User talk:Túrelio

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

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.

All requests for and notifications of re-use of my images on Commons have been moved to Requests & Notifications.

If you can't find a comment or an older discussion here, take a look whether it is in one of my archives:
Archive1 (latest), Archive2 (2007), Archive3 (2008) (big!), Archive4 (2009) (huge!), Archive5 (2010) (huge!), Archive6 (2011) (huge!), .

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, Túrelio!

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.

BotMultichillT 04:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

My pics

Hello Turélio! I've been posting on Wikimedia Commons some South Parked pictures of me! So, you said that you'll delete them cause they're copyright violations! D: Anyway, I've posted the owners of the image in their descriptions, I always say that they're art from Trey Parker and Matt Stone, creators of the South Park series. And I respected the copyrights page in the site where I get my images. Please dont delete them. They're so important to my Wikipedia page

Thanks, DennysOMarshall (talk) 22:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Fotos Kinderheilstätte Harzgerode

Hi Túrelio! Vielen Dank für deinen schnellen Kommentar. Die Bilder sind leider auf Privatgelände gemacht (abgezäunt), der Bau ist mit 22 ha Gelände umgeben und nicht öffentlich einsehbar. Es besteht aber eine Schöpfungshöhe, da er denkmalgeschützt ist und einer der wenigen Bauhaus-Krankenhausbauten in Deutschland ist. In den Archiven "Bauhaus architecture" etc. fehlen diese Bilder leider. Es besteht m.E. ein öffentl. Interesse. Der aktuelle Besitzer hat wahrscheinlich nichts gegen eine Veröffentlichung. Was ist der nächste Schritt?

Danke für die Rückmeldung. Kommentare bitte immer "unterschreiben" mit --~~~~. Das mit dem "öffentlichen Interesse" ist gut und ehrenwert, für die Urheberrechtsklärung aber irrelevant. Der aktuelle Besitzer hat kein Urheberrecht am Gebäude, das haben vielmehr die Nachfahren des Architekten. Wenn du die herausfinden (und überzeugen kannst), wäre das die absolut beste Lösung. Falls das nicht geht, müssen wir versuchen, ein paar Experten zu gewinnen, die für jedes einzelne Objekt die Schöpfungshöhe abschätzen. Dort, wo eine solche besteht, muss dann wohl leider gelöscht werden. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Modifications

Hi Túrelio, how are you? I had fear because in the baseboard of the pages of the book it has written: "direitos reservados" - rights reserved. But it is of 1930, and is legal today in Brazil, because it has 70 years more than. P.M.J. is "Prefeitura Municipal de Jequié" - Jequié City Council, and the coat is public domain. See you later. Thursday, 08/18/2011, 21:39 (Horário de Brasília - UTC−03:00). Gomes Netto.

5 years of good work - 5 Jahre gute Arbeit

Apfelküchli passend zur Jahreszeit

Dear Túrelio,

for your efforts protecting commons against copyvios and vandalism and also being kind and helpful in case of questions or tasks, I would like to thank you.

Hallo Túrelio,

für Deinen großartigen Einsatz, vor allem um Commons gegen Vandalen und Urheberrechtsverletzungen zu schützen, sowie das zur Seite stehen, wenn es Fragen und Aufgaben gibt, möchte ich mich bedanken.

• So, das hast Du dir wirklich verdient :-) Ich teile so etwas normalerweise nicht aus, weil ich es persönlich nicht mag. Aber wie ich lese ist es hier erwünscht. Uf wiedrluagn -- RE rillke questions? 20:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank, Rainer. Schade dass MediaWiki noch keine Schnittstelle zum nächsten Backofen hat. --Túrelio (talk) 20:30, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

File:San Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer - Iglesia de la Vera Cruz.jpg

Hello. I don't know the name of the artist, and yes, it is permanently installed there. The place is a public church. --Carlos yo (Discusión) 21:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. However, we will have to check whether interior space is really coverd by FOP exemption of copyright law of Chile. --Túrelio (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for your kind support during this and the previous year. Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:40, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Tireless Administrator Barnstar

			The Tireless Commons Administrator Barnstar
			I hereby award Administrator Túrelio this special barnstar for the extra huge contributions as Administrator on Commons. Well done and keep going! Mit freundlichen Grüßen -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

For more than a year, Túrelio has been consistently the most productive Administrator, doing about 13% of all Administrative actions.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

1931 map

Hi. I was not aware that the word has some bad rep. However, I did this on purpose. The population census actually lists them as evangelicals, not as protestants. That's interesting, I would think. A similar weird thing appeared on the montenegro language census for 2003 - they have both bosnian and bosniak languages listed on there! So unusual things pop up from time to time. Anyways, here is the 1931 census according to srez units, http://pod2.stat.gov.rs/ObjavljenePublikacije/G1931/pdf/G19314001.pdf , so you could jump down to page 5 and 6. There it shows evangelical, not protestant. When I first made the map I missed that. (Lilic (talk) 17:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)).

The pdf doesn't help as I don't read cyrillic. Anyway, it is hardly thinkable that a government statistic really records subgroups of confessions. Please tell me what are the other "groups" listed besides "evangelicals". I assume this is only a language issue. --Túrelio (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

M.Theresa

Hallo. Leider - ich weiß nicht, der Autor dieses Werkes. Viele Grusse. MOs810 (talk) 18:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 20:27, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Nächste Gelegenheit

Nachdem die WikiCon angesichts der Menschenmenge lustig, spannend, aber auch etwas hektisch war, empfiehlt sich unbedingt, de:Wikipedia:10. Fotoworkshop schon mal vorsorglich auf die Beo zu nehmen. Grob angedacht ist der März 2012. Eine wirklich nette Truppe in überschaubarer Größe, spannende Themen, breit angelegtes (selbstgemachtes) Programm mit Theorie, Bildbearbeitung, Fotopraxis inhouse und draußen, eine schöne Location, lecker Catering (mittags bring in und abends Restaurant), überschaubare Kosten und bei WM D/A/CH eine unkomplizierte Erstattungsbereitschaft der Teilnahmegebühren (inklusive Hotel und Essen) und der Reisekosten. Würde mich freuen ein neues Gesicht - genau genommen deins :-) - dort anzutreffen. --Martina talk 22:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

+1 ! --Schwäbin (talk) 07:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Danke für die nette Einladung, obwohl es die :de-Seite noch nicht gibt. Oder meintest du diese? --Túrelio (talk) 20:44, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Nee, es gibt sie tatsächlich noch nicht, obwohl sie normalerweise innerhalb von Stunden nach dem vergangenen Workshop aufgemacht wird. Ich war aber ja beim letzten (Innenhof)workshop nicht dabei, zudem ist das eine komplizierte Seite mit Unterseiten und so, da lass ich mal die Finger von... Aber auf die Beo kannst Du's trotzdem legen, dann kriegst Du es mit, wenn sie eingerichtet wird und bist live dabei! :-) --Schwäbin (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Falls du sie nicht auf deine Beo genommen hast: 10. FWS ist jetzt online, inkl. Terminwunschkonzert. :-) --Martina talk 20:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Error

Hola Turelio.

Todas las fotografias del usuario Piragüismo Aranjuez tienen licencia Creative Commons Genérica de Atribución/Compartir-Igual 3.0. y han sido realizadas por nosotros.

Hay muchas de ellas que has marcado para ser borradas, por favor revisa los motivos al haber algun error.

Gracias. Piragüismo Aranjuez (talk) 20:36, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Hola,

sabo muy poco castellano, sorry. Let's try in english: the problem with most of your uploads is not the license, but the authorship. For example File:SEVILLA 75 7º.jpg: source=Socios del Club Escuela de Piragüismo Aranjuez; author=Club Escuela de piragüismo Aranjuez. What does that mean? A club cannot shoot photos, only photographers, single persons, do that. Who has shot these photo? You need to provide his or her permission. See Commons:OTRS/es for details. --Túrelio (talk) 20:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Move

Since I can't move things into category namespace, can you fix this? I believe the creator misspelled category. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for the hint. --Túrelio (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, I tried to do a speedy delete. However, the instructions are wrong here. It should not be {{speedydelete|reason}} but {{speedydelete|reason=}}. For some reason, the template's instructions (on this page suggest to put {{speedydelete|1=}} but the template's actual parameters allows for |reason= and that seems to make more logical sense. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

When I add it manually, I usually use {{speedy|1=}} (so even without the "delete"). --Túrelio (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That will make things a little more cleaner. :) I assume most people use a script to tag. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but there is no "script" for derivatives and for "out of scope", for example. --Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yinlingspeaks.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yinlingspeaks.png

The image in question is from here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FUVuQMtE0g&feature=player_embedded#! a political campaign video.

