Q1[edit]

The following discussions from User talk:LX have been archived. Please do not change them. Any further comments, even if they deal with a matter discussed below, should be made at User talk:LX.

about homer simpsons picture[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Anubis-mx#Image:Homer Simp.png. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete of my image[edit]

21:05, 25. Okt. 2007 LX (Diskussion | Beiträge) hat „Image:BSD-Daemon CeBIT 2006.jpg“ gelöscht ‎ (Copyright violation/Commons:Derivative work of a non-free work: "BSD Daemon Copyright 1988 by Marshall Kirk McKusick. All Rights Reserved." http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/daemon.html)

This Daemon is authorized by Marshall Kirk McKusick back in 1996, when it was made, the BSD-Daemon is my own. There is no copyright-violation, please restore the image. --Kawana 09:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please forward evidence that McKusick approved distribution of the likeness of his BSD Daemon character under the {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} licence to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org per the instructions at Commons:OTRS and then make a request at Commons:Undeletion requests. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That %#!@ flag[edit]

Thanks for you're help, I didn't want to look like the only bad guy. ;) Rocket000 20:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP block[edit]

Hi - this IP I blocked yesterday on en wb as an open proxy (info via en wp IIRC). Will you review the block? Cheers (& I noticed the other block - persistent some people!) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Extended to one year, not limited to anons. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Puppet accounts?[edit]

Might want to look at user:Juancvm? Let me know if you want me to dig deeper, regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look familiar, but I'm juggling a bit much at the moment. What was your suspicion? —LX (talk, contribs) 19:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shall we say there are similarities. However if the work they are doing is different then maybe just keep an eye for now? Let me know if I can help - thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've warned and blocked so many users lately, I just can't keep track of them all. If you think it looks like a problem user I've dealt with before, I trust your judgement. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello LX[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Tony Scarface Montana#Image Tagging Image:Coretta-scott-king.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 00:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Diferents Camaras[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User_talk:Optimus07#Do you own a lot of different cameras?. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 09:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Bebop[edit]

What is the problem with the photo? I took it, so the copyrights are mine are they not? 128.139.226.37 12:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Bebop CD covers.jpg? If so, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Licensing. The problem, put simply, is that taking a photo of a photo does not make you the copyright holder of it. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get admnin help[edit]

user Kojadi emptyes his discussion page and take away my editings in the pictures, can you help little --Motopark 20:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I've warned the user not to remove legitimate warnings and I'll keep an eye on their activities. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no permission since[edit]

The template no permission since clearly states: Also, use{{subst:image permission|Image:FPO affiche.jpg}} ~~~~ to notify the uploader. Why didnt you notify me?! Multichill 22:50, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because the uploader of Image:FPO affiche.jpg was apparently User:File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske). —LX (talk, contribs) 00:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I keep filling out the username field but everyone seems to ignore that :(

I understand it can be considered deriative work so you can delete it. Multichill 21:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy to overlook if you use UserMessages.js, and it's also completely unreliable because there is no checking. (Several respectable users have reported bad uploads being made in their name.) I wish it could be set up so that it only accepted commands from registered Commons users via a page here on Commons so that there would be some proper traceability. Until that happens, I won't bother people unless I'm sure they're the uploader. I guess if you're really keen to know, you can always put the image on your watchlist. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ca:Spierekanaal[edit]

Hi, You took away a photo in that article. I sent an email to permissions where I had the explicit authorisation to use the map in the wikipedia article from the copyright holder of the map. Please help me as I don't understand at all why in this case, the image has been taken away. I normally am very carefull with images from third parties and never copy and paste from the internet. It's very confusing and I need help. Flamenc 01:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image in question is Image:Bluelinks-carte Canal de l'Espierres.jpg. When I deleted it, it looked like this: it had no evidence of the copyright holder approving the stated licence and it was tagged as a copyright violation from http://www.bluelinks2008.org/, which has the notice "All rights reserved" on it. User:GeorgHH, who initially marked the image as a copyright violation, has undeleted the image. Please follow his instructions on your user talk page.

Also note that "authorisation to use the map in the wikipedia article" is not sufficient. See {{Permission}} and Commons:Licensing. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Korrekt licens[edit]

Hej! Jag har möjligheten att ladda upp logo och bilder av företaget A&E Design med företagets VD Hans Ehrichs tillstånd (han har upphovsrätten). Han vill maila dessa bilder till mig. Fråga: Hur skall han formulera sitt tillstånd till mig så att det uppfyller kraven för Wikipedia "GNU Free Documentation License" ? Vart skall jag sedan skicka Hans Ehrichs tillstånd?--Holger.Ellgaard 09:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Holger! Titta på Commons:Email templates och Commons:OTRS. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Optimus07[edit]

Hey. I noticed you have dealt with Optimus07 before. I suppose you are watching User talk:Optimus07 then, but if you are not, I have just tagged four of this user's uploads as obvious copyright violations (three were from Marcus Grönholm's official website, www.mgr.fi). While assuming good faith is important, I believe all of Optimus07's uploads need to deleted since he simply can not be trusted to provide accurate author and source information. Prolog 03:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I took care of the most blatant ones earlier. I'm pretty knackered right now, but I'll make a mental note to look into this more later. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the user didn't seem to want to talk about it, so I didn't see any other way forward than to open Commons:Deletion requests/Images by Optimus07. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good call, and well-written deletion request. Thanks, Prolog 00:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion question[edit]

Hi LX, the image Image:Chesrilanka0749.JPG was deleted because of the photography visible on the poster. It would be nice to have that picture for illustrating wp:Sinhala alphabet, but only for the letters, the person is completely irrelevant.

So, before uploading a modified picture, I have a question: - If I remove the head, would a depiction of the remaining words be a copyvio? They read basically "John Doe, political science courses", and thus fail the originality criterion, as far as I can see. Could you tell me whether I am correct? There are a number of comparable images on the commons that are not objected too, which I include.

Jasyjatere 80.126.161.176 12:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(I converted the inline images to links; I hope you don't mind.)

There are already other images which could be used for illustrating the sinhala script. See Category:Sinhala script, Image:Examples.of.complex.text.rendering.Sinhala.png and Image:Sri Lanka Sinhala.jpg.

Given the translation you provide, there is probably no textual copyright, but the design (colour scheme, placement of the elements and other effects) may well be sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection. The deleted photo also showed other posters with presumably copyrighted photographs and graphic designs.

There is no approval process for photos at Commons, so the fact that there exist similar images which nobody has nominated for deletion (yet) is not to be used as a guide. If they are questionable (and some of those examples are), it probably just means they haven't been spotted yet. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You will certainly agree that those images are very technical and do not illustrate the use of Sinhala script in context or real life.

I am aware of this. I just wanted to save you and me the time of another deletion process

I think I will be able to edit out the questionable parts of the image under discussion. Thanks for your time. Jasy jatere 80.126.161.176 09:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the images I suggested are somewhat different in nature and I understand if that was not what you were going for; they were more meant as suggestions for temporary alternatives until we have something better. I hope you can create something with the copyrightable parts removed without it looking too odd, and I thank you for taking the time to ask first. I think the best sort of image to show the script in a natural context without having to crop or mask stuff out might be something like a street sign or other simple, preferably official, sign. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep out this picture is not reel.[edit]

السلام عليكم هده الصورة غير حقيقية وأنا اطلب منكم وارجوكم حدفها . وشكرا

Hello, please keep out this picture because is not reel. thank you.

