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Kanō Sanraku

Bonjour Asclepias.

J'ai importer quatre images de Kanō Sanraku. J'ai essayé de créer sa page sur Commons laquelle a été supprimée. Je m'y suis mal pris sans voir comment faire. Je cherche à créer sa galerie à partir du lien en bas de sa page ( Kanō Sanraku - Wikipédia Commons). Pouvez-vous m'aider s.v.p.En prévisualisant je me rends compte que la page Kanō Sanraku est inexistante. Pourtant elle est toujours là..? Cordialement --Colibrix (talk) 12:32, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

RE:J'ai trouvé comment (autres projets), par contre l'article est toujours en page inexistante. D'autre part, alors que j'ai donné la même catégorie aux quatre images, seule Tigres et dragons l'est.Les trois autres ne le sont pas alors que j'ai utilisé les mêmes termes. J'ai beau cherché comment catégoriser, sans trouver la méthode. A toute fin utile voici les quatres images:

File:Prune sur paravent.jpg

File:Pivoine sur paravent 2 2011-03-15 095922.jpg

File:Pivoine sur paravent. 1. Du peintre japonais Kanō Sanraku.jpg

File:Image Tigres et dragons du peintre japonais Kano Sanraku 2011-03-14 130909.jpg

Si vous avez un moment pour m'expliquer comment catégoriser, merci d'avance. --Colibrix (talk) 15:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

File:André Laurendeau et Jean Drapeau.jpg

Hello. I'm pretty comfortable that the image is pre-1960, and therefore public domain in Canada. It is possible that it could be as late as 1961, as Laurendeau was on the CBC payroll from 1953 to 1961. However, images on the web of Laurendeau when he was on the Royal Commission suggest that he looked significantly older in the 1960s. Your guess of 1952 is probably correct. We will be updating PD-Canada, so I added it for now. The image is not PD in the U.S., but such images are not being deleted. You did an excellent job clarifying the details of the photograph. Regards, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 23:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Kudos

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Your work helping properly categorize and describe images respecting Canadian politicians, especially women politicians, has not gone unnoticed. Thanks for your hard work and patience. Merci bien.

Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:01, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Droits voisins

Bonjour Asclepias. Je n'ai pas oublié de te remercier pour ta réponse au Template:PD-EU-audio bistro ; simplement, l'IRL m'a éloignée de WP et Commons. J'y reviens donc pour 1/ dire merci et 2/ te demander comment je peux trouver rapidement les fichiers audio qui comportent le modèle Template:PD-EU-audio ? Je reviendrai te lire sur cette page si tu préfères. Amclt, --Égoïté (talk) 09:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour Égoïté, Sur Commons, le modèle PD-EU-audio catégorise automatiquement les fichiers dans la catégorie PD EU Audio. Il y a toutefois très peu de tels fichiers sur Commons actuellement. Tu peux aussi explorer les différentes sous-catégories de la catégorie Audio files by license. Mais il n'y a pas beaucoup de fichiers là non plus. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC) (Répondu sur fr:Discussion Utilisatrice:Égoïté#Fichiers audio)

User:Asclepias/Sandbox

Hello there. Just curious, is this list and this list still accurate? If not, would you mind updating it for me? ;) Thanks in advance, FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Both lists are accurate (as best as I could make them so, anyway). However, they are not necessarily up to date, which simply means that it is possible that some users may have uploaded a certain number of new files between February 2011 (when I made the lists) and now. We would have to look through the relevant categories and search through the site to catch those additional files, but that will be much easier to do once the backlog of the already listed files is eliminated. Also, list 1 ("sandbox") was as complete as I could make it, but list 2 ("sandbox2") was still slightly incomplete, as I got tired of working on it when I had yet to include the coins from Portugal, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Germany. (But they are all on list 1, which is sorted by countries, so it is possible to work from there.) I see that you worked on this today. Great job! -- Asclepias (talk) 12:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Great! If it's not too much trouble, could you make a list of files that should be deleted at User:Asclepias/Sandbox2? It makes it much easier for me to batch delete the files that way. Thanks in advance. Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:36, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Vaticaan 2 euro CC 2008.jpg

Hello!