I simply wish to give it the proper licensing for screenshots. It has come to my understanding that screenshots can be used if there is no alternative to portray the subject. Like this image for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nagato_RINNEGAN.PNG It is high resolution, but it stays because there is no alternative MikamiLovesDeleting (talk) 22:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I tried to give it the Template:Non-free video screenshot licensing, which was used here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Old_Gregg.jpg, but it did not show MikamiLovesDeleting (talk) 22:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That is because here at Commons we do/can not allow "fair use" (as your non-free video) content, as opposed to english wikipedia. So, you might try to upload it locally at :en. --Túrelio (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

May you provide the link to the site where I can upload locally? MikamiLovesDeleting (talk) 22:56, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Upload. --Túrelio (talk) 22:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

COM:AN/P

Hi Turelio,

Would look into my request here? Thanks. --  Docu  at 07:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Docu, sorry, today I hadn't the nerve for that. --Túrelio (talk) 22:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

GAMBIT

I did nothing out of the ordinary when I uploaded the GAMBIT image - that garbage with Flickr? Don't know where it came from. Photos were NOT from Flickr, but the standard way to upload to commons put the tag in there. Tdrss (talk) 04:04, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Now, could you add an URL/website into the source entry of File:GAMBIT on launchpad.png. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Failed panoramio images from 2008

Dear Turelio,

Can any of these images from 2008 be deleted by you? Maybe the two "Zriba" images whose DR expired yesterday. Or can you file a Mass DR on them? I don't know anything about Mass DRs. The thing is they were originally failed in mid-2010 by ZooFari or Electron. I originally passed them because I thought the permission statement was OK since 2008 (or older) images didn't need OTRS permission as Lupo said. But as I noted in the image's talkpages, Lupo now also says that the permission must be general and not limited to wikipedia. Worse still, the original permission statement on the panoramio link I quoted has disappeared. So I revoked my panoramio pass and think that its better to just delete. Most of them are not heavily used except for the panoramic image of Sousse, Tunisia. The panoramio account doesn't appear active and I have no panoramio account anyway, only flickr. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 02:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

•  Comment: Perhaps this other 8 day old panoramio DR can also be closed as delete here? The image isn't even used anywhere. I thought someone would tag these failed panoramio images with npd or DR but I guess I was wrong. Anyway I can't delete them. Thank You Turelio, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

File:SavondeMarseille.jpg

How could you used a speedy delete about a simple picture of soap ? for your information, « Savon de Marseille » is not a company name, just generalist product name as whisky from scotland. So, i'm not agreed whith you decision, and ask you to do youn best to do it back. In fact, before to deleted it, you may first discuse about a eventualy delation. Véronique PAGNIER (talk) 05:25, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, it had been speedy-tagged by an OTRS volunteer as "French Soaps Ltd claims the copyright of this image, refer to OTRS ticket 2011092110017567". Such requests are to be taken seriously, because if not followed they might result in legal problems and because our OTRS volunteers usually know their job. As I am not on OTRS, I can't look into the ticket. Anyway, you might wait what Fæ has to say. --Túrelio (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

It appears here -- https://www.frenchsoaps.com/base.htm. It may be "a simple picture of soap", as Véronique says, but it still has a copyright, the company that owns the copyright, French Soaps Ltd. has issued a takedown notice, and we have complied.

Also, Véronique, please note that copyright violations may be deleted on sight, without discussion, so this was entirely within our rules.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

deletion my files

Hi. i uploaded several pictures last day . all of them have PD-Iran permission because all of them over of 30 years ago published in iranian media like magazine and newspapers. unfortunately one user made a mistake and labeled to all my files (cpyright violatin) and some of them deleted. but all of them have true permission and i have to upload them again.

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miladkhoshtip98 (talk • contribs) 24. September 2011, 13:46 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Miladkhoshtip98, though I haven't deleted all images requested for deletion, the deletion request seemed plausible to me as the was no evidence of pre-publication. As you had already some contact with User:Monfie, who tagged them for deletion, it might be better to continue communication with him in order to check out what additional information might be needed. As soon as this is clear, you might ask for un-deletion, instead of re-upload. --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

OK.thanks for you didn't mind to all User:Monfie's tags and keep them.i answer to User:Monfie in my talk and i continue communication with him if it is necessary.User:Monfie lebeled to all of them without any logical reason but for example this file has been deleted , before had been uploaded in other language of wiki like this and also this and this that tagged (cpyright violation) there are in other wikis 1 2 . all of those pictures had been published for public in iranian media and i saw them in old historic documents and old archive of iranian media , you trust me.i will return later in a better time and occasion just i hope the rest of my files not delete until that time . thanks again--Miladkhoshtip98 (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

The Barnstarfeather

	For all your input
	For you Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Opel Kapitän 1959

The photograph of the cat with the real life looks to be beyond fault -- I'd say well chosen if I have identified the "look" correctly.

I am here because 14 hours after you deleted the subject category, I am recreating it. If you choose to delete it again, I will not re-create it again.

The reason I am re-creating it is because 1959 is part of the navigation template I made for Opel and its Kapitän. The special P1 and P2 models are a pain. Cadillac, the other category I have been constructing has the same problem. Some Eldorado's are Fleetwood also, for example.

(the enclosed is mention of a bunch of problems I am looking at:

Opel is like Honda (which I am not even thinking about constructing right now) and made motorcycles and automobiles at the same time. So Opel vehicles, unlike Cadillac, are separated into an automobiles category and that too is under construction.

General Motors could have divided their frigidair line (refrigerators) and called a model of those Cadillac -- I am really glad that they didn't. I was told that there was a time when most refrigerators were made by General Motors and it was more common to call the device a "frigidaire" instead of a "refrigerator" -- that was long ago though.

Ford made chainsaws and they were called Ford, but I am not constructing or thinking about those categories now either.)

About Opel Kapitän in particular. It is a problem that the <Brand Year> is often also the <Model> but not always. I am going to handle this by putting those <Brand Year>'s which are not also the <Model> into only the category "by year". I chose Opel to start with for a number of reasons, being kind of small and not complex was one of those reasons but it is difficult to see that this was the truth right now.

So, a re-cap via links:

1. Category:Opel Kapitän 1959 using Template:VehicleBrandModelYear
2. Category:Opel 1959 automobiles
3. Category:Opel 1959

Not all of those have templates right now, but probably/maybe will.

A personal note: you were mentioned on my talk page as a person who knows when and what to delete here. It is the reason for the lengthy explanation now.

It is also the reason that I kept out of the battlefield of the deletion nominations as often as I did. That the people doing the deleting would delete or not, based on if my nomination was accurate or not. That the crappy personality based battles there would be a waste of my time.

It is knowing that there are experienced eyes and brains reviewing before deleting that made the opportunity to battle to be understood by me as a waste of time.

That was a thank you in three paragraphs. -- Queeg (talk) 22:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

generations

The Cadillac models are separated into generations. I think that Kapitän needs that also.

Being that most of Opel's history belongs to the Germans, do you have some feeling about this? de.wikipedia separates them by year of form 'YY. With that form, the company was not looking to beyond 1999.

I am going to leave Opel until I can get a comment from someone from Opel's motherland about it and work on Cadillac (being from its motherland). -- Queeg (talk) 22:27, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Queeg, I'm somewhat puzzled over this "complaint", as my deletion of the cat Opel Kapitän 1959 followed your own speedy-tagging {{badname|Opel Kapitän P1}}, which then seemed plausible to me. Anyway, I have no personal opinion for or against this cat. So, feel free to recreate it. One of our category experts is User:Foroa. You might contact him, if you are unsure. --Túrelio (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

This was not a complaint. Not even an attempt to disguise a complaint. I suppose it was more of an apology for re-instating a recently deleted category.

I have met Foroa: User_talk:Queeg#Just_to_say_....

I think I asked for your permission, as a German, to use "generations" for Opel automobiles instead of year to define changes to the model (German wikipedia uses years ('YY) and English wikipedia uses generations).

And I thanked you for being reason enough to not "wallow in the trash" at the nominations for deletions. -- Queeg (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, therefore I had written "complaint" ;-). Though being German, I'm not very interested in cars and therefore don't have a strong opinion about the one or the other way. --Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

File:The Alquemist.jpg

Esta fotografía es propiedad del propio Paulo Coelho, y la ha cedido a su representante legal en todo el mundo Sant Jordi Asociados agencia literaria, S.L., con sede en Barcelona (España), para más información o para cotejar y corroborar la información facilitada contacten al número de teléfono 93 2240107 o bien al email santjo@santjordi-asociados.com. También pueden visitar nuestra página web http://www.santjordi-asociados.com/. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Santjo2011 (talk • contribs) 28. September 2011, 11:20 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Miriam,

if you have indeed the necessary rights from the original author, then please mail a statement to our OTRS "department" (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org), where our OTRS volunteers will handle this. If you want to sent a formal permission, go to Commons:Modelos de mensajes, copy the boxed "Declaración de permiso para todas las peticiones", put in the filenames of the related images, put in the name of the license of choice, date and sign it and mail it back to the above email address. --Túrelio (talk) 09:33, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Photos and images about Paulo Coelho and his books

Dear Túrelio, I don't know how I can say that.... I am working for Paulo Coelho, we are Sant Jordi Asociados agencia literaria, S.L., we are the legal representative of Paulo, I have provide all the documents I load with a phone number, and email, and a web. Maybe We are new in wikipedia terms but not with all Paulo Coelho world. We have the need to change the photos becouse what are publicated don't like to Paulo, and we need to make new wiki web for Aleph his new novel in case someone wants to know more abouth that.

I don't know how much I have to do, I also have sent an email to permissions_commons@wikipedia.org explaining that.

what else can we do to not have more problems?

Hi, if you sent an email as explained above, an OTRS volunteer will check whether the permission is sufficient and, if not, contact you directly. If the permission is cleared, then a so-called OTRS-ticket (sort of o.k.) will be put on all related image pages. Please always sign your comment using the following string --~~~~ . --Túrelio (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Mark O'Connor photo by Jim McGuire

Hi Turelio, I am currently an intern for Mark O'Connor and i am trying to edit and make his wikipedia page more accurate. He needs to have a photo on his page. I got the photo from his press photos off of his website and I have permission from him to post this on the wikipedia page. I also gave credit to the photographer. Please un delete the photo so that I can keep his page updated and accurate. Thank you.

Fiona Fionakz (talk) 16:34, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Fiona, press photos are per se not free enough for upload to Commons. We need a permission from the rights holder. Provided that the photographer transferred his copyright to Mark O'Connor, he may give such a permission, otherwise you need to get it from the photographer. Please see Commons:OTRS for details and a permission template. The permission needs to be mailed to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

To Clarify, I just need to email the photographer a request for permission, and then email permission-commons@wikimedia.org? Then the picture will become available? I might use a different photo by a different photographer, so This needs to be done before I upload it, correct? Thank you. Fiona Fionakz (talk) 19:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Fiona, the email address I gave you initially was missing 1 character, it's permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. For the permission please use the template under this link. Ideally the photographer should send the permission himself to the above email address. After you got his o.k. (that he will do it), drop me a note. I will then immediately undelete the image, even though the confirmation of the permission by one of our OTRS volunteers may take some time. If you want to upload a different photo from a different photographer, you might first ask the photographer whether he is willing to give permission, then upload the image (add the {{OTRS pending}} tag) and then send the request with the permission template to the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Your assistance please...