Bonjour, s'il veut plais supprimé cette photo car ce n'est pas vrais. merci. —the preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.248.19.237 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted image from Flickr[edit]

Hi. I posted a photo to Flickr. Someone, it seems, used it for a Wikipedia article and you deleted it: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=delete&page=Image:245910213_ce5d30d52e_o.jpg

The image in my Flickr shows a Creative Commons license so I see no problem in using it for Wikipedia. I took the picture (it is of a native cuisine dish: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mgiraldo/245910213/ ). Not sure where the photo was placed though. —the preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.24.88.33 (talk • contribs) 07:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved this from #Flickrwashed copyvio, because it's unrelated to that discussion. (That was about the Flickr uploader not being authorised to issue the licence stated on Flickr.) I hope you don't mind.

Image:245910213_ce5d30d52e_o.jpg was deleted because it was incorrectly claimed to be under the licensing terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence, whereas on Flickr, it is actually licenced under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike licence, which is not compatible with the Commons:Licensing policy. Only the copyright holder may issue a new licence to his work with different terms, so what the Commons uploader did was a copyright violation. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. So the guy who suggested the photo messed up (if I understand right). What is the procedure for me proving I own the photo? —the preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.25.135.96 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone has a reason to doubt that. The problem is that the licence you have chosen on Flickr doesn't make the image free enough to upload here. Commons only accepts images that can be used by anyone, for any purpose, and your licensing choice prohibits it from being used in a commercial context.

If you want your image uploaded here (and we would of course appreciate that), you would have to change the licensing on Flickr to Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike. This would allow others to reuse the image in a commercial context, but they would still have to credit you, state that the image is free to use under that licence, and release any modifications they make to the image under the same licence.

(You could also use Creative Commons Attribution, but that would allow others to publish modified versions under a non-free licence, and it seems further from what you originally specified, so I assume you would be less inclined to choose this option.)

If you do decide to change the licence, let me know and I'll be happy to undelete the image here and make sure it has all the proper credits. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. License changed. Had no idea Commons was a commercial context. —the preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.25.135.96 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons itself isn't, but its purpose is to be free (in the libre sense of the word rather than gratis) and reusable. (You may read more about this in the introduction of Commons:Licensing.)

Rather than restoring the image with its old, rather meaningless name here on Commons (245910213_ce5d30d52e_o), I re-uploaded it as Image:Ajiaco.jpg. Thank you for your kind donation. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is next user page OK[edit]

User:Jlora2, it seems be out of project space but I'm not sure, what are your opinion ?. See also his discussion page --Motopark 19:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pages in the User: namespace are meant to be used to give a brief presentation of yourself (as yours and mine do, for example). Of course, I'd hope that that's not going to be the user's only contribution here on Commons, and he does need to add a licence to his image or it will be deleted after a week, but other than that, I don't think it's hurting anyone for now. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, let's wait--Motopark 19:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperion[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Relampague#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 20:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry[edit]

Sorry... i dont now about to do get licence. Thanks. I not do again. --Ewertonandrade 20:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Image protection[edit]

Can you revert edits by User:Le Behnam and then protect the Image:Tajik man in Kabul.jpg that I uploaded so that it doesn't get deleted until discussion on it comes to an end. Thanks!--Executioner 04:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not going to favour any particular version, but the image is locked to prevent you and Le Behnam from continuing your edit war. The deletion request is incomplete, so there's no risk that the image will be deleted. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the image and Le Behnam added a Duplicate tag then you protected the image to prevent me from removing the duplicate tag. So the image will be speedy deleted if you don't remove the duplicate tag that Le Behnam placed. Can you please remove the DUP TAG because I started a discussion on it.--Executioner 17:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relax, I doubt any administrator would delete it while its the subject of an ongoing dispute, and if that does happen, it can always be undeleted. I will not participate in your edit war. As long as the image stays protected, I am not about to make any edits to favour either side, and if you insist on others making changes for you, I can unfortunately only assume that you intend to continue the edit war after the protection expires. Rest assured, this would not be without consequences. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Le Behnam has decided to self-delete his Image:Pashtun man in Afghanistan, 01-07-2002.jpg: "Ok I've had enough of this. I know he is Pashtun but I'm not going to waste any more of my time on something unimportant. I'm going to self delete the image I uploaded and you can do the same. That is a good compromise and it saves us both time." Le Behnam 17:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC) [1][reply]

Can you unprotect the file or delete it yourself? Also, please stop offending me like if I'm a criminal and you as a police officer. Your job is to help other editors not try to show off with your admin tools. You're suppose to be a servent here. Thanks for understanding and have a nice day Swedish mate.--Executioner 18:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image is freely sourced image on Flickr, I think it's a good photo, and I believe it could be useful on Wikimedia Commons. Since the naming seems to be the point of contention, and there really cannot be anything objectively said about the subject's ethnicity, my suggestion is that we upload it again with a neutral name such as Man in Kabul or similar and delete the duplicates. However, I'd like to wait for the toolserver to fully recover so that I can do a proper check for usage of the other versions before deleting them.

As for the administrative role and the tools that go with it, I feel pretty comfortable with my views on them. Some of the behaviour shown by both you and Le Behnam (edit warring and personal attacks) is disruptive to the point that a block may have already been justified, not as a punishment, but to prevent further disruption. I chose to protect the subjects of the edit wars instead of blocking the two of you because I felt you had perhaps not been given a clear enough warning yet as to the inappropriateness of the disruptive editing. I was also hoping to encourage civilised discussion. While I'm not entirely satisfied with your attitudes towards each other, I think things have been moving roughly in the right direction.

Sorry for the late respose; I've been working all sorts of hours this week. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Www.wikipedia.org screenshot.png[edit]

Image deletion warning

Image:Www.wikipedia.org screenshot.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

This is an automated message from DRBot. (Stop bugging me!) 06:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete[edit]

Can you please delete the file Image:Iraq.jpg. I have uploaded it from Flickr, but the filename is similar to another image in English wikipedia. So I cannot use this image there, I want to rename it, or delete it, I will again upload it with a new name. --Otolemur crassicaudatus 18:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upload it under a new name first and then tag Image:Iraq.jpg with {{bad name|Image:Whatever the name is.jpg}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded the same image under new name Image:Iraq dog.jpg and tagged the previous file for speedy. --Otolemur crassicaudatus 18:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,

Done. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mohammed_kaaba_1315.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning

Image:Mohammed_kaaba_1315.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

202.83.172.245 07:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the uploader. I just reverted some vandalism that was done to it.
Painted portraits are obviously not as documentary as photographs, and are always subject to the artist's own interpretations. I think most intelligent people understand this. This doesn't mean painted art is useless.
If it hurts your feelings, don't look at it. If we deleted all images that were potentially offensive to someone, we'd have very few images left. We don't need another Bamian, so please stop your efforts to eradicate our common cultural heritage and focus on something more productive.
You are most welcome to create a Wikipedia fork or competitor. You may even use their text and our images if you like, provided that you comply with the licensing terms and credit the authors.
As noted on the talk page, this matter has already been discussed, there is a clear consensus to keep, and the disruptive ongoing campaign from you and other anonymous users to deface or nominate Islamic art for deletion is now regarded as vandalism. You have therefore been blocked for a week. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LabourIndia_Logo.jpg[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Avineshjose#Image Tagging Image:LabourIndia Logo.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 12:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I've replied in my talk pg. please check. --avinj 06:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hasselblad sunset.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright

Image:Hasselblad sunset.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. The Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.

