User talk:Fluffy89502/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
 |
File:CalBarSeal.svg 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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.
|
大诺史 (talk) 08:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
|
File:CalBarSeal.svg 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. |
大诺史 (talk) 09:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Featured pictures
Hi, Please read the guidelines before nominating anything. Thanks, Yann (talk) 06:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Warning
Hi, I told you to read the guidelines before nominating anything. Yann (talk) 08:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Yann: My apologies, will not happen again. Thank you for letting me know about such issue. Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 16:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- And yet it did happen. You didn't read the guidelines like Yann told you and you made a whole bunch of FPC noms. I see that you have recently been indef blocked on en-WP for making a mess. Please don't continue that behavior here. I think it would be best if you found something else to do than making FPC nominations. Getting it right at FPC usually requires some better and deeper knowledge of photography. --Cart (talk) 13:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with Yann and W.carter, please stop your careless nominations immediately, otherwise I'll block you. Nominating this photo is unacceptable anyway: its copyright status is dubious, a Deletion request is in process. --A.Savin 13:18, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- @A.Savin: Yeah that was a horrible nomination as i took too little time with reviewing it. Probably one of the lowest lows so far for me on this site. At least I know my lane now lol and I am going to stay there. Much apologies, Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 20:44, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
|
|
Template:PD-USGov-state 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 template, 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. |
- Alexis Jazz ping plz 00:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! AC powered NE-2 type neon lamp close-up.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Circus Liquor clown sign at night 2015-08-17.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Antelope Valley Indian Museum from southwest 2016-12-10.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.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! 2mm diamond drill bits macro.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Lufkin Universal 50 ft tape measure.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! LAX Theme Building and moon from northwest 2016-07-21.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.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Why did you claim copyright on my content?
I am using MY OWN PHOTOS. How can you report me for such nonsense when i am using my own pictures? you're evil and you abuse your power. I OWN MY PHOTOS DO YOU UNDERSTAND?? Yes you do understand, you just like to use your power to harass people. Musiccollective97 (talk) 21:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Musiccollective97: if you got your photos from news websites you do not own those photos. -- Fluffy89502 ~ talk 22:47, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello.
The File:Smoking Age by Country in Asia.svg which you created, is a good map, but can you fill the countries in gray that are missing?
- East Timor - still has no smoking age limit, so no change of color is necessary: https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/files/live/Timor-Leste/Timor-Leste%20-%20P%26L%20Regs%202018%20%28No.%2010_2018%29.pdf
- Tajikistan - smoking age 18: https://www.agemattersnow.org/downloads/AgeMatters_data_t4.pdf
- Uzbekistan - smoking age 20: https://www.agemattersnow.org/downloads/AgeMatters_data_t4.pdf
- Azerbaijan - smoking age 18: https://www.agemattersnow.org/downloads/AgeMatters_data_t4.pdf
- Armenia - smoking age 18: https://www.agemattersnow.org/downloads/AgeMatters_data_t4.pdf
- Georgia - smoking age 18: https://www.agemattersnow.org/downloads/AgeMatters_data_t4.pdf
- Laos - smoking age 18: http://origin.wpro.who.int/topics/adolescent_health/lao_fs.pdf (page 7)
- Myanmar (Burma) - smoking age 18: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433639/
Yours sincerely, Maphobbyist (talk) 21:40, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Maphobbyist: Sure thing. I'll get onto the ASAP. --Fluffy89502 ~ talk 21:46, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Maphobbyist:
Done. I did not include Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia on the map due to the fact that they are already included on the European Map. --Fluffy89502 ~ talk 22:49, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Maphobbyist (talk) 23:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Maphobbyist:
|
|
File:Zzyzx Rd.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. |
Closeapple (talk) 05:21, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
What do you mean i got them from News Websites?
Stop playing around. Show me the "News Sites". I ALLOWED 2 news sites to use 2 photos and that's it. I NEVER gave up ownership. The News sites asked for them from ME. It's nice how you don't know anything about this situation yet you claim to be god, knowing where everything came from, and it's funny because by the end of this situation, i hope you get blocked for fraud so you learn to actually do your work RESPONSIBLY. We could have ended this situation by you actually being nice and asking for the explanation instead of reporting me for doing NOTHING wrong, but you just went ahead and said, "who cares" and tried to hurt me for no reason Musiccollective97 (talk) 07:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Musiccollective97: for previously published work you need to send permission to OTRS. See: "I am the copyright owner but my file has been previously published without a free license on a medium I can't alter." - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion
.jpg)
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Óscar Arnulfo Romero.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Lil Peep.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Valued Image Promotion
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Dith Pran.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Improving filenames
Hi Fluffy89502, I noticed your rename of File:Venice Beach, Los Angeles, CA 01.JPG. We generally try to avoid renames unless something is wrong, from Commons:File renaming: "In general, Commons aims to provide stable filenames as there might be external file clients and file moving involves significant human and computing resources. Thus renaming should be used with caution" . You hit Commons:File_renaming#Which_files_should_not_be_renamed? here. Just be a bit more conservative when considering renames. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Multichill: Alright will do. Thank you for letting me know! --Fluffy89502 ~ talk 18:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Valued Image Promotion
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Han van Meegeren.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Rodney Mullen.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Valued Image Promotion
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
John Paul Stevens.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Valued Image Promotion
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
August Vollmer.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