I think we may have discussed before some ideas I have about how complicated trimming duplicates can be.

In my opinion File:MP speaks to one of the first 20 Guantanamo captives during processing on January 11th, 2002.jpg is a much more informative title than File:Camp x-ray detainees.jpg.

In my opinion the longer file name is sufficiently more informative that, even if it were not the older file, it should be the name other file(s) redirect to. Former navy photographer Shane McCoy has been quoted on how he recorded a series of very similar, but actually different images on January 11th, 2002. He attached his camera to a monopod, then put his camera in a mode where it automatically took a series of images, then held the monopod and camera over his head so he could photograph the processing of those first 20 captives in a way that wasn't obscured by the tall fence htat surrounded the compound.

I just checked the revision history of the longer file name -- essentially blank. There is a potential problem with the file you decided to keep.

The images McCoy took that day are very widely republished. The DoD realized that mid-level press officers had made a gigantic blunder by distributing these photos, which were originally intended for internal use only, and quickly took them down. Consequently about half the time they are republished they are improperly credited -- either not credited at all, or credited to various wire services, or to leading newspapers. It is a mess, and an indication of how non-professional the photo editors can be -- even at big news organizations. My impression is that those photo editors can be surprisingly oblivious of copyright issues, surprisingly poorly informed, and no one in their management chain really gives a damn if photos are routinely miscredited.

This has represented a problem in the past, not just in general, but with this series of images in particular. Good faith contributors come across instances where one of these images has been republished, but where it is credited to a news organization, and they want to challenge whether the image should be considered PD. Many good faith contributors here take the precautionary principle to such lengths that won't accept good faith assurances that no civilian photographers were allowed to take photos early in the camp's history.

The image you chose to keep has sourcing which I anticipate may result in it being challenged. It was transferred from en.wiki way back in 2006, without explicitly carrying over its original sourcing. If the image you chose to discard had a source field that was still active, and the page at that link properly credited the image to Shane McCoy that would be a very strong reason to make that image and its {{information}} template the base image. Even if it merely linked to a page that didn't offer a credit at all I think it would be preferable than saying the image was transferred from wikipedia in 2006, when 2006 is too early to go back to the original wikipedia page to try and find the original source.

So, is it technically possible for you to graft back on the original history for the image with the longer name that you replaced with a redirect? If so, could you pleas do so?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Will have to study, how that might be done. --Túrelio (talk) 23:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

MW 1.18 update

Offline for now. --Túrelio (talk) 16:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

As recommended by Wikid77 at 1.18 issues,
may be we should have got such an announcement on top of every Commons page before the great update-corruption started:

Upgrading to MediaWiki 1.18x, Commons will be basically unusable for this week

--Túrelio (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Ich hab keine Schwierigkeiten, welchen Browser setzt Du ein? --Schwäbin (talk) 09:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

IE 8 unter XP. Wenn ich mir die inzwischen seitenlange Liste der Beschwerden auf :en (Link s.o. "1.18 issues") anschaue, scheint die Version dabei aber keine Rolle zu spielen. --Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Und auch noch monobook. Also mit Firefox und Vector kämst Du ganz normal durch. Vielleicht so lange, bis sich die größten Probleme wieder verzogen haben? --Schwäbin (talk) 09:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Gerade auch einen IE crash unter der (gräßlichen) Vector-Skin (aber mit wieder aktivierten Gadgets) erlebt. --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Wenn Du auch bloß die Hälfte meiner Empfehlung umsetzt ;-) --Schwäbin (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Morgen ist eh erstmal das welterste Wikipedianer-Dreiländertreffen in Aachen! ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 21:16, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Wann meldest Du Dich hier an? Ich muss Dich unbedingt mal persönlich kennenlernen! Viel Spaß in Aachen! --Schwäbin (talk) 21:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Und wo bleibt der Bericht? ;-) --Schwäbin (talk) 14:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Ich wollte noch einen Moment warten, bis vielleicht einer von mehreren Photographen einige Stammtisch-Shots hochgeladen hätte, was bislang aber nicht der Fall ist. Also, es war für Aachener Verhältnisse ein Bombenerfolg, ca. 25 Teilnehmer, nicht nur eine neue (in Bezug auf den Stammtisch) Aachenerin mit gewisser Reallife-Relevanz, sondern auch Gäste aus der Aachener Peripherie: Köln (darunter einige Wikipedia-Urgesteine), Bonn, Niederlande, Belgien und sogar Luxemburg, womit aus dem geplanten 3-Länder- ein 4-Länder-Treffen geworden ist. Ich habe den Eindruck, dass es allen gefallen hat. --Túrelio (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

pixelio

Hello, the two photos are by some sort of fluke with the Pixelio note was published. I've edited it for upload to Pixelio (trimmed to the essentials, Levels ..). (I did not Commons). Since I am registered with Wikimedia, I've uploaded my (subjective) best possible images in Commons. Since I have the originals on an external backup drive - I have the simplicity of my pictures Pixelio retrieved and uploaded to Commons. The elevator in Lisbon now has no more indication of Pixelio (or?), The Aaron rod carries the hint, unfortunately, in the name - I do not know how I could change that. mfG--Alfredte (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)alfredte

Werd mich später drum kümmern. --Túrelio (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Plaque on Contalmaison Cairn memorial.jpg

Just wondering why the file was deleted i double checked and it clearly says its available under a commons license. Am i missing something sorry if i am. see [1] [2] Edinburgh Wanderer 22:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Edinburgh Wanderer, that's a not uncommon misunderstanding: not every CC license is allowed on Commons. This image is licensed CC-BY-SA-NC[3]. The problem is the NC-restriction (=no commercial use), as Commons requires all images to be free also for commercial use, at least in regard to copyright. Another Commons-incompatible restriction would be ND (=no derivatives). --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Some baklava for you :) !

Some baklava for my favorite admin :) ! Алый Король (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! --Túrelio (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

¡Muy importante!

Español (Spanish) Hola Turélio. ¿Como estás? Cargué uns archivos sin cuidado, no respetando los derechos de los autores, y sin poner el permiso del autor. Para no dañar mi imágen y mucho menos el de Wikipedia, "pido humildemente que elimine los archivos de abajo", que me cargan:

Português (Portuguese) Olá Turélio, tudo bom? Carreguei uns ficheiros por imprudência, não respeitando direitos autorais, e colocando sem a permissão do autor. Para não prejudicar a minha imagem e muito menos a da Wikipedia, "peço humildemente que exclua as imagens abaixo", por mim carregadas:

120px 120px 120px 100px

Gracias. Domingo, 9 de outubro de 2011. 5:36pm (Horário de Brasília). User talk: Gomes Netto.

Hola Gomes Netto, I have speedydeleted the 3 recent image and the unused portrait. However, why should there be a problem with the old postcards etc.? As they have been published in 1930, they should be free since end of 2000 per Brazilian Copyright law. --Túrelio (talk) 18:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Español (Spanish) Turélio ¡Muchas gracias! El punto es que las imágenes escaneadas de tarjetas postales antiguas que pertenecen a otra persona - una colección privada, y yo no pedí permiso. Por lo tanto, quiero corregir el mal que hice.

Português (Portuguese) Muito obrigado Turélio! A questão é que digitalizei as imagens de cartões-postais antigos pertencentes a outra pessoa - um acervo particular, e eu não pedi autorização. Então, desejo consertar o errado que fiz.

Quarta-feira, 12 de outubro de 2011. 7:15pm (Horário de Brasília). User talk: Gomes Netto.

delte yu nan 2010

you erased the 2 pictures i upload yesterday because you find it on internet on http://slide.ent.sina.com.cn/image_4_163_10102.html ??? with writing copyright down the page ? Do you read Chinese ? The copyright down the page is not for the picture but for the web site.

i m the owner of this picture and i never give sina the right to use it, there is no agrement or contract for this photo, but in China sina can do what they want, you should know that! So how can i show it s my work ?

16 octobre 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edichina (talk • contribs) 16. Oktober 2011, 07:07 Uhr (UTC)

You uploaded File:Yu nan 2009.jpg and dated it from October 15, 2011. However it was found on http://women.sohu.com/20100301/n270448217.shtml, where the URL suggests it was uploaded already in March 2010. How did the people on sohu.com get this image more than 1 year before your upload to Commons? In addition, the file you uploaded has no EXIF data. That is typical for images simply grabbed from the web.

Your 2nd upload File:Yu Nan 2010.jpg has 296×444 pixel, was dated from October 15, 2011 and again has no EXIF data. However, on http://slide.ent.sina.com.cn/image_4_163_10102.html the image has 950x1432 pixel, has EXIF data and, from wat I can read on the page, seems to have been uploaded already in 2009. Again, how did the people on sina.com.cn get this image in this high resolution?

In most countries when somebody unlawfully publishes/uses your works/images, you can at least request them to take them down.