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 ∙ +/−

The main theme of photo is copyrighted logo. Picture used only on nationals wikis to ilustrate the logo of producent..., e.g. see here. Regards Electron 11:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden has freedom of panorama and the sign is permanently mounted on top of a building in Gothenburg, Sweden. The logotype is text in a simple font and probably qualifies for {{PD-textlogo}}. I don't know if the same logotype has been used since the company was founded in 1841, but if it is, it should be {{PD-old}} as well. I've converted the speedy deletion tag to a regular deletion discussion. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's me again![edit]

OK, this time I need your help. I am looking for pictures of Christina Milian, but cannot find any free ones. Any ideas as to where I can find any? Upload Less and Talκ More 06:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help with the specific request, but have a look at Commons:Free media resources/Photography for a list of places you can start looking. —LX (talk, contribs) 06:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2pac image violation.[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Carlonesm#Image:2Pac Makaveli-The Don Killuminati front.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 21:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

IP blocked, 129.194.8.73[edit]

Hi, would you be so kind and unblock my IP? It is quite difficult to write any message on your talk page having the access blocked. That's not very nice. Could you explain me, please, why my IP was blocked? Thank you. Twisp 18:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As noted by the message in the block log, the use of open proxies is not allowed on Wikimedia projects. The IP address was picked up by our open proxy detection system following some vandalism. If you do a Google search for the IP, it turns up quite a few hits indicating that it's compromised or deliberately set up as an open proxy being used for a variety of malicious purposes. -LX (talk, contribs) 19:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a quick reply. I still have some questions about this. I had a look on the contributions from this IP and there were quite a few which were ok. Would it be possible to take a risk and allow the edits, just to see if the vandalism is realy a crcial problem of this IP. Your example seems to be unique according to the User contributions tool. The second concern is that I am not able to upload images even if I am logged in. Would it be possible to fix this somehow? Thank you. Twisp 21:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, editing through open proxies is not allowed as a matter of policy. I'm afraid your only recourse is to ensure that the root cause of the problem gets fixed. Having everyone being able to use your IP address for any purpose is generally not a very good thing. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Internet filters and proxy IP's[edit]

Please be careful with proxy IP's !

You might have all the luxury in the western world, but for people like me and Waerth in Thailand, proxies are frequently the only way to gain access to Wikipedia and related projects ! (at least to the wikiprojects where we're not auto-blocked!). I see no reason to block non vandalism proxy IP's. The goal of the wikimedia projects is to be editable for everyone. Locking out people from non western countries (which is most of the world's population !!) from contributing won't help building a world wide project with views from all people... until we have full and non filtered internet access all the time everywhere when moving to Asia ! (pushing or lobbying for more free internet availability would be a good side project by the way). It is good behaviour to look at our contributions, not the fact the we need to use proxies in some places from time to time !! Regards. —the preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.31.186.104 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read meta:No open proxies. If you wish to object to the policies, please direct your complaints at the Foundation. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for undeletion[edit]

Hey. Sorry to bother you. Could you check and restore Image:Ari_Vatanen_2006_EMS.jpg and a few other images of notable racing drivers deleted by now-desysopped User:Stahlkocher with reasoning "personality rights", as seen here? I can't see deleted revisions, but I think the deletion reason might be bogus in all these cases. Thanks, Prolog 19:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks reasonable, but considering Commons:Disputes noticeboard/Archive 3#User:LX and User:Stahlkocher, I'm probably not the right person to ask. Could you please put these up on Commons:Undeletion requests and name each specific image concerned? —LX (talk, contribs) 21:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I didn't notice that archive. Prolog 19:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Space Invaders on TV.jpg[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:RTG#Image Tagging Image:The New Zealand Story screenshot.png. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 19:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Notar heli pics[edit]

I just uploaded two pics to Epolk's page for discussion as possible improvements. Won't mind if they are deleted in two weeks. JMK 21:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Marcelosimao without heading[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Marcelosimao#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 19:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Graphics village pump[edit]

You may think that discussions should always be held on the subordinate month page, rather than on the main page itself, but it's a simple fact that people don't actually do this, and the way you move things around is confusing... AnonMoos 10:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if you were confused, but I thought I was pretty clear in the edit summaries. If you don't like how the page is organised, I guess that should be taken up at Commons talk:Graphics village pump. I don't have any strong feelings one way or the other, so long as things are consistent. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP block[edit]

Thanks but I range blocked it (72.68.31.0/24). They seem to be happy playing a game where they make one edit & I block a range of IPs :) It is the ongoing Shankbone stuff. Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds productive. Cheers! —LX (talk, contribs) 15:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Violation[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Jorghex#Image:InspectorClouseau.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 19:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Group_account[edit]

Hi LX, with respect, please look again at this topic. thanks, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 11:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. (The page is on my watchlist.) —LX (talk, contribs) 19:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Q2[edit]

The following discussions from User talk:LX have been archived. Please do not change them. Any further comments, even if they deal with a matter discussed below, should be made at User talk:LX.

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for Welcome Messege ;)

Prppedro 16:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About deletions...[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Prppedro#Please do not remove deletion requests. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 17:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

The Subspace Emissary[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:ManecoWifi#Image:The Subspace Emissary.PNG. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 21:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually..about the Station Logo Photo[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Cordelia89#Image:Stationlogo.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 11:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vasa model.jpg is OK?[edit]

If Image:Model rescued Vasa ship.jpg was deleted because No FOP since not outdoors as required by Swedish law, Image:Vasa model.jpg is OK? --Jacopo Werther 18:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a deletion discussion open now, and I'm afraid it will also have to be deleted. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:These kid.jpg[edit]

Would it be possible for you to send this deleted image to me? Some anon IP over on Wikipedia uploaded it here so we could help him ID a show, and he doesn't have the ability to upload it anywhere else (see his bizarre story here). If you could do this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! ···日本穣^{Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimail doesn't support attachments, but if you want you can send me a wikimail, which will tell me your address, and then I can send a regular e-mail with the image attached. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ···日本穣^{Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lost[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Pypaertv#Image:Jin (Lost).jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 08:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Migueles.png[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Anarkangel#Image Tagging Image:Migueles.png. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 22:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your response with the London pictures. 75.105.13.17 15:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may think that I don't know what I am talking about, but the law supports what I state. See here:

"4.-(1) In this Part "artistic work" means- (b) a work of architecture being a building or a model for a building, or"

and

"The author of an artistic work has the right to be identified whenever- in the case of a work of architecture in the form of a building or a model for a building, a sculpture or a work of artistic craftsmanship, copies of a graphic work representing it, or of a photograph of it, are issued to the public."

