User talk:Ipatrol

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

TUSC token 79642a776c42270658b822eddf86c720[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!


File tagging File:Flux1.jpg[edit]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Flux1.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Flux1.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Multichill (talk) 21:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Norro cats[edit]

Could you please revert your undiscussed upmerging of the categories, since the categories have been kept after discussion? Thank you. --Drilnoth (talk) 18:25, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your unconstructive actions. I ask you to revert your changes, then i will revert you again myself. If you do it again i will ask somebody to block you, because you tired me.
I already said it to you... I say it again. If you disagree with the category name, discuss the name, do not remove the category. With your actions, every body lose time for nothing. ~ bayo or talk 14:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please 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!

Elmor (talk) 05:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm rather confused why you would flag this image as a possible copyright violation for being a screenshot of non-free software. First, it's not a screenshot. It's an actual picture that I took of the original notebook interface. Second, pictures of non-free software isn't a copyright violation. If it was, images of virtually every software would need to be flagged. For example, Microsoft office Wikipedia page currently has images of excel, word, outlook, and powerpoint. Office is not a free software. Wiki commons is flooded with images of non-free software and non-free products. I would appreciate the cancellation of this copyright violation review reqeust. Thanks. OrdinaryArtery (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status of "Kizuna Ai" picture[edit]

Hello. I am the License Reviewer responsible for File:Kizuna AI - SCP Foundation.png. Please refer to the original YouTube video cited as the source in the picture, which stated the following in its description:

※この動画はクリエイティブコモンズ 表示-継承3.0ライセンス(略して、CC BY-SA 3.0)で公開されています。

Then it comes with a link to the Creative Commons website. Considering this was uploaded on "Kizuna Ai"'s official YouTube channel, it is an acceptable CC licensing declaration. I am undoing your edits on the aforementioned file page, and I will be filling DRV for files already been deleted. Please get back to me if you have any concerns regarding its licensing status. Thank you. --TechyanTalk09:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]