User:Jcb removed the speedy-del-tag that has been inserted by you. I think this could be of interest for you. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Estonian money

Hi, please see COM:MONEY - Jcb (talk) 18:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Please note that COM:MONEY has nothing to do with the reason given for this speedy DR. The reason given for this speedy DR is about the false licensing of actual photos/images copied from a website. Please read the reason and the copyright notice that was linked with the request. The reason is that those particular photos have a non-commercial and no-derivatives license. The uploader copied the photos and misrepresented them with a false license that does not correspond to the real license. Compare the real license with what the uploader tagged and you will see the difference and why the tag is bogus. Simple as that and obvious copyvio. When photos/images that are directly copied from the internet are blatant copvios, and that is plainly visible by just looking at the source, it is immaterial that they are images of food, money, people, animals or any subject. If you read the reason for the DR, you see that it was not nominated for being a derivative of a coin or anything, but because it is a copy of an image with a non-free license.

(That is why I didn't even mention the coin design, because it is not even necessary to examine that point. And that is why this has nothing to do with COM:Money. It might have been necessary only if the uploader has taken his own photos instead of copying them from the internet. But if you want to speak of COM:Money anyway, i.e. the coin design, then that would only add a second reason for the deletion of the files, this time as derivatives of other works, as the Estonia section of COM:Money is obsolete because now the the design cannot be used for advertising without prior permission and is thus not free, as per this article of Estonian law (2009 version). But, like already explained, it is not even necessary to go into this because this was not the reason for the DR.)

-- Asclepias (talk) 19:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The source website is of the bank itself. We know the position of that bank regarding the copyright of the coins. Combine those facts and you get the reason why I kept the images. Jcb (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

But this is not about the copyright of the coins. This is about the copyright of the images. Just like they were images of hippopotamuses or anything. The materials (not excluding images) on the website are under NC+ND restrictions, which are not accepted by Commons. We have the link to the terms of use. Their statement is clear, we cannot ignore it. To challenge their statement, we would need supporting evidence. Is there a link to any other official statement by the Bank saying the opposite?

Although the copyright of the coin designs was not the object of this DR, may I ask, out of curiosity, what it is exactly that you say we know about "the position of that bank regarding the copyright of the [designs of the estonian sides of the euro] coins"? (not the kroon banknotes). It cannot be assumed that a work is free without an explicit declaration. is there a link to any official statement by the Bank telling that their coin designs are free (including commercial use and modification)? If so, we could add it to the information pages, so users would not need to ask the question if cases arise. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thanks so much for you help at the help desk re the Joseph Merrick image. It has been driving me mad, so I really appreciate the advice that you (and others) gave me there. --Belovedfreak (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Thank you for finding my rosocyanine structure.HowardJWilk (talk) 19:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Merci

Merci. - Khayman ^(contact) 22:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia pour les nuls

Merci Asclepias pour vos renseignements. Je vais suivre vos conseils. Cependant je précise qu'il me semble avoir déjà consulté plusieurs fois ces pages. Il y a tout simplement des mots dont je ne comprends pas le sens. Je sais qu'un "Template" est une sorte de modèle dans lequel on entre des informations ou des photos et qu'ensuite une fois enregistré le template ayant fait son office je me trouve avec une nouvelle page. Mais je n'arrive pas à comprendre beaucoup d'autres expressions et j'ai le sentiment de me heurter à un mur. Dans les explications il y a souvent : faites ci et ça et ensuite ça (ce que je peux comprendre) mais il y a souvent une manipulation tellement évidente une fois qu'on sait qui n'est pas décrite et qui est nécessaire et c'est là pour moi le chainon manquant. D'où l'intitulé de mon sujet : Wikimedia (Commons) pour les nuls. Encore merci pour votre aide. Dinkum

Un gros merci

Pour File:Wireless station -- Father Point (LOC).jpg. Quelquefois j'ai l'impression que le code et les modèles Commons sont encore plus complexes que ceux de Wp:fr (où ce n'est déjà pas de la tarte). Au plaisir de se croiser sur un des articles reliés au projet Québec où j'effectue 95% de mes contributions. -- ChristianT (talk) 13:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Remerciements