Thus, the author must be identified in such pictures. This is not happening on Wikicommons. 75.105.13.17 01:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Julio Voltio[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:El cangri386#Please do not recreate deleted images. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 17:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

A101j[edit]

The user A101j is uploading large numbers of copyvios, such as all the CD covers of the band Molotov. I noticed that you warned him to stop two days ago. It seems that he hasn't, he should be blocked from uploading more files and his recent contributions deleted (I guess it would be futile to go placing "copyvio" to all of them) Thialfi 03:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing it. Looks like Christian Nurtsch dealt with it while I was sleeping. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vasa model photo[edit]

You voted to have Image:Vasa model.jpg deleted recently, but I think I've found a solution to this problem. Please see request page for clarification.

Peter ^Isotalo 18:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's really good news, and a refreshing contrast to the attitudes of many museums that I've come across in discussions lately. Please see Michael's comment underneath yours in the deletion request. Additionally, if you could ask them to include mention of the model showing the salvaging operation as well, we could undelete Image:Model rescued Vasa ship.jpg. Don't forget to thank them and encourage their stance. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Anarkangel#Image Tagging Image:Migueles.png. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 11:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Dinosaur Jr. photo[edit]

it would have been nice if you had waited until I sorted out the licensing before deleting this image Arleach 20:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you do, leave a message at Commons:Undeletion requests and it can be undeleted. Generally, the right order to do things in is to ensure we can host the image before uploading. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confused[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Runningblader#Image:Ogame.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 23:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:Unsigned[edit]

I see you reverted me. I thought I had that right. Please point me to a broken use, as I cannot see how I was wrong. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should of course have left you a note about this. I recreated your revision in my own namespace as User:LX/Unsigned, and here's the result of {{User:LX/Unsigned|Username|2000-01-01}}:

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Username (talk • contribs) {{subst:#if:2000-01-01|2000-01-01 (UTC)}}

This does not seem to happen when the template is substed, but the idea that it "must be substed" is a relatively new invention, which contradicts Template talk:Unsigned#Usage and which has, as far as I have seen, not been justified. It continues to be used without substing by many users, and even if that were to be universally considered wrong, I don't think the above is an very informative or graceful degradation. —LX (talk, contribs) 06:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, old uses should be substituted, and future uses as well. I will subst them at some point. Once that's done, I'll add that back in. If it says anywhere that this template should not be substituted then it needs to be changed. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why should it be (other than to make your change work ;-) )? Keeping it unsubsted makes discussions more readable in source mode and helps new users figure out which template to use when others forget to sign their posts (that's how I learned). I remember a time in the past when a bot started substing them and there were objections (I'll try to dig up the conversation later; I'm a bit swamped at the moment). —LX (talk, contribs) 15:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary server load. The template code is simple, and will not clutter edit view. I will add a hidden comment so people know what template is used. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 19:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this actually a problem? Is it by request from the sysadmins that we're worrying about performance in this case? —LX (talk, contribs) 19:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright[edit]

I present my excuses for the copyrighted photos that I have no exact knowledge of origin. I am the coordinator of a working group to put information of Paraguay in "Wikipedia". On the list are many pictures we have taken, but we also have an agreement with other people linked to media that I have gone for me to upload the photos.

You deleted 3 photos quite rightly, I realize that they have been copied elsewhere.

However, 80% of the photos that are on the list are in my group, and we have taken with different cameras.

I know understand this situation, and I'm going to be much more careful when it comes to receive and publish them. In addition I will make a review of other photos that I charged and delete those that do not correspond.

But allow me to continue our project smoothly.

I am available for any clarification.

I notice you has deleted more than 70 photos. Can we do anything to resolve this fact. Its this much important to our contribution project, to resolve this ?. Thanks. --Hujadila 16:24, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Hujadila 14:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to keep discussions in one place. You've posted nearly identical messages here, on the deletion discussion page and on your own user talk page. I'll address most of your points in the deletion discussion instead. The word "you" in the last paragraph of your message above is ambiguous, but I assume by the use of it here on my talk page, it's directed at me personally, so I'll address that here.

In total, I've deleted close to 5,000 images, but only four of your uploads (Image:Carlos gamarra.jpg, Image:CHILAVERT.jpg, Image:Jose-luis-chilavert6.jpg and Image:Carlos gamarra.jpg), not 70. Others admins have deleted three more of your uploads (Image:Oldman.jpeg, Image:Juancarlosmoreno.jpeg and Image:Monday 002.jpg). If you disagree with any deletions, you can request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help; i agree with your comentaries. The 70 photos wasn't deleted; was marked for deletions. Sorry, until now I thought, i could do anything with my Discusion Page. I don't know how to do to legal unmmark those pictures marked for deletion.

--Hujadila 23:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. (It's actually 114 images by my count.) If you edit the image descriptions so that they contain truthful, credible and verifiable information about the authorship and licensing (including evidence that other authors approved the licensing terms you have stated), and if the consensus of the deletion discussion is that the information is as required, the administrator closing the discussion will remove the {{Delete}} tags from the images. Do not remove the {{Delete}} tags yourself. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:2506988601 3528546f18 b.jpg/Image:Hilton San Diego Bayfront explosion incident.jpg[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User_talk:Cooljuno411#Image:2506988601_3528546f18_b.jpg.2FImage:Hilton_San_Diego_Bayfront_explosion_incident.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 07:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments removed[edit]

Would you care to explain why you removed my comments from here? I used to think that I was entitled to (at least) voice my opinion, especially when I am being called lame. I also used to think that deletion of comments from discussions had to be somehow notified.

I would very much like them to be reinstated, unless a specific policy against this exists.

Cheers --Alien life form 11:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The top of the page states "This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive." I thought that was rather clear. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The top of the page now states what above. When I entered my comments, it did not. If I still cared, I'd call that vandalism (and the lame tag a personal attack, that being a seaparate issue). As things are, you are very welcome to do as you please, and feel justified in the process. (My request of reinstatement still stands, BTW). Have fun & cheers, --Alien life form 17:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It did contain that text when you added your comment. See the revision immediately before your edits and immediately after. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Hotel" one[edit]

Just by way of information I looked at the email address of the user - this suggests care/reflection. I am concerned about the increase in images on Commons that may be used for marketing, selling or search engine optimisation purposes. I'll post something more general shortly --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Say HI[edit]

Just I say thanks and hi for the three times to you block my user, now i just upload images than is free copyright or self made. Jorghe X

That's good to see. Glad the message got through. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:15, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unfortunately, after you uploaded Image:Age-Of-Empires-2-2wallpapers.jpg, I have to take that back. It seems you still have a bit to learn. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:12, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

I'm sorry, I didn't know nothing of the license, I have to read more, thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Threll (talk • contribs) 21:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete[edit]