To provide evidence of your ownership you might upload the images with the original EXIF data from the camera and in a higher resolution. --Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I know now how they get this picture... Anyway i have upload a picture "Yu nan picture.tif" in the real size. This is the one i have used for the file "Yu Nan in 2010.jpg" and i m sure that nobody have use this picture. I have also send the permission to wikimedia-commons for the rights. What should i do next ? Edichina|17. Oktober 2011

Hi Edichina, yes, that is enough proof for your ownership of File:Yu Nan in 2010.jpg. Now, do you really want to release the high-resolution TIFF under a free license? Or shall we consider the TIFF file as a "test"? You might instead upload it in JPEG format. If you can do similar operations for the 2 above discussed images, you might just upload them as high-res JPEG, which means less upload time for you. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your work, I think it ll be ok like this, I mean it s better to share a good picture, i was just thinking in term of storage capacity for wikimedia commons. And i still able to use this picture in the future. Edichina|17. Oktober 2011

informations about my images

hi, recently you've contacted me to tell me problems about my images, now deleted. So I've not understood why there were problems. For example, if I find some images that I upload with PD-Italia (or PD-Italy maybe) is necessary to know author(s)? And I have the same question about PD-AR-Photo (Argentina). Thanks --Cucuriello (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cucuriello, as the messages on your talkpage state, there was missing information about source and permission.

Take, for example, File:Tarasconi action.jpg: you claimed it to be {{PD-AR-Photo}}, but you did not provide a source of the file, the author of the image, the date (year) of the creation of the original image, the publication where the image had been published >20 years ago, as required per {{PD-AR-Photo}}. --Túrelio (talk) 20:55, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Bruxelles Divinite farouche Tibet 02 10 2011.jpg

Sorry, but the museum don't provide any date for this statue, so I can't write more. --Vassil (talk) 07:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I asked this question not for encyclopedic reasons, but to check whether the image is legal on Commons, as in Belgium there is not freedom of panorama. Is the original sculpture on ancient/old or a more recent work? --Túrelio (talk) 08:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File tagging File:Renzo Rosso by Anton Corbijn.jpg

Hi Túrelio,

Thanks for your help and input on the images I uploaded.

I will categorize the images better from now on and get the signed copyrights from the copyright owner, Diesel, as soon as possible.

Thanks again.

Wellescorp (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)WellesCorp

Hi WellesCorp, if you work for or act on behalf of Diesel Corp., please ask them to provide you a permission of those works of which they are the rights holder. --Túrelio (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, although the weird name Im actually just an independent writer, though obviously with a lot of interest in Diesel and its founder. I have emailed the Diesel press office and asked them to supply written permission for the photos. Hopefully it will come through soon. Thanks again for your help! All best.--Wellescorp (talk) 20:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Question on duplicates

I think the "duplicate files = always speedy delete" rule needs a bit of looking into. In 99% of cases, its not a big deal. However there's one class of images I'm really not sure about. What if the files are identical but depict two different subjects?

For example File:Blason Bourgogne-comté ancien(aigle).svg and (the deleted) Special:Undelete/File:Roussillon-Anjou.svg have identical SVG content. However they have fundamentally different descriptions as they depict two different subjects (which happen to be visually identical). I'm not keen on the idea of merging the descriptions and having one file description handle every different subject. We have enough legibility problems with many different language descriptions on one file. To have many different subjects?

Given the complexity of this type of situation, it feels like a full deletion request is probably better (ie it should not be eligible for speedy deletion). In such a DR, I'd probably vote to keep (based on concern I have above), but don't know what community consensus will be on this.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:57, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

As I have used "your" special script for dupes for a lot of files in the last months, I have indeed found situations where I did halt the already started process, especially when there were extensive descriptions which were not identical between the 2 files, as with File:The Pinwheel Galaxy, M101, in the Infrared.jpg. As of yet I have then left those files with the dupe-tag to other colleagues. Most are gone, anyway. The above mentioned File:Roussillon-Anjou.svg was in the dupe-queue already since 3 days, as I had hesitated to perform the deletion until today. I have no problem with restoring it, though the links may already have been replaced. --Túrelio (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

To be honest I'm not particularly bothered about the file in question here (and see no real need to restore) - the deleted version might be of a different subject, but I don't think it was in use and its caption/file name don't appear to be that useful. I'm more concerned about the implications for our speedy criteria as clearly, discussion is needed for such files. In the case of the one for the Pinwheel Galaxy, merging the descriptions is quite complex; and isn't really in the deleting admin's remit (we just want to push a button!). In the case of COAs, its if two seperate files or one with a combined caption is the better way of presenting.

I wonder if it would be sensible to tighten up the wording of the policy, and on the template, to ensure users are aware of the need to sort out the description and don't just say "bitwise identical = delete"?

Btw, on that image OSX is frustrated about - how about a full deletion, followed by a selective restore? I think that would do it (and you could also rm the tag nonsense edits).--Nilfanion (talk) 23:24, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

msg

hi you left me a msgs about the photo of rodolfo jimenez he had ginven me permision to use it it belong to him but now i dont have anything to do with him can you please errase it and regarding the other one of Carolina sandoval titled mme osea yo that was taken from her camera and she gave it to me to put it in her wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Topmartz (talk • contribs) 5. November 2011, 21:48 Uhr (UTC)

Filemove reversion

Hello Túrelio,

Yesterday I moved file File:ESA Gothaerstr9 Bild1.jpg to File:ESA Gothaerstr7 Bild1.jpg on an uploader's request. Now, because of misidentifying the subject, he wants me to revert that move. I use the "revert" link in my Logs, but an error message appeared: "The file name chosen is already in use on a shared repository. Please choose another name."

I thought that if the destination file hasn't been changed since the filemove, we can revert the rename? Or is it only sysops can do the revert? If so, please do it for me (here is the request of the uploader). Thank you. PRENN (talk) 00:41, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested image deletion

Hi. Do not know if this is the appropriate place for this. I apologise if it is not.
Regarding my deletion requests, I saw that you saved 2 images (this and this). Even if I can agree that quality of the these picture might be better, main (and probably only) purpose of this pictures is to be hosted in PSM project on WS, where naming convention is very important.
For the following reasons: 1) these were uploaded by mistake and risk only to confuse, 2) we can upload improved quality images of the correct ones, 3) the source is clearly identified and everybody if interested, can easily reach it, I suggest that we delete also these two.
Will you please reconsider the request? Thanks --Mpaa (talk) 16:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

FoP in Iran

Hi Túrelio, Could you please have a look at this DR that is about FOP issues in Iran. I hope that this help the community to reach a consensus about FOP issues in Iran. Furthermore, it might be helpful to have a look at this discussion you had earlier this year. Thanks AMERICOPHILE 08:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to do, but I'm not an expert in FOP of Iran. --Túrelio (talk) 17:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Otto_Hupp_Undeletion_Requests

I am now getting the individual images for this mass undeletion request, which was something you asked for before in October at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Mass_del_Category:Coats_of_arms_by_Otto_Hupp. If you have time, I like to request for your help in sorting these images out. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 19:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Puh, I tried to avoid that ;-), as I am not a specialist for COAs. O.k., I'll try to make some sense of it. --Túrelio (talk) 20:08, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I am a specialist in coat of arms, but with how many images that has to be restored, I needed/wanted a second opinion before we just mass restore all. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 20:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Good. I've also asked on Forum to support you. --Túrelio (talk) 21:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

• File:Krems Coa.jpg
• File:Wappen der ehemaligen Gemeinde Aubing.png
• File:Berun Wappen.png
• File:Beuthen O.S. Wappen.jpg
• File:Bladen Wappen.png
• File:Borislawitz Wappen.png

Canvassing

I agree with you philosophically about the canvassing. The area could be seen as negative. However, I think the focus on canvassing ignored that there were many supporters that gave no reason for their support, with no background on Commons, etc. while there were many opposes who were prominent members here. It is a little sad that Peter Damian's issue ignored the problems on Commons that I was bothered with - asking people behind the scenes to speedy delete images then try to prevent others from doing the same via DR (i.e. in public and not pulling favors) while claiming pointing out the double standard would be harassment. Then the coverup of his past actions in very out of process ways and having defenders make blatant untruths about Wikipedia's policies (the Clean Start policy makes it clear that people have the right to point out the previous socks and that when you edit in the same topic area it can be construed as trying to hide past behavior. Fae verified that such concerns were true by having people rev del out of process and getting pages deleted out of process). The user had a background of putting up copyright infringing material at Wikipedia and making BLP violations, and it is obvious from at least a few images that they continued this behavior here. I think if the BLP matters and the copyright matters were known, they would not have been allowed on OTRS and their many, many bad rationales at DRs here would have been met with a block to stop disruption.

Commons affects all projects, and there is a difference between disagreeing and harm. I believed that Fae and I merely disagreed until I saw the lengths he was willing to go to regarding hypocrisy and preventing others from self-nomination deletions of their images while nastily attacking others in those reviews and tossing around rather hateful accusations in a very unfair way. Hate is never good, and his hateful ways of interacting with others was why he kept having to change names before. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Hans Hartig Bei Bardowick in der Lüneburger Heide 1900.jpg

Hallo! Habe gesehen, dass Du dort auf meinen Duplikat-Hinweis geantwortet hast - sollte man sonst beide Dateien als "other versions" miteinander verlinken, ohne eine von beiden zu löschen? Ohnehin sind beide gleichermaßen nicht mehr als nur Abzüge von einem Original. Guten Start ins neue Jahr! --ChristianSW (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Request of undo of deletions of paintings and pictures of manav gupta

Artist Manav Gupta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manav_Gupta) is one of the ten leading young artists of india and has been interviewed by top &leading news channels and media bodies. One of the pictures of his that you have deleted is in the CNN IBN website ( http://ibnlive.in.com/photogallery/1578-0.html ) when his interview was being taken. The other one is the 5 floor mega mural in Bharti Airtel that is his copyright work ( http://www.hindustantimes.com/audio-news-video/a-tall-story-artist-manav-gupta-paints-a-colourful-tale/article2-577892.aspx) This is a very humble request of undoing the deletions of his paintings and photographs Regards Thunder Minds —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thunder Minds (talk • contribs) 13:43, 31. Dez. 2011 (UTCTúrelio (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC))

OMG, this was nearly 3 months ago. So this is about File:Umbilical_Cords_of_Earth.jpg, File:The_Tree_of_Life_by_manav_gupta.jpg, File:The_Life_Tree.jpg and File:Manav_Gupta.jpg. The source http://ibnlive.in.com, above linked by you, has a clear copyright mark. So you can't take content from that site. --Túrelio (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

* * * Gutes Neues Jahr 2012! * * *

-- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, auch ich wünsche dir Gesundheit, Zufriedenheit und dass dir gelingt, was du dir vornimmst! Du machst hier einen megaguten Job nicht nur mit deinem Fleiß, sondern auch auf eine sympathische Art, die wertvoll ist für das gesamte Projekt. Deine Familie und Freunde wissen hoffentlich, welchen Schatz sie bei sich haben. :-) --Martina talk 17:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

. --Túrelio (talk) 18:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

File deletion

Hello, Túrelio! Happy New Year!