Bonjour, Je souhaitais remercier Asclepias pour les indications éclairantes qu’il m’a données concernant l’utilisation d’une image de Hans Baldung Grien. Si vous êtes la même personne. Voilà, c’est fait. Sinon, ... Avec mes excuses pour mes tâtonnements dans l’utilisation du système Wiki qui ne m’est pas du tout familier. De plus, je trouve le monde des droits ... bien brumeux ! Vous dire à tous combien j’estime et apprécie le comportement et l’esprit de la Fondation, cette remarquable orientation bien commun. Tout comme, en informatique, Apache, Linux, etc... Et combien je suis reconnaissant aux collaborateurs qui témoignent d’une telle disponibilité, correction et amabilité. Selon la suggestion, je prends contact avec l’institution Historicum pour m’assurer de la libre utilisation de la reproduction (n° 3 ci-dessous) et demander une clarification sur la référence de l’œuvre (du Louvre). À titre informatif, voici mes autres emprunts au système Commons, avec la légende que j’y associe. Si vous avez un commentaire à ce sujet, je vous en serais reconnaissant, notamment sur la rédaction correcte des références à l’emprunt Commons. Mais je ne veux pas abuser. 1. À peine la femme s’échappe-t-elle du contrôle de la communauté, s’égare-t-elle dans les bosquets hors de la cité que sa lubricité, tare bien féminine, l’aveugle : elle ne reconnait pas, sous l’habit de l’élégant, le diable qui la séduit et va la perdre. Mais grâce à Dieu, les théologiens et les autorités veillent, peuvent dévoiler cette réalité inquiétante et la dénoncer. (Auteur inconnu, Hexerei – Tierverwandlung. Source : upload.wikimedia.org/ wikipedia/commons/4/48/Hexerei – Bulshaft mit dem teufel [PD-Art] Illustration apparentée à celles d’Ulrich Molitor, De Lamiis et phitonicis mulieribus, Cologne 1489, B.N. Paris.) 2. « Malleus maleficarum maleficas ... Impressus Lugduni: per honestum virum Ioannem marion, 1519 Lyon ». Couverture d’une des premières des nombreuses éditions (au moins 34 entre 1487 et 1669) de ce Marteau des sorcières qui bénéficia du succès des innovations récentes de l’imprimerie. (Source : Brumario.usal.es, 2008 ; upload.wikimedia.org/ wikipedia/commons/4/48/Malleus_lyon.jpeg [IDP, image dans le domaine public].) 3. Fascinés par la beauté féminine, n’avons-nous pas, nous les hommes, raison de nous inquiéter ? semble nous demander l’humaniste Hans BALDUNG GRIEN (1484-1545). Les trois générations confondues, à quelles extravagances, à quelles turpitudes mêmes, nos compagnes ne se livrent-elles pas en notre absence et hors de notre contrôle ? Leurs chevelures mêmes ne tirent-elles pas leur séduction du feu satanique ? (Hans Baldung Grien: Hexenszene, um 1514, Dessin à la plume, rehauts de blanc sur papier 28.9 x 20 cm, Musée du Louvre, Paris, Département des Arts Graphiques, Inv.-Nr. RF 1083 Aus: Freiburg 2001, Abb. S. 183. Source : http://www.hexenforschung.historicum-archiv.net/etexte/bilder/Hex11a.jpg) 4. Un prêtre célèbre-t-il la messe à leur intention ? Aussitôt les âmes, en nombre, marquées encore des morsures des flammes du purgatoire, sont accueillies par deux anges majestueux et avenants. (Extrait d’une « Fresque de la seconde moitié du XVe siècle dans la cathédrale de Saint-Flour (Cantal) » ; auteur du cliché : Ji-Elle, 2008, via Wikimedia Commons). 5. Gian Lorenzo BERNINI (1598-1680) réalisa plusieurs portraits et plusieurs statues de son protecteur Maffeo Barberini (1568-1644), élu pape sous le nom d’Urbain VIII. Au moment où les services du Vatican rédigent les deux brefs pour la confrérie de Mirwart, le pontife est âgé de 75 ans, à quelques mois de sa mort. (Le pape Urbain VIII par Gian Lorenzo Bernini et ses élèves. Marbre, entre 1635 et 1640 ; 2,60 m ; Musées du Capitole, Galerie des Horace et des Curiace. Inv. MC 1201. Auteur du cliché : Jastrow, 2006) 6. LE BERNIN servit magnifiquement le souhait d’Urbain VIII de manifester le triomphe de la Contre-Réforme sur le paganisme et le protestantisme en réalisant, par exemple, de 1624 à 1633, le baldaquin de Saint-Pierre. Pour soutenir son entreprise de reconquête des esprits, la papauté contemporaine recommande à son clergé les liturgies ostentatoires telles qu’elle en déroule aujourd’hui encore dans ce prestigieux cadre baroque. (Nef centrale de la basilique Saint-Pierre de Rome ; auteur du cliché : Christophe Eyquem, 2007 [CC BY 3.0]) Bien à vous, Néant der Thal, Bx. Néant der Thal (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Ticket

