User talk:TheImaCow

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
File:Influencegraph.PNG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Yuwash (talk) 01:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Boris Brott conducting.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)


Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Spinixster (talk) 02:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinixster: the file was uploaded in 2007, and the linked article is from 2018? They used the file from here/wikipedia. TheImaCow (talk) 06:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Windermere marty.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Windermere marty.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Windermere marty.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Spinixster (talk) 02:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinixster: the source is clearly stated "own work" TheImaCow (talk) 06:43, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Boris Brott Group Shot.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Boris Brott Group Shot.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Boris Brott Group Shot.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Spinixster (talk) 02:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinixster: the source is clearly stated "own work" TheImaCow (talk) 06:43, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheImaCow, there are many hits on Google for the images. If you think I made a mistake you are welcome to undo my edit. Spinixster (talk) 07:55, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. Abzeronow (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Seres Automobile Logo.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Complex logo exceeding COM:TOO China
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Wcam (talk) 20:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wcam I disagree with this. The linked logo consists of 5 normal letters, and a circle with two bend lines within it. This is a very simple logo. From the linked TOO page, I'd say the "KON" logo is more complex than this logo in question here and it is acceptable. TheImaCow (talk) 20:59, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See the LY and Gang Heng logo examples under the Not OK section. This logo is more complex and creative than those. Wcam (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Oisin McConville - AI Club 2007.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Adeletron 3030 (talk) 22:53, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old McKenzie Fish Hatchery Interpretive Sign.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old LSU Logo 50s.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paolo Restani Riccardo Muti.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

ZioNicco (talk) 14:57, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Templeton station 159.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

200.111.227.223 20:42, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Barbie Billboard.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

SDudley (talk) 01:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lambda cassiopeiae diagram.pdf has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

 — billinghurst sDrewth 10:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

stream of photos in category:Nazareth College (New York) uploaded by Ser Amantio di Nicolao[edit]

Hi. The photos uploaded by Ser Amantio di Nicolao are clearly not f10 speedy deletes per commons:speedy deletion. They will need a DR, and I suggest discussion with the uploader first. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Image Promotion[edit]

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! GaogiersGrasshopper.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
 Support Picture is good, author was missing from nomination though (fixed it). --Plozessor 05:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravshan_Kulob

https://static.flashscore.com/res/image/data/jVj0mQg5-GWNHAPHr.png

If can add logo of mentioned team, appreciated lot. Loptač01 (talk) 13:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Loptač01: Hello, the logo is not free, and such files are not accepted on Commons. However, I uploaded it locally to the english wikipedia, which operates solely under US Copyright Law, where exceptions to usage of protected works exist ("fair use"). I also added it to the article you linked. Hope I could help. TheImaCow (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Dionna on tour 2013.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

ZimskoSonce (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

cannot speedy delete "in use" images[edit]

Hi. Where an image is used the speedy deletion criteria doesn't allow its resolution. Ideally if you think that a use of an at another wiki is inappropriate, then best to resolve that at that wiki first, then apply for a speedy deletion. Alternatively, do a normal DR, and suggest that there is abuse occurring and see where the discussion proceeds.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:53, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Exact Center Of The Universe Set Tobye Studio 2004.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

DS (talk) 14:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Evening and Morning Star July 16 1833.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

P-Makoto (talk) 06:17, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:WFSP-AMFM.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

NeutralHomerTalk02:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC) 02:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maps as duplicates probably not the best idea[edit]

Hi. Looking at those recent duplicate requests, can I make the comment that I don't think that it is a good idea. They may be the same base image, they are mostly not exact duplicates. Also as scans of these things are an imperfect science with a working archival document, I think that there is too much possibility that poor scans and any handwritten annotations if we are too assiduously saying that they are exact duplicates. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To me, they look de-facto the same, and I don't see value in keeping them - yes, clearly they are rotated slightly different or have very slight color differences, but that's far from warranting seperate versions IMO. A notable difference between page 1/2 I've seen is that sometimes, one version has elevation lines, and the other one dosent.
Anyway, I will stop tagging those files, there is more than enough other stuff to do TheImaCow (talk) 20:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--Yann (talk) 20:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you request speedy deletion of these maps (under some nonsense rationale)? Yann (talk) 20:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Yann You do realize that Billinghurst asked the same question in the thread above this, and I immediately stopped this tagging? Also, which "nonsense rationale"? The tagged files are clearly highly similar -a defacto duplicate- without educational use. Calling such tagging "vandalism" is absurd. TheImaCow (talk) 21:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't tag them as duplicate, but as "personal files by non contributor". You should have removed the inappropriate tagging yourself. I unblocked you, but don't do it again. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see. I misclicked and selected the wrong category and didn't realize it. I will take more care in the future.
But you seeing such edits, immediately assuming they are vandalism and blocking for it was way too hasty too and not appropiate. (Note that the 5 or so edits in questions happened at 20:30 and you blocked me at 20:50, so there clearly wasn't any immediate action warranted) TheImaCow (talk) 22:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am not saying that they cannot be DR'd, so deleted through consensus, I am saying that it is too awkward to speedy delete them as "exact duplicates" without a closer review. Exact duplicate is particular on the word "exact", not that the same image exists within our system, which is why even same image in a different filetype is not considered an exact duplicate.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Templeton station 159.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Yann (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]