Well, I have tagged some files (Caj.jpg, Lab Geral.JPG, CampusSantoAmaro CentroConvencoes b.jpg, CampusSantoAmaro Biblioteca a.jpg, CampusSantoAmaro PredioGastronomia b.jpg, CampusSantoAmaro AreasdeConvivencia a.jpg) for speedy deletion as I felt they meet the criteria for that. I saw your comments and I understand your doubt.

You know that anyone can create an account with the name they want. I could create an account with the name Sony Ericsson, but that does not give me the right to use the images registered in their Picasa album without the required permission. I think someone tried to impersonate Senac São Paulo, a well known institution in Brazil, and thereby promote the images improperly.

To me there is no problem in deleting the images, since in the albums can be seen clearly that all rights are reserved, according to the author. But if you think evidence is still needed, I can try to contact Senac.

Ah! I've made a mistake about the file Caj.jpg, sorry. They are not the same image, as you wrote. You can remove the speedy delete tag from this file. Agente Rolf (talk) 19:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Permanent_calendar_greg.svg

Guten Tag Turelio, einen Teil der Antwort hat der Benutzer "Botaurus" schon gegeben. Den großen Teil meiner Antwort möchte hier nur umschreiben.. (Näheres gern über E-Mai; da lesen nicht Alle mit) Durch meine konkreten Lebensumstände bedingt konnte und kann ich nicht so wie ich möchte. So bin ich erst im höheren Lebensalter mit Herrn Computer in näheren Kontakt gekommen. Weiterhin hatte ich nie Englisch, was sich als großer Nachteil bei Wikipedia herausstellt. So konnte ich mich mittels Google-Übersetzer auch nicht gut mit "AnonMoos" verständigen; es ist also nicht so, dass ich 2 Jahre lang nichts versucht hätte. Bei dieser Gelegenheit muss ich doch gleich meine Meinung mal offen legen zu der GNU-Lizenz, die bei o.g. Bild/Datei enthalten ist (warum auch immer). Die dieser folgende Lizenz (von mir vergeben) ist meines Erachtens die "schärfere" Lizenz. Wenn ich demnach gestatte die weichere GNU anzuwenden, wird die Vergabe der anderen Lizenz sinnlos, oder ? Freundiche Grüße --LenderKarl (talk) 14:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Karl, der angesprochene Unterschied zwischen schärferer und weicherer GNU-Lizenz ist mir nicht klar. Insgesamt wird die GFDL/GNU-Lizenz als weniger geeignet für Bilder betrachtet. Aber was stört dich an der Lizenz, die vermutlich sowieso niemand benutzen wird? Das Problem, dass ich mit einer Löschung von File:Permanent calendar greg.svg sehe, ist dass diese Datei laut Google-Suche auch auf einer Reihe von nicht-Wikimedia-Seiten verwendet wird. Wenn man sie jetzt einfach löscht, dann verschwindet das Bild (sofern ge"hot"linkt) von diesen Seiten oder es fehlt ihnen pötzlich die Quelle. Da ich aus der Löschdiskussion den Eindruck habe, dass dich eigentlich mehr die mindere Qualität der SVG-Umsetzung (kann ich selbst nicht beurteilen) stört, wäre es m.E. eine bessere Lösung, die "mangelhafte" Version durch eine bessere/korrekte Version zu ersetzen, also einfach drüberzuladen. Das geht allerdings nur SVG -> SVG, nicht SVG -> PNG. Könntest du dich damit anfreunden? --Túrelio (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, könnte ich; vielen Dank !--LenderKarl (talk) 10:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

O.k., dann die Frage: gibt es eine bessere Ausführung von File:Permanent_calendar_greg.svg im SVG-Format? --Túrelio (talk) 10:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Nein, oder besser: Nicht bekannt. Wenn ich an die umfangreiche Arbeit denke, die dem Vernehmen nach die Umwandlung einer png in eine svg macht, bin ich fast der Meinung, wir lassen es so wie es ist. Es sind doch nur Kleinigkeiten, welche die Aussagen des Kalenders nicht beeinträchtigen. Betreffs der Lizenzen habe ich vertrauen in Deine Aussagen !--LenderKarl (talk) 10:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)--LenderKarl (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Siehe auch...

...Commons:Deletion requests/File:SeaLandExchange.jpg.--D.W. (talk) 23:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

deleted File:Dhwani 10 fashion show.jpg

Hai,
you have deleted File:Dhwani 10 fashion show.jpg due to Screenshot of non-free content: Speedydelete.But the image was taken by me and later edited using gimp (which may be felt as Screenshot).I have also shared this picture to many free picture sharing websites.
so please restore the image in Commons. Abilngeorge (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Could you please upload the original (un-edited) photo in a somewhat higher resolution than File:Dhwani 10 fashion show.jpg? --Túrelio (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You removed "File:FionaR.jpg" from Commons but I have permission from Fiona to use it

Regarding... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Ritchie -- I began updating the page after interviewing Fiona last winter and had her permission to use this photo which (I guess) you removed 69.120.196.53 23:31, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, if you are the uploader User:Profdrew101, you should log-in before commenting.

Now to File:FionaR.jpg. This image was uploaded as "own work" of User:Profdrew101. However, User:C45207 found it on http://thistleradio.com/, a page that is marked © Fiona Ritchie and credited to Butterstone Studios. This finding questions the uploader's ownership claim. So, who is the photographer?

Also, you wrote "had her permission to use". But what kind of permission? A permission by the copyright holder (the photographer) or by the personality rights holder (the depicted)? What we mainly need is the first one. When you look now at http://thistleradio.com/, you see an (different) image of Fiona that has the credit "photo: ©Roy Summers/Scottish Field". Though it is on Fiona's page, the rights holder is Roy Summers. --Túrelio (talk)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cabedelo-pb.JPG

Yes, the alleged author of the image filled a judicial proccess against me. My lawyer checked and the same person filled a hundred judicial proccesses at the same time. The same image can be found on a lot of sites. The author have placed a small text on the image page too stating that he does not authorize the use of the image (think he doesn't know how to ask for deletion). Allgood (talk) 12:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry to hear that. Did you already copy the logs of this upload, in order to be able to provide evidence for a good-faith-use on your behalf? --Túrelio (talk) 13:17, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

We are settling the proccess, looks like he stabilished a "catch-coins" scheme, and as I was very naive trying to automatically incorporate articles from Wikipedia on a local news site, ended up shooting myself in the foot. I will have to pay a not-so-small quantity to him, but in my analisys, it would cost a lot more only to defend myself, including a forced tourism travel to the beautiful city of Cabedelo/PB for me and my lawyer. So I ended closing my 'automatic clone' site that never gave me a penny. As the proccess are publicly available, I am thinking in getting it on the wild as soon as it is closed to warn all the friends to take care on this things! Allgood (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

My pics

Hello Turélio! I've been posting on Wikimedia Commons some South Parked pictures of me! So, you said that you'll delete them cause they're copyright violations! D: Anyway, I've posted the owners of the image in their descriptions, I always say that they're art from Trey Parker and Matt Stone, creators of the South Park series. And I respected the copyrights page in the site where I get my images. Please dont delete them. They're so important to my Wikipedia page

Thanks, DennysOMarshall (talk) 22:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, what do you mean by "pictures of me"? Aren't these the regular characters? But even if they aren't, I strongly assume that the appearance ("design") of these figures is copyrighted and/or trademarked. And what/where is the "site where I get my images"? --Túrelio (talk) 22:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

question

You deleted File:MSC ocean surveillance ship USNS Able use firefighting hoses to deter simulated attackers.jpg, an image uploaded by a real human being, in favor of an image uploaded by a robot.

I was surprised that the robot uploaded image remains poorly categorized.

I am sure I have written to you before about how counter-productive it seems to me to favor images uploaded by robots over images uploaded by real human beings, as (1) real human beings are more likely to make sure an images categories are wisely chosen; (2) robots have no feelings to be hurt.

It doesn't seem like me to have failed to put this image in useful categories. Did I really fail to do so? If I did add meaningful categories I am going to assume not adding them to the image you kept that was kept was an oversight.