Salut,

Je n'ai malheureusement plus accès aux emails situés dans le répertoire permissions. ~Pyb (talk) 09:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Explications sur le copyright dans Le Bistro

Bonjour,

Je suis impressionné par ce que vous avez écrit sur Le Bistro. Explications longues, certainement, mais exposition de plusieurs notions qui permettent de mieux cerner, si c'est possible, l'application du copyright (ou du droit d'auteur) sur Commons. Bravo !

Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments

Bonjour. Would you be interested in helping organize a potential Canadian component of the 2012 edition of Wiki Loves Monuments? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG

Hi, I have responded to your vote on Commons:Deletion requests/File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG, as I do not understand how the Ets-Hokin case is relevant. I am not a regular commons editor though, so I might be missing something here. 83.87.4.157 21:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for the notification. I replied on the DR page. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Licence/Droit d'auteur

Bonjour Asclepias, vous allez peut-être pouvoir répondre définitivement à toutes les demandes de suppression que j'ai lancées. Le droit d'auteur s'applique, d'après ce qui est dit sur Commons, également à l'éclairage des bâtiments, à partir du moment où cet éclairage est spécifiquement dédié au bâtiment (exemple de la Tour Eiffel). Du moins est-ce ce que je comprends, mais d'après vos commentaires, vous êtes d'un avis contraire.

Puisqu'on ne va pas s'amuser à répondre page par page, pourriez-vous développer complètement ici ?--Sammyday (talk) 23:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour Sammyday, Déjà dans le cas de l'éclairage de la tour Eiffel, la revendication de droits d'auteur la Société d'exploitation n'est pas nécessairement convaincante, mais disons qu'on peut à la rigueur admettre la subtilité d'éclairages de la tour Eiffel et accepter de retirer les photos de la tour Eiffel ne serait-ce que parce que la Société d'exploitation prend cette position. Pour plus ample discussion, je vous réfère, si vous ne l'avez pas déjà lue, à cette discussion récente sur le Bistro en français de Commons. Vous pourrez en trouver d'autres, le sujet de l'éclairage de la tour Eiffel étant un peu un marronnier. Par contre, penser extrapoler une pareille position à n'importe quel éclairage anodin de bâtiment, cela deviendrait vraiment indéfendable. Je suis d'avance convaincu que les utilisateurs de Commons ne vont pas considérer qu'il y a lieu de supprimer ces photos pour la raison que vous invoquez. D'où, dans plusieurs cas, ma recommandation non seulement de conservation, mais de conservation immédiate. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Dans ce cas, vous pouvez clore toutes les demandes de suppression que j'ai faites sous cet argument. Par contre, je ne l'ai pas fait en me référant à mon seul point de vue : j'ai lu les conseils et recommandations de Commons, et je les ai appliquées telles qu'elles étaient écrites : "L'architecte d'un immeuble remarquable détient les droits d'auteur sur les représentations où figurent ce bâtiment, ce qui inclut les cartes postales et les photographies.[...]. Cette règle s'applique également au concepteur de l'éclairage d'un bâtiment; par exemple la société qui gère la Tour Eiffel a demandé des droits d'auteur sur les photos représentant la Tour Eiffel éclairée de nuit". Avec une page comme celle-ci, même avec une mention de "brouillon" au-dessus, on risque d'avoir à nouveau le même problème, les même interrogations et les mêmes demandes de suppression (de la part d'un autre contributeur évidemment). Ce serait sans doute pas mal de remettre un peu d'ordre là-dedans, si on ne veut pas s'y perdre.--Sammyday (talk) 02:03, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:European Union heads of government

