User talk:LX/Archive/2014: October to December

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following discussions from User talk:LX have been archived.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.

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
Danke für den Hinweis und vor allem für die Höflichkeit, bin Neuling und leider werden mir noch einige Pannen passieren, habe mir die Hilfestellungen als PDF ausgedruckt, um besser damit klarzukommen. Siggisieg (talk) 14:53, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned message in WCommons[edit]

The editor here is saying that he uploaded a picture but cannot edit it on the page where he is using it, but does not say what page that is. Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 11:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be these two photos, meanwhile both already used in articles. I’m not 100% convinced about «own work», though. -- Tuválkin ✉ 12:40, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tuválkin, File:Porsche 930 - 121.jpg was uploaded after the question was asked, but yes, I agree that they both look suspect. File:Porsche 930 - 121.jpg has some weird "play" button on it and a faint watermark; it's probably a screengrab from somewhere. File:Marcelo pp 6 abc.jpg looks like a botched photomontage with some sponsor logos in higher resolution than the original photo(s). The head and the body may be two different photos. Very odd indeed. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Rui Gabriel Correia, that is as much as I got out of the Google translation as well ("I can not edit it on the page I am writing"), but I'm still not sure what he means. You don't "edit a photo on a page". You might edit the picture and upload a new version under the same name (unless your account is too new), and it will be automatically updated on the page where it is used. You might edit the photo and upload it under a different name and edit the page where it is used to point to the new version (unless the page is protected). You might edit the description of the picture on the page where it is used or on the file description. Problems with editing articles on Wikipedia are of course something that should be dealt with at the relevant project rather than here. If you speak Portuguese, please feel free to jump in and help. —LX (talk, contribs) 13:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just thought I'd let you know, seeing that you took the trouble to create a separate entry for his comment. I'll pass onj your message. Keep well. Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 20:26, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Obrigado! —LX (talk, contribs) 21:19, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

licenses : cc-by-sa-3.0[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Faisal Al-Abdullah#File:المجلس الإسلامي في جامايكا.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. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian culture[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Szczebrzeszynski#Please remain calm and collegial. 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) 19:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, including your work regarding an "industrial-sized farm of confirmed sockpuppets." Logical Cowboy (talk) 19:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request[edit]

Hi, I would like to bring this [1] to your attention. I have not spent much time on Commons and would welcome your views. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:05, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is likely that this picture [2] was uploaded by the same sockfarm. It is just restoring exactly the same pic that was added by another sock of NZ here [3]. I don't know the rules on Commons, but on EN-WIKI, the picture could be deleted per WP:EVASION--it's re-creating the same material from a blocked editor, possibly by a proxy. But I suspect it is the same person and not just a proxy. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 18:54, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Howdy Logical Cowboy! I've been busy traveling for work, hence the slow response. This falls under our criteria for speedy deletion; specifically recreation of previously deleted content. I've tagged it with {{speedy|[[Commons:Deletion requests/File:DavidAlssema.jpg|Previously deleted content]] [[Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion#G4|recreated]] outside of [[Commons:Undeletion requests|process]], possibly using a [[Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Newzealand123|sockpuppet]]}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:32, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two uploaded versions of same photo ?[edit]

Thanks for the 'Category cleanup' you just did on two images I uploaded in the last few days. As it turns out, this photo:
File:Motorcyclists about to cross from Sweden to Norway in 1934.png
Motorcyclists about to cross from Sweden to Norway in 1934
is one I later uploaded in a better quality (as part of a whole series of photos). If you could help me to mark this first photo as replaced by this one:
Danish motorcyclists about to cross the border between Sweden and Norway in 1934
then I would much appreciate that. Thanks either way. Lklundin (talk) 19:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! You could add {{duplicate|File:Danish motorcyclists about to cross the border between Sweden and Norway in 1934.png}} to File:Motorcyclists about to cross from Sweden to Norway in 1934.png. Or, since they're not exact duplicates, {{speedy delete|[[Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion#G7|Uploader requests deletion of recently created, unused content]]; superseded by [[:File:Danish motorcyclists about to cross the border between Sweden and Norway in 1934.png]]}} might be more appropriate. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. I think I followed your recommendation. Lklundin (talk) 00:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


A kitten for you![edit]

It's a cool kitten, don't you think?