Can I ask when I uploaded the version you deleted? Geo Swan (talk) 01:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Yours was newer (ie the robot uploaded one was here first). You uploaded in Aug 2010 and the bot did it in Nov 2009. Yours only contained these categories: Category:USNS Able, Category:Piracy. The former seems to redirect to the category that's currently on the robot uploaded version and the latter can be easily added. Did you mention something about wisely chosen categories? Killiondude (talk) 07:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I increasingly hate this kind of dupe-deletions that result from our may-be-not-so-well-thought do-not-overwrite policy. As already mentioned by Killiondude, the bot-uploaded image was uploaded about 10 months earlier than yours. The upload-precedence is an important forensic point in the choice which image should stay. If you provide me an easy-to-handle solution how to legally-safe record the original upload date of the other version, this point might become less critical. --Túrelio (talk) 07:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

PD-1996 und so

Huhu. Aufgrund einer Anfrage auf WP:UF kam ich auf deinen Edit hier. Könntest du mal da nachschauen? PD-1996 ist da meines Erachtens nach nicht richtig, da Juni 1976 + 20 Jahre = Juni 1996, aber das liegt doch nach dem URAA-Datum vom 1.1.1996, oder? Da ich mich damit nicht auskenne kannst du dich drum kümmern? Danke. --Quedel (talk) 14:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Ömm, also ich halte mich von den inkonsistenten PD-Bestimmungen der USA i.a. eher fern, weil ich es schwer durchschaubar finde. Auch die Hinweis im PD-Italy-Fenster sind unklar: "es wurde vor 1976 erstellt" oder "es nach 1976 erstellt". Dieses wurde aber in 1976 erstellt, was gilt hier? Aber egal, ich hab jetzt mal {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} gesetzt, weshalb das Foto wohl gelöscht werden muss. --Túrelio (talk) 14:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Da ich mich noch weniger damit auskenne als du, wirst du schon das richtige tun, auch wenn mir jede Behaltensmöglichkeit lieber ist. Aber konsequent müssen wir schon sein. Und es ist auch kein Foto, was wir nach de.wp retten können :( --Quedel (talk) 16:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Programm-Screenshots

Siehe User talk:Pill. Grüße, —Pill (talk) 02:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Danke, werds mir heut abend anschauen. --Túrelio (talk) 07:57, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied

Replied here File:Exydrus_gibbosus.jpg Stho002 (talk) 01:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

O.k., "I can reup the file and relink the pages easily" - but I hope you will really do it: [4], [5]. --Túrelio (talk) 07:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi

I've been the first day. These images that I uploaded, I bought a internet-site shop which I have in the copyright notice. For them to pay money, then they are legal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Артём Алтухов (talk • contribs) 28. Januar 2012, 22:10 Uhr (UTC)

Hi Артём, images (and any other files) uploaded to Commons have to be free for any kind of use and without any further payment or similar. Images on websites are generally considered unfree, except if they are expressedly put under a free license by the photographer. The smugmug.com website carries a (C) note and none of the subpages of individual photographers is under a free license. I do not fully understand what you mean by "I bought". Did you pay the photographer for these images? If yes, what kind of use does that include? I rather doubt that this would include redistribution under a free license, because that would mean that the photographer no longer can sell these images. For some general information, see COM:CB. --Túrelio (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Deine Fragen vom 28.1. bez. Bilder zu Kunst am Kanal

Hallo Turelio,

vielen Dank zunächst für Deine Rückmeldung. Da ich nur sporadisch in Wikipedia arbeite habe ich nicht viel Erfahrungen und denke nicht an alle rechtlichen Eventualitäten. Ich hoffe es ist der richtige Weg Deine Fragen zu beantworten, ich habe keine Möglichkeit für einen direkten "reply" gefunden: - Löschung des Artikels der Neumarkter Nachrichten ist korrekt. An die rechtliche Seite habe ich nicht gedacht und entschuldige mich dafür. - Alle Objekte, also auch die Kugeln und EINSTSTEIN sind Eigentum des Vereins und sind dauerhaft installiert. Die Kugeln waren ursprünglich Leihgaben sind aber inzwischen angekauft. EINST STEIN ist eine Schenkung. - Das Bild vom Model wird inzwischen nicht mehr benötigt. Ich habe es bereits aus dem Artikel gelöscht. Du kannst das Bild daher komplett löschen.

Viele Grüße, DLI25--Dli25 (talk) 12:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Danke für die Rückmeldung. Allerdings ist es so, dass das Eigentum an einem Kunstwerk keine wirkliche Relevanz für das Urheberrecht daran hat (ich weiß, ist vielen nicht so geläufig). Das Urheberrecht verbleibt beim Künstler, bis 70 Jahre nach dessen Tod. Allerdings gibt es in D/CH/A zum Glück die sog. Panoramafreiheit, die es rechtlich erlaubt, von im öffentlichen Raum dauerhaft angebrachten Kunstwerken Fotos usw. zu machen und diese auch kommerziell zu nutzen. Aufgrund dieser Regelung sind Fotos von den installierten Kunstwerken (sofern im Prinzip dauerhaft aufgestellt, was wohl auch für as zusammengebrochene gilt) somit legal, bedürfen allerdings eines entsprechenden Hinweises, weil unklar ist, ob die Fotos auch in Ländern ohne Panoramafreiheit (Frankreich, Belgien, u.v.a.m.) legal benutzt werden dürfen. Was das erwähnte Modell angeht, bräuchtest du nur den Künstler um eine Genehmigung zu bitten (Details: Commons:OTRS/de) und diese an permissions-commons@wikimedia.org weiterzuleiten, dann könnte es auch bleiben. --Túrelio (talk) 13:20, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Portrait drawings by Jean-Étienne Liotard

Dear Túrelio, I would be grateful to you if you could let me know if you intend to move the content of Category:Portrait drawings by artist to Category:Drawings by artist for the same reason, namely “for easier navigation”? Thank you.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 21:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Thorvaldsson, as I only executed the deletion request by User:Vincent Steenberg, who also provided this rationale, it might be better to ask him directly. If, in the end, you both agree to revert to the former state, I have no problem with that. --Túrelio (talk) 21:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Henri Bienvenu Ntsama.jpg

Please delete this image that I speedied. I didn't know that a second user had typed in a fake flickrpass in my name. I never even saw this image. If an anon IP does this, just revert the flickrpass and either 1. tag it for deletion or 2. allow another trusted user or Admin to mark it. This image is obviously a derivative anyway and a flickrwash. I only mark images with my signed in user account. Thank You for notifying. One day, I may be away...but I would never pass an image with an anonymous IP account. That is for sure. Best Regards from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Aso natsuko.png

Hola, La Fotografía sacada de Flickr, el autor Dj ph puso la licencia con la etiqueta Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 2.0 Genérica (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) a la que la borraste según con la licencia No Comercial , Sin obras derivadas , or Todos los derechos reservados , Por favor vuelve a revisarla --Asaraya (talk) 00:02, 4 Febrero 2012 (UTC)

Hi, images licensed[6] no-commercial-use are not allowed on Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 08:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Thamnophis sirtalis infernalis 002.jpg

Moin. :-) Ich hab kein Verschiebe-Flag hier. Kannst du die Datei umbenennen zu File:Thamnophis elegans terrestris 002.jpg? (war auf deWP jetzt schon wieder falsch eingesetzt) Danke im Voraus. --Martina talk 01:37, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Der alte Dateiname wird als Weiterleitung aber wohl erstmal erhalten bleiben. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Wie imemr: 1000 Dank --Martina talk 23:14, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Leider schon wieder

eine traurige Nachricht - schau mal bitte hier und hier. lg, --4028mdk09 (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Danke für die Info; hab ihn in COM:RIP eingetragen und werde an ihn denken. --Túrelio (talk) 21:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

File:MakSim.jpg

Hello. I got permission to use photo via private message. How can I prove it? --Lexusuns (talk) 10:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Forward it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 10:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Rail vandal

RE: this edit. See also User:Krinkle/Socks#Rail-related nonsense. –Krinkle^talk 18:06, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Copyvio

Hello Túrelio, could you please take a look at File:Gianluca Sansone.jpg? Thank you so much, --Delfort (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio

... schaust du bitte mal über meine Beiträge. Ich hoffe ich hab nicht allzuviel grobe Fehler eingebaut (Bei Commons übe ich ja noch...). P.S. ich hatte mal im de:WP Artikel Rumänien nachgeschaut, dort konnte ich nur den Hinweis finden "Mitglied der NATO (2004) sowie der Europäischen Union (2007)". Einen Hinweis auf das Schengen-Abkommen fand ich im Artikel nicht. Im Artikel Schengener Abkommen wird zu Rumänien der Hinweis: "Bestimmungen über die Außengrenze sind bereits in Kraft" gegeben. Just for Info! LG --1971markus (☠): ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 23:01, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, kurz als Hinweis: Ich habe auch schon einige Beiträge durchgeschaut: de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Saibo#Commons_Fragen. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 00:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Ihr Beiden, mir ist es ganz recht wenn mehr als zwei Augen mal etwas Obacht geben. Auf Commons übe ich ja noch. Lieben Gruß in die Runde --1971markus (☠): ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 01:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Ich hoffe, dass ich morgen dazu komme. Die hemmungslosen URV-Hochlader hindern unsereiner zu oft daran, das zu tun, was wir viel lieber täten. Bzgl. Rumänien war ich schon zur selben Schlußfolgerung gekommen, hatte das aber nur Rehgina mitgeteilt. --Túrelio (talk) 08:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Ich hoffe ich bin mit meinen Fehlern soweit durch? Wäre nett ne Rückantwort zu bekommen. Frage: Was haltet ihr davon? Für Kritik und Tipps immer ein offenes Ohr... --1971markus (☠): ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 03:01, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Da hab ich Euch ne Menge Arbeit gemacht, ich glaub ich nehm da aber ein paar neue Erkenntnisse mit. Dank Euch für die Mühen. LG --1971markus (☠): ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 20:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

RfCU

Thank you for your support and kind words.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio, yes, I'm the artist, and the photos are mine. Sorry for my english, almost forgot it!--Benet Rossell (talk) 13:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File Guillaume Sarkozy

Hi, I understand I might have done something wrong with Guillaume sarkozy file. The thing is the current image is no longer displayed on Flickr. That's why I displayed a new image. Is there any other way I can change the current image ? Thanks for your help. TheYoungPilgrim

Hi, your new version of the image is NC/ND-restricted on Flickr, which is not allowed on Commons. However, the fact that the older version is no longer available on Flickr doesn't really matter as the correct license was checked at the date of upload (see the green box). CC licenses are considered to be non-revokable. We would consider this to be a problem only if there would be solid evidence that the image was already a copyvio when originally uploaded to Flickr. --Túrelio (talk) 23:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Image Confprensa4.png

In Commons:Deletion requests/File:Confprensa4.png. I'm a journalist. I took that picture. So obviously I have the copyright of that image, why I can not upload? RonsonPeru2 (talk) 17:40, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi RonsonPeru2, I didn't say to be sure that you are not the copyright holder, just that it seemed unlikely to me, as is very often with shots from celebrities. Anyway, if you are really the photographer, then I recommend you to follow the advise of my colleague PierreSelim on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Francisco Martínez (saxofonista)

Stop deleting all my images because I am the owner of all the images uploaded and shown in Francisco Martínez (saxofonista). I want you to restore every image you deleted of this article.--Pablobetes (talk) 23:21, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I deleted only a few of your uploads, but notified you of most deletion requests. So, obviously my other admin colleagues who also performed the deletion, were also convinced that you are not the copyright holder. For the most definite answer see here. --Túrelio (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Dombóvári Helytörténeti Múzeum előtér.jpg

Helo Túrelio! This is a wallpaper. --Gnagyrobi (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. But then it is the work of a photographer and is likely copyrighted. Obviously being inside the house, it is unlikely to be covered by FOP exemption. --Túrelio (talk) 13:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Dombóvári Helytörténeti Múzeum rajza.jpg

This is a drawing, isn't yet ready. I don't who taken it.