Why did you delete File:Indians 2007 Champs.jpg? User:Spencer (talk) 21:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the answer on your user talk page before I saw this: please see Commons:Derivative works. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But wouldn't it go under freedom of Panorama...this is a building. And why is Image:Jacobs Field scoreboard.jpg allowed? Spencer (talk) 21:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an image displayed on a jumbotron mounted on a building, and that's not covered by US FoP, I'm afraid. Thanks for bringing Image:Jacobs Field scoreboard.jpg to my attention. I've deleted it too, for the same reason. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Image:Snowed out on opening day.jpg and Category:Baseball scoreboards? Spencer (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those include only {{PD-ineligible}} signs. In some, the inclusion of copyrightable elements is de minimis and incidental to the image itself. (In Image:Snowed out on opening day.jpg, the center sign is just text in a standard typeface and all other signs are de minimis, the main focus being on the condition of the field and to some extent the center sign.) Other images in that category should probably be reviewed. I'll post a notice on COM:ANB. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Derivatives of baseball scoreboards. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I thought it was okay because of the other pictures, but this clarifies it for me. Thanks, Spencer (talk) 00:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding. —LX (talk, contribs) 00:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem...I also got the image deleted fron en.wikipedia (I was originally copying it over). Spencer (talk) 13:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nero InfoTool[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Tdc6502#Image:Nero InfoTool Disc.png. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 23:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Copyright[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Mark.heifetz#Image:Big Gun - AC-DC.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 08:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Imagenes del usuario solfeo957[edit]

oye me han borrado todas las imagenes que he subido, pero lo que se me hace raro es que por ejemplo la de Amanda_Rosa.jpg y la de las campanas extractoras hace mucho tiempo que las subí y que casualidad que meses despues me resulten con eso. Quisiera saber por que hicieron eso, explicamelo tú por favor, gracias. --Solfeo957 (talk) 16:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't understand. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why my all images which i uploaded had been deleted??? if 3 of them they have a long of time here, and now, they're deleted (amanda_rosa.jpg and the 2 extractor hood images), and so tell me why.--Solfeo957 (talk) 00:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion log for Image:Amanda Rosa.jpg (uploaded just over two months ago) indicates that it was deleted following Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Amanda Rosa.jpg, which states that it was a copyright violation. Finding an image online does not make you the copyright holder, creator or author of that image, and you may not release it into the public domain. The fact that these things are not clear to you indicates to me that you still need to read Commons:Licensing (Commons:Sobre las licencias). Please note that making fraudulent statements regarding the authorship and licensing of other people's works is a criminal offense.

Image:Extractor-hood_air_gets_in.gif and Image:Extractor-hood air gets out.gif have not (yet) been deleted, but they have been nominated for deletion. You can find the deletion discussions at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Extractor-hood air gets in.gif and Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Extractor-hood air gets out.gif, where the reasons for the nominations are stated.

The reasons for deletion of your other uploads are stated in the deletion logs here, here, here and here. In short, you need to read Commons:Licensing (Commons:Sobre las licencias). —LX (talk, contribs) 01:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks LX for answer, I think the reasons which I did wrong the images upload were because I am new here in Commons and I don't know the commons rules. Thank you once again for answer.--Solfeo957 (talk) 17:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some things I don't understand[edit]

Hi, first, EXCUSE ME!!!!!!! if I am not polite, I don't have a great level in english, so, if I say to you something that sound like an agression, really, excuse me. Well, I don't use commons frequently, so I don't know verry well how it works, so excuse me (again) if I do, say, think or make something mistake about commons. Ok, you erased the photo Jacobo Arenas.jpg. Well, that was a photo of a member of the Farc-Ep (a terrorist organization), taken by a Farc-Ep member too. The image was found in the page of the Farc-Ep (a blocked page by the police). As a Terrorist organization, there's no possibility of any kind of sue for that reason. The image Eguzman.jpg, well, you're right, it's a copyright violation. The images Bertulfo.jpg and Alape.jpg appear in a list of the US government, so I suppose, the images have no copyright. Second, the image Wasserman.jpg was tooked by me. It's a graffiti in the National University of Colombia and it's not a part of a copyrighted work. I aprecciate your time, and again, if i'm wrong with something (copyright, language) please excuse me. Thanks a lot. --Elviper (talk) 01:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the deletion log for Image:Jacobo Arenas.JPG shows, it was deleted as a result of the consensus at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Eguzman.jpg.

Image:Bertulfo.jpg, Image:Alape.jpg and Image:Wasserman.jpg have not (yet) been deleted, but they have been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Bertulfo.jpg (also covers Image:Alape.jpg) and Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Wasserman.jpg.

Commons only accepts works that are in the public domain or whose copyright holders (usually the authors, meaning the people who created the works) have published the work under a free license. Assumptions that the copyright holders are unlikely to sue the uploader or Commons for copyright infringement are not sufficient to meet the requirements of Commons' licensing policy. If you believe that a work is genuinely in the public domain, you need to indicate why, with reference to the specific laws that state that such works are in the public domain. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Jake2088#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 18:58, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Golf![edit]

I see autoblocks in the block log - I think we might safely assume we will see more of the pictures uploaded yet. Let me know if I can help - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep an eye out and keep you posted. Thanks! —LX (talk, contribs) 08:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BitDefender Logo[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Rbedy#Image:Logo BitDefender.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 14:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Help desk[edit]

You are really good there. Sometimes, excellent even. -- carol (talk) 06:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) —LX (talk, contribs) 07:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should add eloquent as well -- it is all an understatement right now -- carol (talk) 08:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further, one day you might experience asskissing from me. This isn't that. This is a thank you. I would go as far to call it slobbering if I hadn't just pasted a picture of a person spitting elsewhere. -- carol (talk)

Well then I shall keep looking forward to that day. ;) —LX (talk, contribs) 08:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me podrias Ayudar a Archivar mi pagina de Discusión[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Mil va#Please do not remove warnings. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 16:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Dlaczego?/Why?[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Dragon-ghost#Image:Nicky Jonas.21.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 11:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Q3[edit]

The following discussions from User talk:LX have been archived. Please do not change them. Any further comments, even if they deal with a matter discussed below, should be made at User talk:LX.

Primoz Brezec[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User_talk:Bballlova99#Image_Tagging_Image:Primoz_Brezec.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 14:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

How[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User_talk:Chubbennaitor#Image:Sepang_Fan_Track_Map.jpg. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 19:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear officious jerk[edit]

Here where I am physically staying there has been an invasion of ants. I agree with many resource conservation suggestions, especially when they mean less housework which is even more agreeable to me. That being said, it seems I have managed the infestation with a pile of scraps outside of the living area. They do not seem to care now for the little bits of things that might be in the living area and are interesting to watch where they now dine around the clock (some clocks are still actually round).

I mention this now because at English wikipedia, they did not like it when I spoke for myself. Then, they did not like it when I borrowed the words of en:Nathan Explosion to say what was on my mind. I have the option to log into either of the two other computers I have shell access to and work from there, just because. I rather like keeping it "real" though or among human beings and not about access privileges and sneaking and hacking, etc.

Is there something like what I did with the ants where I physically am that I could do to the eh, biting ants at English wikipedia? -- carol (talk) 11:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I can still tell the difference between ass kissing and brain picking, this is not yet ass kissing.... -- carol (talk) 11:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I usually deal with the ants on my patio using boiling water. Not sure I can recommend that, though. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to kill them. Just put something they can feast on somewhere else; out of sight is fine in this case. The real ants here are interesting and I have enjoyed watching them. No boiling water here -- I am not going to name each one of them but, I am becoming fond enough of them that they are being called collectively the feasties which almost rhymes with species.... -- carol (talk) 11:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user: Executioner making racist comments, vandalizing, and using sockpuppet IP[edit]

user: Executioner often tries to delete or change images I upload. A few days ago he did it with his IP so that he doesn't get into trouble for it. I know that this is his his IP range because it is this IP that he uses when placing the images he uploads on Commons onto articles in EnWiki. Here is the diff where he tries to delete an image that I uploaded. Executioner often puts "cleanup" in his edit summaries, here he puts cleanup in the edit summary but does not do a cleanup at all. Instead he puts a deletion tag on the image. He has tried deleting images I upload many times. Also, just a few days ago he also made racist remarks about Persian-Iranian women basically calling them ugly on his talk page, see here. He clearly shows he is racist toward Iranian women so it makes sense that he would try to delete their images from Commons. Due to this evidence I am sure this IP is him vandalizing the image of the Iranian woman I uploaded. Editing with an IP is ok, but using your IP to get away with racism inspired vandalism is sockpuppetry. Le Behnam (talk) 19:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Serious questions about administrative goals here and elsewhere[edit]

In the last few days, uncommunicative and disruptive edits have been encouraged here and communication attempts has been discouraged.