Clairement, mon objectif est d'y inclure tous les chefs d'états passés. Peut-être mon intitulé n'est pas suffisamment clair. --Aʁsenjyʁdəgaljɔm¹¹⁶⁷¹ 21:07, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: File:Francois Bonnardel.JPG

Hi Asclepias, thanks for let me know. It's my first time to clean up an entire category of files that leak licenses. I seem to be not enough careful. :-p--Mys 721tx (talk) 00:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Mes voeux de succès pour 2012

Juste un petit mot pour te souhaiter une bonne année 2012. Je veux aussi te signifier le plaisir que nous avons eu tous à discuter avec toi lors de notre rencontre de wikipédiens à Québec le 21 décembre. J'espère t'y revoir encore si ton emploi du temps le permet. -- ChristianT (talk) 20:20, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

3D artwork in a public place

Hi. :) Since you took part in this conversation, I just wanted to let you know that the legal team has been looking into this question. One of the legal interns has posted some thoughts on the matter at the village pump. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Permission rights for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DavidYarnold.jpg

Hello,

The following was e-mailed to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org yesterday. Please update the permission status for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DavidYarnold.jpg

---

From: Jeffery, Matthew Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 4:03 PM To: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org Subject: Authorization for File:DavidYarnold.jpg

To Whom It May Concern:

I hereby affirm that I am the creator of the exclusive copyright of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DavidYarnold.jpg

I agree to publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" (unported) and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Matthew Jeffery, mjeffery@audubon.org, Senior Program Manager, International Alliance Program, Audubon, 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW, #600, Washington D.C. 20036.

I am the copyright-holder of the photo.

UPDATE: Feb. 4, 2012, 5:46 PM EST- Thank you for your speedy response and help with this!

Robert Chisholm.jpg

Hi: I believe proper authorization was given for this image. Please look at the letter that he sent granting both Wikimedia and myself Creative Commons licence 3 to use this image. --Abebenjoe (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

	The Golden Maple Leaf Award
	For your great photographs of Canadian politicians. Keep up the good work! InverseHypercube 09:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Oui mais...

Je suis pas contre. Je vais essayer de prendre le temps de prendre contact. Ceci étant dit, je trouve un peu louche qu'elle ne l'ait pas téléversé dans une plus grande version. Aussi, je ne suis pas sûr que les coms d'une série télé soient vraiment les détenteurs des droits d'auteur de l'image.

Pour ce qui est de la DR, je pense que l'argument "c'est la seule qu'on ait" n'est pas valide dans le cas d'une possible violation du droit d'auteur. Cependant, j'avoue que je n'ai pas toujours le temps ni les droits pour traiter complètement les copyvios alors je les marque et espère que quelqu'un pourra les traiter mieux que moi. Merci pour ton commentaire et j'espère qu'on en trouvera une bonne solution. Amicalement, Letartean (talk) 16:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

J'ai changé la suppression immédiate en PàS. Sachant que ça prend du temps, au moment de son traitement, il fera soit aasez longtemps pour conclure que nous n'avons pas de retour ou pour que la personne réponde. Je vais tenter de prendre contact. Amicalement, Letartean (talk) 17:09, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

merci !

Bjr Asclepias, je ne sais pas répondre directement sur le bistro, impossible de trouver... Merci beaucoup pour votre réponse plus que complète sur les droits des images. je la garde précieusement. Bon WE patricia

Thanks

Thanks for solving my licensing dilemma. It's perfect: File:Sir_Percival_Hart_(1496-1560).png. - PKM (talk) 18:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)