--Gnagyrobi (talk) 13:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Alisha_Glass_2012.jpg

Hi, this picture is croppped from the original one. As I know pictures like this one doesn't have meta data. Why is it a crop? I made pics to players of Atom team yet, so this time I went to the match without a special attitude to making good quality portait pics (made some only to my fan FB site). But, as a addicted wikipedist ;) I can't refrain to put even not very good quality photo to player who didn't have any one. I've added some location informations yet.--Zorro2212 (talk) 09:19, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

O.k., thanks for the feedback. However, there is no principal problem why crops should/could not have the EXIF data of teh original uncropped image. It simply depends on the settings of the software you use. For example in the freeware IrfanView, maintaining the EXIF is the default. So, you might look at your cropping program and change the settings. --Túrelio (talk) 10:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Help again

Hello Túrelio - you have been helpful and logical in the past, so maybe you can help me with this one? This is one of 87 pictures uploaded from Garage de l"Est's website over the last six years. They have all been targeted for deletion for a few weeks now, for various causes all of which I am trying to fix. I received permission from the owner of the Garage (still languishing in OTRS) but since many shots were uploaded long ago, the original images are no longer available. So while I managed to find a source for the image in question, the link is now dead. I did find a shot of another car, taken in the same location. If you could be so kind so as to look at the shot, originally uploaded by 328cia and then again by Love Krittaya. Both of those users stated the image came from delest.nl, the image size, subject, and background all match the other images available on delest.nl. Thanks again for your consideration.

Also, perhaps you can aid in somehow establishing a way to confirm the source for these images, so that I won't have to go through this all over again next year? Mr.choppers (talk) 16:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mr.choppers, will try tomorrow, as I don't how enough time today. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Images from Sony Music

Hello! You tagged a few of my uploades and I was notified here. According to the respective sources, Sony Music licensed these images under a Creative commons attribution 3.0 license through their account at mynewsdesk.com. (If you reply here, we can keep this discussion in one place) --Bensin (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I would prefer the discussion at your talkpage, but I've spread it already by myself [7]. You know, this is nothing against you. Formally you seem to be correct about the licensing. I simply doubt that Sony etc. would give away high-qual promo shots under CC-BY and, at least in part, even not remove the "All rights reserved" from the EXIF data. --Túrelio (talk) 16:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello again! Don't worry. I know it's not personal :-) You tagged a few images (File:Amanda Jenssen 2012.jpg, File:Markoolio 2011.jpg, File:Newkid - Alexander JR Ferrer cover.jpg, File:Marc Mysterio.jpg, File:The Shins - Port of Morrow cover.jpg, File:Chris Medina - What Are Words cover.jpg and File:Bruce Springsteen - Wrecking Ball cover.jpg) with the template {{no permission since}}, which says that "there is no proof that the author of the file agreed to license the file under the given license". I think there is proof on the source page. If you think the proof is not sufficient it might be better to nominate the images for deletion instead. I also added a link to the discussion on the Village pump in my edit comment, and if the consensus there is to remove the images from mynewsdesk, we'll revisit these images later anyway when that discussion is closed. --Bensin (talk) 22:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Schaust du mal

wenn du Zeit hast auf meine Commons-Disk wegen der J.L.-Fotos und ev. alternativ bei deWP auf meinen Artikel über Joachim Lutz! Der Fotograf kann nicht mehr ermittelt werden - ev. sogar Privataufnahmen ca. 1930 - 1938). Es handelt sich um Erbstücke meiner Mutter, deren Alleinerbe wiederum ich bin, genau wie bei den Zeichnungen von J.L.! Eventuell hätte ich für die Fotos eine andere Lizenz nehmen müssen, das war aber zum damaligen Zeitpunkt noch unklar. VG.--Martin ^{der Ältere} 20:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Túrelio, ich darf auch um Rücksprache mit Saibo zum Thema bitten. Gruß --1971markus (☠): ^{⇒ Laberkasten ...} 00:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Hab ich gemacht, kann mich diese Woche aber nicht mehr drum kümmern, da offline. --Túrelio (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Suppression catégorie non justifiée

Bonjour Turelio. Pourquoi as-tu supprimé la Category:Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat qui est l'appellation officielle depuis 1854 des deux évêchés réunis ? Voici le site du diocèse qui l'affiche clairement aussi bien dans son titre que dans son logo, et l'article sur WP/fr parle bien de Diocèse de Périgueux et Sarlat. Père Igor (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, I don't know enough French, so I write in English. Category:Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat had been tagged for deletion by User:NeverDoING with the rationale "duplicate of Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux", which seems to be correct. While I understand that for you and most people living in this area, "Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat" is clearly identified as the "Catholic Diocese ...", there may exist (now or in the future) dioceses of other Christian denominations. Or is your main problem with the missing "and Sarlat"? --Túrelio (talk) 14:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Look for my rename-proposal at Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux. --Túrelio (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

My (big) problem is to understand and write in english. Officially, since 1854, « Diocese of Sarlat » and « Diocese of Périgueux » are united. This is the official web site of Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat (in french : « Diocèse de Périgueux et Sarlat ») and I want that Category:Diocese of Périgueux and Sarlat take the place of Category:Roman Catholic Diocese of Périgueux which no more exists. Père Igor (talk) 09:32, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Si vous parlent mieux l'allemand que l'anglais, nous pouvons communiquer en allemand. --Túrelio (talk) 09:55, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Help

Hello, can you help me with this picture? File:Rafael Roldós Vinyolas.jpg The point it's that this guy born in 1846 and dead in 1918, so, i think that now this pic is free, because the rights are expired. It's right? Can you help me putting the correct info in the pic?

Thanks a lot, and excuse me because my english and because i'm new in commons.--Wiay22 (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, first you should provide the source from where you got this image. "Periodico" is not enough. I assume you got it from a website; so put the URL/address into the source entry. I'll go offline for the next 12 hours and will look into it later. --Túrelio (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, i put the URL that i got the pic in the source. What else? It's enough? Thanks! --Wiay22 (talk) 20:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

No, do not link the image file itself, but the page on which the image is shown on the newspapers website. --Túrelio (talk) 20:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your help. I did the change that you said me. Something else? What i have to do more? --Wiay22 (talk) 09:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

O.k., that's better. The image caption doesn't really help, as the "credit" likely refers only to the second image, not to the portrait. In order to find out whether the image is still protected (Spain had 80 years pma already in 19th century), you should contact[8] the editors of elperiodico.com and ask them for the name of the photographer of the photo of Roldós Vinyolas. If they say, we don't know, then it might go as anonymous work. Please forward their reply to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. --Túrelio (talk) 11:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello and really thanks for your help. I sent an email to the people in El Periódico. Anyway, this pic have at least 94 years, because the man was dead in 1918; so I understand that the picture is free of rights? Thank you so much, --Wiay22 (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

That is not automatically ensured. If the photographer died 20 years after taking the photo and if you consider the 80-year-after death-of-the-author proection of Spain, it might still be protected. --Túrelio (talk) 13:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I still not have answer of El Periodico. In the other hand, as you can see in El Periódico new, the picture is from the familiar archive of Rafael Roldós, so only the familly have the original. I know the family and they want that this picture will be free. Can they do something for it? It is enought with a mail from the familly? I don't know what i have to do... Thanks a lot again. --Wiay22 (talk) 01:37, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm on travel today and cannot look into it today. --Túrelio (talk) 07:00, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, when you can, i need your help ;) Thanks a lot! --Wiay22 (talk) 09:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Copyvios?

Could you have a look of the files uploaded by LUIGI19956? Several of the uploads was deleted by you and Sreejithk2000 yesterday, after I had marked them as copyvios. I suspect the rest also to be copyvios; some of them seem to be television screenshots. See e.g. [9] - File:Franco Ricciardi Wikipedia.png can be found 53 seconds out in this official video. - 4ing (talk) 07:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll look into this tomorrow. --Túrelio (talk) 12:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Did you have a look into this user's uploads? - 4ing (talk) 08:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Finally  Done. Thanks for notifying. --Túrelio (talk) 13:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Would you care to take a look at Amin5530's and Yea14's uploads, too? - 4ing (talk) 16:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I really took those photos.

I really took those photos.

I've got the authorization from that television station. These photos are really okay for the Wikipedia.

I've also uploaded some similar photos before, but those files are not deleted.

Please let me upload those files again.