Administrators revert some of my edits and then ask the reason for them.

I was having similar problems on English wikipedia. English wikipedia has a really weird situation going right now, weird, contradictory and kind of interesting so I am taking your time and talk space to outline it:

I was blocked for idiotic reasons (I suspect the real reason was that I clicked on a wikisource upload and reaction to that got out of hand).
While my user account is blocked, my login expires and I was pasting some information that was already wikified for a category here (All the names of Yugoslavia!!!), I could easily read that the block on the IP was to expire on a certain date.
that date arrived, the IP was no longer blocked but the user name was. I like my edit history there. I made one edit with my IP and got a sock en:User:Spears, Carol and went to a user name who had been really good about keeping administrative spam off from my user page there to ask about (or mention) the inconsistency in the ban between IP and User name. No other edits.
I am now banned for "making socks".
The same inconsistency exists where the ban on the IP is set to expire but the ban on my User name is set indefinitely.

My problem with all of this is that it is a point where the definitions do not meet and those points are oftn where extremely abusive people work. I suspect that Ryan Postelwhatever is a new/recent administrator here (using the windows gamebox) but have nothing but a feeling about that.

I do not like the new these last few weeks atmosphere where non-communication is encouraged. I am used to administrators looking into things and making changes then, not making changes and then looking into things.

And not only am I sorry to bother you with this, but I am also sorry that it exists to bother you with. -- carol (talk) 01:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(It does often have the look and feel here that all of the administrators and interested contributors that are looking for problems I create are experiencing unusually strong PMS here. Sometimes I have regular PMS, but never -- I think -- to the extent that the administrators are experiencing it now. Over-reactions, over-emotion, lack of logic and the over-quick deletion of things. It is actually textbook and an often mentioned reason that a female could not be a good leader, yet all of the current administrative actions against me and my work have all of those qualities to it.)

Forgive me for these observations of the "staff" both here and at English wikipedia. I would love to be seeing something else. -- carol (talk) 01:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Executioner[edit]

Loads of autoblocks in the log. I'll be away but I think it may be worth nudging a CU or two if you see anything odd! Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did I speak too soon? :-0 Anyway, emails sent. Rocket000 (talk) 07:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

+[edit]

How about this? Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, same Flickr account. I'm adding it to QFI. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. I'll mail the other CUs and you will get one from me too :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandrina (talk · contribs)[edit]

@LX, would you mind if I replace your english Welcome-template on the userpage of User:Alexandrina (blocked by you for 1 month) by the portuguese language version? Patricia told me recently that portuguese-speakers often have little knowledge of english. --Túrelio (talk) 07:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I generally leave templates in English because don't want to give the impression of being able to speak languages that I don't speak. I figure anybody should be able to recognise the name of their own language in their own language, but if you want to give that a try, I don't mind. —LX (talk, contribs) 07:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS request[edit]

There you go! Just to notify you just got removed on Meta about your request for OTRS, I believe you're now a member. --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I have an e-mail with instructions. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats/good luck! —Giggy 08:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions of Webber[edit]

Hi LX,

I wonder if you would have a look at the contributions of Webber. I am not convinced that they are free images at all. Thanks 84.13.130.1 10:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular reason for that suspicion? They appear to have a consistent style and quality level as far as I an see. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:João P. M. Lima#Copyright_violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 20:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Renaboss (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)[edit]

Good day LX, I was wondering if you could give me more information on how you found the sockpuppet LeoLaci which belongs to Renaboss. For all we know the user might have more so if you find another one, or if I find another maybe a Checkuser report should do. Best regards, --Kanonkas_(talk) 14:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spotted the uploads in Special:NewImages, knew I'd seen them before, checked their usage, looked at the history of one of the instances where it was used, found that pt:User:Renaboss added the image uploaded by User:LeoLaci and that they had previously added Image:Lynette-Scavo.jpg (uploaded by User:Renaboss) to the same article. With User:Renaboss being blocked, User:LeoLaci uploading the same images and pt:User:Renaboss adding references to the images, it was pretty trivial to connect the dots. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Golf Pgatiger.jpg[edit]

Hi, i nominated this image for deletion after you deleted it. Im very sorry for recreating the page Image:Golf Pgatiger.jpg , can you remove it once more? thanks and greetings, --Martin H. (talk) 13:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, no worries. If you see images following the same pattern as this, please report them at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#New Salma sockpuppet, since this is a persistent vandal with so far over half a dozen sockpuppet accounts. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i once nominated (and speedy nominated) a bunch of golf pictures, i still have them on my watchlist, so i found Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Golf Pgatiger.jpg and finaly this thread on your discussion page. Can you please check the contribs of Fatooosh (talk · contributions · Move log · Statistics · logs · block log), the Golf images he recently uploaded are looking familiar to me, all of his uploads are photographed with a mobile phone cam from the monitor (i strongly believe). There are some images of airplanes to, the first i mentioned was Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Airplane114.jpg, i dont nominated other contributions of this user so far because it is obvious and waste of time. --Martin H. (talk) 12:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This could be the same user, and the last rangeblock has expired, but it's not obvious enough that I'm willing to go for a block right away. You could file a request at COM:CU or talk to Herbythyme (talk · contribs), who's familiar with the case. I'm a bit too busy at the moment; otherwise I'd do it myself. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

done by involving User Herbythyme. Thanks, --Martin H. (talk) 17:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ManuelVillalobos.jpg[edit]

Hi, you deletet this image already. Is there any template to tag a imagepage with "permission needed"? The uploader claims to be the author of the image (Photosport (talk · contribs), author is ANDRES PINA/PHOTOSPORT according to the images metadata), unlikely he is - so i want to call on him to sent a written permission. Could you give me an instruction? Please excuse my bad english, --Martin H. (talk) 19:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted that again, since it was recreated outside of process. For what you're asking for, see Image:Luis Flores Abarca.jpg, which I've tagged with {{subst:npd}} and notified them of this per the instructions on that template. If you enable User Messages gadget in your preferences, you'll get a bunch of new links in your toolbox on the left-hand side which makes the whole process a lot easier. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, ill try out the User Messages gadget, it seems to be very useful. The npd tag is what i'm looking for, there are three possible reactions of the uploader in this example: 1. permission per email and everything is ok, 2. do nothing and image will be deleted, 3. make the copyvio obviosly (like this time) and the image will be deleted. thx, --Martin H. (talk) 21:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/

Hello i was wondering if i could upload a manga scan using this licene, ive been banned already by you for the same image but i think this license should work --Elmerion (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In a word: no. Firstly, do not recreate images that have previously been deleted. If you believe the deletion was incorrect, you may request undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests. Secondly, only the legitimate copyright holder can issue a valid license to their work. Making a copy of someone else's work by scanning it does not make you the copyright holder. Please read Commons:Licensing. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Droits d'image[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Louis02#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 13:09, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

images[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Overred#Please do not recreate deleted images. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 08:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

cat fix[edit]

hey, thanks for fixing the cat links in my userpage! I often forget to add the colon :) --Waldir ^talk 11:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're friend of the power dury![edit]

Anyway seeyou... friend of the power (or friend of Wikipedia PT user), but some pics is from GOV web sitepls dont delete that one ok, that pics have some right to be here ok pls first know portuguese then ask me if you can't or your fiends of the power.

DO you know that...gov pics friend of the power! gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov gov

See you friend of the power (I'm pool person end rush!).

Marcio Benvenuto de Lima (talk) 07:47, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I back here for talk about it your BS BS BS BS...all pics "YOU" deleted as under GOV web site, that! YOU CAN'T DELETED THAT PIC BY YOUR PERSONAL WAYS then I'LL BE FIGHT TO THAT PIC!

If you used your power to hit me becouse someone from PT wikipedia friends talk something about me wich you...I have to say...my bad...can't be sweet wich "ALL" then...PLS AND PLS that pics under GOV roles, that pics is free to use, somewhere, everywhere then "I" upload that pic here "SIR".

YOUR JOG IS YOUR JOB, BUT DON'T TRAY HIT ME BY ROLES, THAT ROLES IS FROM YOU NOT FROM COMMONS, GOV PICS IT FREE TO USE ANYWHERE, EVERYWHERE.

Thank you for. pls back that pic in your location "COMMONS" THAT PICS FROM GOV WEB SITE.

Thank you onemore time "SIR" LX.

Marcio Benvenuto de Lima (talk) 08:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THAT SIR FROM GOV OF BRAZIL to me Brasil!

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following licenses:

This work is in the public domain in Brazil for one of the following reasons:

It is a work published or commissioned by a Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal) prior to 1983. (Law 3071/1916, art. 662; Law 5988/1973, art. 46; Law 9610/1998, art. 115)
It is the text of a treaty, convention, law, decree, regulation, judicial decision, or other official enactment. (Law 9610/1998, art. 8)
It is a work whose authors' rights belong to the Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal), for which the economic rights shall be protected for a period of 70 years from the first of January of the year following that of their disclosure or that of the author's demise, whichever is later. ([2])

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ +/−

This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Generic license.

You are free:

to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
to remix – to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

You may select the license of your choice.

Respect is one of the most (if not the most to we ahve PB "SIR" FX).

Marcio Benvenuto de Lima (talk) 08:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look for other Admin for halp, you can´t use your status or you don't know how to use your Status of admin sir, that hit me sir so much, i can't know you by that, why? becouse I from Brazil or "America do Sul" you don't know how much I love my home and pics of my home, law is law, that law driver all in commons (me and you too) you're not the law, I'll open front line to "fight" under law commons and call "one" Admin to help, if that law work just in here "America do Sul" you have PB, I from Brasil South of America, if that roles of Commons work only here...Commons admin FX hame the bust one PB on your life..."User Marcio Benvenuto de Lima under law of Commons boy" welcome in my life FX and South of America...Brasil..rush people home!

Marcio Benvenuto de Lima (talk) 08:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LX I see your comment...first I have to say...sorry or my bad, that pics it so...anyway, have say sorry, my sorry LX so sorry.

Satday or sunday can answer more better, sorry.

Stay wich God LX and My sorry.

Marcio Benvenuto de Lima (talk) 15:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mám otázku[edit]

Co sem ti udělal? Přefikl sem ti přítelkyni, že se do mě navážíš?--Cassius Chaerea (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Watson image[edit]

Back again: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Image:Emwatson.jpg rootology (T) 17:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Target neutralized. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ripped of your talk page, kind of...[edit]

Thanks :) Jacoplane (talk) 20:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go the penguin! —LX (talk, contribs) 20:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

feasties are back![edit]

Sorry to bother you, I have no idea where the correct place for this is. The feasties have returned. They do not seem to enjoy the cold weather but that isn't the problem because the weather has not changed and they have returned.

Regardless to what makes them appear and disappear, this morning I moved something and they started running around. There was a spider which was about their size hanging out near their hole. I got to see the spider encounter one of these ants face to face. They both got scared and ran away. Honest! It was quite funny.

I am really sorry that there was no way to capture that via a movie -- even if I had a lens and a camera that could make a good picture of it; it was just one of those things.

Anyways, thanks for the break -- carol (talk) 00:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/National Portrait Gallery images (first set)[edit]

Could you find a few moments to comment on this? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done about as much as I can without getting too snarly at the drivers-by who seem to think that one or two words makes for a compelling argument. I think I'll try strong give me a raise with my boss next time my salary comes up. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HI LX...About it...Dury[edit]

Hi you said to Patrícia..." I don't know what a "power dury" is; dury does not appear in my dictionary"

Dury = Duty, sames times can´t have control about "r" or "t" if have somes problem, but my friends said that..."if marcio used that, Dury, lol, good halp that duty wich T(I talk about me)"

See you LX...And My Bad!

Marcio Benvenuto de Lima (talk) 17:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Arantxa Sánchez-Vicario.jpg[edit]

Sorry, I've been abused by flickr. You're right the user on flickr is probably not the copyright holder. I will try to do better from now. - Zil (d) 08:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

ODLG[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:ODLG#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 17:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

respect my request[edit]

I just shamelessly stole your thingie for that request to keep discussions where they started.. Thanks for making it. -- carol (talk) 09:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I usually use {{subst:User:LX/Moved back to|Original place}} and {{subst:User:LX/Moved back here}}. As you can see, people seem to quite frequently ignore those instructions (but then, most of my interaction with people on this site takes place after they fail to read instructions to begin with). —LX (talk, contribs) 14:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

El cangri386[edit]

Hej, du har tidigare haft kontakt med User:El cangri386 och gett en varning till denne. Jag vill göra dig uppmärksam på att användaren nu åter är aktiv och har laddat upp "problematiska" bilder. Thuresson (talk) 05:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jag ser det. Användarens diskussionssida finns på min bevakningslista (liksom de flesta användardiskussioner där jag skrivit något). Jag avvaktar med blockering och ser om vederbörande fortsätter på samma sätt eller om något händer med de uppmärkta bilderna. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Scope - Pdf and Djvu files[edit]

I have added some text dealing with these based on the discussion on the talk page. Users are by no means unanimous about which files should be allowed, and I have tried to follow the majority opinion. Thus, the suggestion is that if a Pdf or Djvu file is educationally useful even to a single other Wiki it should be kept. Would you like to comment before this page goes live? Please do so at the bottom of the talk page. Regards, --MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Threll#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 06:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, sorry, I will read that. And please, excuse me for my bad english. Thanks

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Threll (talk • contribs) 13:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Time_con_Stakhanov.jpg[edit]

Puedes borrar Image:Time_con_Stakhanov.jpg.--MaratRevolution (talk) 21:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About Copyright[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Unmerklich#Copyright violations. Please respect my request to keep discussions where they started. Don't continue discussions from elsewhere on this page, as this makes discussions harder to follow. Thank you. 14:58, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

PD-Art[edit]