Danke:)--竹筍弟弟 (talk) 09:41, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi 竹筍弟弟, actually I did not delete these, but only tagged them and notified you. Anyway, we need a written permission from the true rights holder. If you got "authorization from that television" company, then forward it (include all headers) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and don't forget to mention the filenames. --Túrelio (talk) 09:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Do you know the name of that game show? I don't think that those files are forbidden.--竹筍弟弟 (talk) 11:59, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Every creative work belongs to its author and he/she can decide whether to retain the full copyright (that is the default per law) or to release it under a free license. If you reproduce a creative work, which is copyrighted by someone else, you infringe his/her copyright and therefore you nee his/her permission. --Túrelio (talk) 12:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

英文對我來說，太複雜了，我看不是很懂。(English is too hard for me. I can't understand very much.) 我也看不懂德文(I can't understand Deutsch language, too.) 反正我的檔案就是不允許放在維基共享資源就對了？(Anyway, my files are forbidden in the Wikipedia and Wikicommons, right?)──竹筍弟弟 (talk) 16:30, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

And I don't know Chinese ;-). Contact my Chinese-speaking colleagues User:Jusjih, User:KTo288 or User:Shizhao. --Túrelio (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The uploader told me that he took both photos as the audience. I know that Taiwanese TV progeam admitting audiences.--Jusjih (talk) 15:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Requesting Message Archiving

Hi Túrelio, Hope you are fine and you remember me. I congratulate you for the excellent animated cat image of this User talk. As you are well aware, I am now a humble filemover. I receive more and more messages everyday and my User talk looks clumsy. I would like to avail archiving instead of deleting messages. Please guide me. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 18:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC).

This cat looks really scary :P -- RE rillke questions? 18:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hindustanilanguage, please read Commons:Talk page guidelines#Archiving - when there is too much text -- RE rillke questions? 18:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Cher deleted image

Hi. I'm a fan of Cher and also a user from Cher.yuku.com. There we use to share our own pictures from the shows we've been. The deleted image is mine; Mavelus posted it with his account, but I can assure you they're mine. I taked them. You can tell by the EXIF data of this other image I uploaded: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cher_February_2009_2.jpg; they're the same. If there are any rules that don't let me upload my pics just because they were already posted on Internet by other people, let me know. I don't think it's fair. See you, XSarkesian46 (talk) 13:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, sure, both images seem to have been shot with the same camera, at least the EXIF data are suggesting this. But does that necessarily mean they were shot by you? Honestly, it's a bit strange that someone would led somebody else publish his photos on a forum and he himself uploads them to Commons full 3 years later. In addition to the fact that yuku poster Mavelus didn't even credit or mention you. To your question: no, it is not prohibited to upload images to Commons that were published earlier, provided 1) it are one's own images, and 2) that the first publication did not result in a transfer of exclusive copyright to the publisher. However, such pre-publication should be stated at upload.

Overall, I still have some doubts. Since this user Mavelus is still active on yuku forum, could you ask him to put a credit to you into his posting at http://cher.yuku.com/sreply/88527/Imagen-del-D-a ? --Túrelio (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In fact I didn't let him publish my photos (I don't have any problem with it). I sent them to an online Cher gallery and he posted it on Cher.yuku. If I had any problem with him posting my pictures on a forum I would not let an online gallery publish it. I'm okay with it.

Posting on Cher.yuku is publication.

Also, my pics on the gallery are credited to ME. http://www.cherlove.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=842&pos=4, http://www.cherlove.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=841&pos=4 See you, XSarkesian46 (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

O.k., I have now temporarily undeleted the image. However, as the page, where it is credited to you, is undated, and as it is linked to yuku from http://www.cherlove.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/cpbattle_002c.jpg, I want to see a credit to you in Mavelus' posting at http://cher.yuku.com/sreply/88527/Imagen-del-D-a. --Túrelio (talk) 15:46, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

You are not understanding me. Let me be clear: I sent my pics to Cherlove.net and, after that, Mavelus, an user not linked to the gallery, copied it to yuku. Since he's not the owner of my pics I don't get why you "want to see a credit" to me in Mavelus posting. XSarkesian46 (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

By doing that he/she would acknowledge that you are the owner/author of the image, which he should have done anyway. Especially as he is not the owner, he should credit the owner of the images he used in his posting. That is very standard. --Túrelio (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but since anyone can copy any image on the Internet and publish on any place without giving any credit, I can't do anything. Also, the link he used to publish the image on yuku is from Cherlove.net, which means he just copied it from the gallery. XSarkesian46 (talk) 18:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

"I can't do anything" - sorry, that is nonsense. 1) Mavelus was still online on April 24th. As you claim to be a member of Cher.yuku.com, it couldn't be so hard to contact this Felipe guy. 2) Doesn't it go into your head that all problems with your upload of this image to Commons and the amount of my and your time lost, was caused mainly by this Mavelus posting "your" image without crediting you and thereby suggesting that it is his image? 3) The link of the image on Cher.yuku.com, http://www.cherlove.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/cpbattle_002c.jpg, leds to Cherlove.net, but it doesn't led to your copy of the image, http://www.cherlove.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=13477&fullsize=1, nor does it show your name. 4) Honestly, your resistance to do what every real photographer would do when he sees an image of his own used by somebody else without getting credited, makes me wonder whether you are really the photographer. --Túrelio (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, I contacted him. Waiting for his response. XSarkesian46 (talk) 22:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I contacted him one week ago, but still no reply. What should I do? XSarkesian46 (talk) 03:48, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, as your upload is currently undeleted, we can still wait. However, you might put some more pressure on Mavelus by a public posting here. --Túrelio (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

ICTY image

Hello, Tur. Can you please point me where, i also searched, but failed to find... --WhiteWriter ^speaks 16:34, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 18:19, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

But i think you are not right, Túrelio. Here we can see

• • • None of the materials provided on this web site may be used, reproduced or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or the use of any information storage and retrieval system, except as provided for in the Terms and Conditions of Use of United Nations Web Sites, without permission in writing from the publisher.

That includes images of those. And more you can see on Terms and Conditions of Use of United Nations Web Sites. Still, material is not free to use, as it looks like... --WhiteWriter ^speaks 10:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's neither my nor the uploader's fault, if the ICTY people are so idiotic to put contradictory copyright statements on their website. IMO, in most jurisdictions this will mean, that you can take the statement which favors you. As these images are encyclopedically important (documenting war crimes in a recent conflict), we should do anything to have them stay on Commons. If you want to have that discussed by a greater audience, you could open a regular DR for 1 image and in a side-note include the other 2 (without opening a mass-DR). But a speedy is surely not appropriate in that case. --Túrelio (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Wild Dog unknown.jpg

You wrote: Hi Inugami-bargho, the description of this image says "it's in the public domain", but at the same time it is under a CC-BY-license. Both don't fit together, either PD or CC-BY. Besides, it would be interesting to know, where this dog was pictured. --Túrelio (Diskussion) 09:15, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I do not know where it was taken. And the license was imported from flickr via the Flinfo tool. So I cannot help you there. Should it be the case that the file has to be deleted, I have no problem with that.--Inugami-bargho (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Galo Recalde como el Capitán Expertus.jpg

El permiso bajo la licencia CC-BY-SA ya ha sido reenviada al mail permissions-es@wikimedia.org por medio de mi e-mail, locowikixd@hotmail.com saludos.--LocoWiki (talk) 06:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

O.k., thanks. Next time put {{OTRS-pending}} on the image page. --Túrelio (talk) 06:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Ya reenvie el mensaje adjuntando la URL.--LocoWiki (talk) 07:12, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thresh Wheat

I Will see again it. I mean thresh wheat around- around by horse. Thanks Dgolitsis--94.68.92.81 10:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Warning: the IP address, 212.121.219.1 is the source of serious hacking activities

Warning: the IP address, 212.121.219.1 registered to Oldham MBC public libraries, and which is permanently blocked in English Wikipedia since 2009, is the source of serious hacking activities right now. Please be on guard with this IP address.

UserHgfhf7657575 Hello Turelio Constantly vandalizing the article La liga please block this ip adress 77.71.212.69

Retrait du lien photo FG2006.jp (page François Garagnon)

Sommes étonnés de votre décision de supprimer la photo que nous avons utilisée après enregistrement sur WIKIMEDIA COMMONS. En effet, en tant qu'éditeurs de François Garagnon, nous sommes propriétaires de cette image, et détenteurs du copyright d'origine ! Le lien pour votre “Copyright violation” renvoie à un blog daté de mars 2011, alors que la photo a été prise… en décembre 2006 ! Nous réenregistrons donc cette image. Veuillez nous contacter si vous avez d'autres objections. Merci !∼∼∼∼MCeditions, 22-05-2012, 15h12

Hi MCeditions, even if the image had been shot in 2006, you have uploaded it at a later time (May 2012) than it was published on that blog (March 2011). This is a general suggestion that you might not be the author. In addition, you provided "MCeditions" as the author. If "MCeditions" is a company, then it is hardly the photographer, as this is usually a person with a personal name, and in Europe the photographer needs to be mentioned, except if he/she has expressedly renounced this moral right. I would therefore prefer that you send written statement about your rights over this image, the name of the photographer and the name to be credited by re-users (usually indentical to the photographer's name) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org thereby mentioning the filename File:FG2006.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 13:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

In addition, I hope that M. Garagnon has agreed to your uploading of his signature to Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Need some time

I try to help this user out. Can you hold a while before deleting all her images. Thank you ! --Zorion (talk) 14:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Zorion, in cases where a permission from a third party has already been sent to OTRS, you may add {{OTRS-pending}} to the image page, which may hold deletion for a while. As many of her/his uploads had been tagged as no-permission already 1 week ago, they may get deleted by any admin. I case where you are rather sure, you will get a permission or something, you might just put a notice below or above the no-permission template on the image page. Please add File:Castor (Castor canadensis) qui se régale au milieu des algues qui recouvrent le lac..jpg to your to-do-list, though it hasn't been tagged as no-permission. --Túrelio (talk) 14:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)