Hello LX. Regarding the PD-Art policy it appears you are the main person blocking consensus on changing the policy. If that is your decision, I would like to ask you how you intend to fix the current problems with PD-Art without changing the policy. Currently, there are 2 major problems:

All PD-Art images get moved from the English Wikipedia to Commons and then speedy deleted from en, even if they are not allowed on Commons. On en.wiki we have tried everything to get people to quit doing this. It is already prohibited by the speedy deletion policy. We have tried protecting such images and adding warning templates to them saying not to move them to Commons. Yet the fact remains that admins on the en.wiki do not understand the issue and they uniformly assume that the PD-Art policy on en.wiki is the same as on Commons. If you don't believe me, look at this example. This is an image that is not allowed on Commons, yet it has been moved to Commons and deleted 3 times! This, despite the fact that the image was fully protected on en.wiki and included a prominent warning that it should not be moved to Commons. Anything marked PD-Art on en.wiki gets copied to Commons and deleted without a second thought.
The PD-Art policy on Commons is not enforced, indeed it seems to be unenforcable. We have literally thousands of images on Commons currently in violation of policy. If you try to delete these images (as I did) it stirs up a firestorm of objections, and all you end up with is a mile long debate and more images left in limbo. If you could just move these images to en.wiki, it would be OK, but since they hardly ever actually get deleted from Commons, people on en.wiki keep moving them here, and we have thousands of images that are left in danger of being deleted. Having thousands of prominent historical images that are used across dozens of wikipedia projects but are always in danger of being deleted is not a good situation.

If you have any compelling suggestions for addressing these problems, please let me know. Kaldari (talk) 16:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I may have been one of the more vocal participants in objecting to encouraging copyright violations (and that is what the proposal is; there's really no way around that), but as far as I can see, I'm far from the only one "blocking consensus" as you put it.

With regards to the first issue, we have always have, and probably will always have, a problem with people not understanding our policies or international issues in copyright law. We also have problems with users not understanding that fair use cannot apply on Commons. That doesn't mean that our stance on that matter is incorrect either. It's simply an issue that we will have to inform people about on an on-going basis.

With regards to the second issue, it is enforced, but like everything else, there are backlogs, and we don't catch everything right away, but there have definitely been many instances of content deleted on this basis, usually as a result of expired {{Nsd}} notices from what I've seen. Yes, there are objections from people who don't understand our policies or the legal matters involved, just like COM:UNDEL and the user talk pages of active admins rack up plenty of invalid complaints after blatant copyvios are deleted. Again, that doesn't mean that our stance is incorrect. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I see the arguments have already been ignored in favour of vote counting. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a lot of sympathy with your view, and as you know I argued the UK case at some length, but who are we to stand in the way of the WMF Board's "position"? :) --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, why did we even bother with a discussion or with that whole voting circus? Other than that, refer to my comments here and here. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note that it's not a Board Position, it's a statement on philosophy of the WMF in general, if that date is correct, it's while Erik is Deputy Director, not a Board Member, and has no (and should have no) undue influence on Commons policies whatsoever (speaking as a WMF Staff Member). Bastique ^demandez 21:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damn[edit]

This totally totally sucks. —Giggy 23:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:'( ~~→Christian .И 13:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)~~[reply]

Turrón[edit]

Given your previous involvement in discussions of the copyright status of food packaging, I would appreciate your opinion at Image talk:Turrón.jpg. Thanks. --Iustinus (talk) 22:41, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation. However, I am no longer an administrator here, so I'm not able to see deleted contents and therefore not able to comment on it. Furthermore, I no longer have any intention of attempting serious discussions of copyright matters within the scope of this project, as that has proven fruitless in the past. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free[edit]

Later of three months i finished the sentence XD. Thanks as well, of new. Jorghex (talk) 04:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a past deletion[edit]

Over here, you deleted a bunch of screenshots from the Lost Via Domus video game, despite {{Attribution-Ubisoft}}, which states that "Ubisoft allows the users to publish screenshots of all their games under a free license. … Ubisoft, the copyright holder of this file, allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that they are properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted." Why? –thedemonhog talk • edits 20:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to the arguments in the discussion that you mentioned. You may also be interested in Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Lost (video game). If you disagree with the reasons provided, you may voice your concerns at Commons:Undeletion requests. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Q4[edit]

The following discussions from User talk:LX have been archived. Please do not change them. Any further comments, even if they deal with a matter discussed below, should be made at User talk:LX.

Viking Satellite Images[edit]

Hi, can you say something about User talk:Rjd0060#Ticket #2008071410064762? 4 of the images are still in the speedydeletion category. Thank you, --Martin H. (talk) 09:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot, as I no longer have OTRS access. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:LX/Archive/2008

Q1[edit]

about homer simpsons picture[edit]

Delete of my image[edit]

That %#!@ flag[edit]

IP block[edit]

Puppet accounts?[edit]

hello LX[edit]

Diferents Camaras[edit]

Bebop[edit]

Can I get admnin help[edit]

no permission since[edit]

ca:Spierekanaal[edit]

Korrekt licens[edit]

Optimus07[edit]

Image deletion question[edit]

Keep out this picture is not reel.[edit]

Deleted image from Flickr[edit]

Is next user page OK[edit]

Hyperion[edit]

Sorry[edit]

Image protection[edit]

Image:Www.wikipedia.org screenshot.png[edit]

Delete[edit]

Image:Mohammed_kaaba_1315.jpg[edit]

Image:LabourIndia_Logo.jpg[edit]

Image:Hasselblad sunset.jpg[edit]

It's me again![edit]

2pac image violation.[edit]

IP blocked, 129.194.8.73[edit]

Internet filters and proxy IP's[edit]

Requests for undeletion[edit]

Image:Space Invaders on TV.jpg[edit]

Notar heli pics[edit]

Message from Marcelosimao without heading[edit]

Commons:Graphics village pump[edit]

IP block[edit]

Violation[edit]

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Group_account[edit]

Q2[edit]

Thanks[edit]

About deletions...[edit]

The Subspace Emissary[edit]

Actually..about the Station Logo Photo[edit]

Image:Vasa model.jpg is OK?[edit]

Image:These kid.jpg[edit]

Lost[edit]

Migueles.png[edit]

Thanks[edit]

Julio Voltio[edit]

A101j[edit]

Vasa model photo[edit]

Image tagging[edit]

Dinosaur Jr. photo[edit]

Confused[edit]

Template:Unsigned[edit]

Copyright[edit]

Image:2506988601 3528546f18 b.jpg/Image:Hilton San Diego Bayfront explosion incident.jpg[edit]

Comments removed[edit]

"Hotel" one[edit]

I Say HI[edit]

Sorry[edit]

Delete[edit]

Nero InfoTool[edit]

Copyright[edit]

Imagenes del usuario solfeo957[edit]

Some things I don't understand[edit]

Huh?[edit]

Golf![edit]

BitDefender Logo[edit]

Help desk[edit]

Me podrias Ayudar a Archivar mi pagina de Discusión[edit]

Dlaczego?/Why?[edit]

Q3[edit]

Primoz Brezec[edit]

How[edit]

Dear officious jerk[edit]

user: Executioner making racist comments, vandalizing, and using sockpuppet IP[edit]

Serious questions about administrative goals here and elsewhere[edit]

Executioner[edit]