Gabriponte (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't they all, really? —LX (talk, contribs) 18:40, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Need to actually delete older version of uploaded photo[edit]

Hello LX,

I am turning to you again because I have another (and different) problem with versions of an image upload.

Some years ago I took this image en:FILE:Registerblad for Frederik Rasmussen Christensen.jpg and yesterday I realized it could be useful to a Wikipedia article.

However, when I first uploaded the photo to Wikimedia, I made a mistake and uploaded a different photo of the same object (I have about 30000 such photos and I guess I could organize them better). I fixed the problem by uploading the correct photo using the 'Upload a new version of this file' on the incorrect upload.

Now I realize that unlike the new one I don't actually have the right to distribute the old photo and that it is still accessible (although currently not linked to from any Wikipedia page). So I would like to completely remove the old photo, while somehow keeping the new one. Would it be possible for you to suggest some help in doing so? Many thanks and apologies for the inconvenience, Lklundin (talk) 14:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Only administrators can delete files and revisions of them, so just go to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and post a request for the first revision of File:Registerblad for Frederik Rasmussen Christensen.jpg to be deleted. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Many thanks. Lklundin (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NZ is back[edit]

Please see [4]. I hope I did this right. Ketsuban Pichu is a confirmed sock on EN. [5]. Thank you. Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:34, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I not surprised? Fixed up the format a bit. Thanks, —LX (talk, contribs) 17:28, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello. I was just wondering how it is not in the PD? The NBC Peacock is in the PD, and the bottom half is just simple geometric shapes and numbers. Therefore it is in the PD. When I originally uploaded it on the English Wikipedia, I just uploaded without even thinking that it was in the PD. The peacock is just like all if the other NBC logos on here. If this one isn't in the PD, then neither should the other NBC logos. Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 19:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I explained quite clearly in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:NBC logos, which is the correct venue to discuss this matter. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so if it gets deleted here, think they would be suitable enough for the English Wikipedia? Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 21:00, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an expert on English Wikipedia's non-free content guidelines and policies, but I see no obvious reason why low-resolution versions could not be used and locally hosted there. That's more of a question for en:Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, though. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:37, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alrighty, thanks! Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 18:14, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Absent69#File:Khimik Stadium, Armyansk.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. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:49, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture from sajed.ir[edit]

Hi, Thanks for your comments on the images from Shahid Blog. I had also some doubt that this blog owns the copyright of these images. There may be a similar situation with File:Ayatollah Ashrafi Esfehani8.jpg. What do you think? Regards, Yann (talk) 11:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's most likely either a bad or at least problematic source, and this is a much bigger issue. There's a custom license template for that site, 44 files that rely on it and several hundred other files from that site. There have been several relevant deletion discussions with various outcomes.
Kept:
Deleted:
I've also I've commented on this issue in the past. —LX (talk, contribs) 15:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable[edit]

You are as low as a dog and have no good will. I sincerely tried to cooperate with you so all those images would not be deleted but your sick mind could not hold its self from doing the damage you have done.
Pity for you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hooperag (talk • contribs) 18:22, 17 December 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you have against dogs. Personally, I like them. Probably not as much as I like cats, but that's more of a personal preference. And I have plenty of good will. Also, I'm not sick at the moment – in my mind or elsewhere – unless you count the usual lack of energy caused by the darkness of winter this close to the Arctic Circle. I have to say, though, I think it's rather uncool to use mental health issues as a pejorative. People with mental health issues aren't bad people. You can't blame a person for having them any more than you can blame someone for having a cold. So all in all, I think your comments about dogs and sick minds probably say more about you then they do about me. Anyway, I'm sorry you don't like having to follow the rules of this project. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:10, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Let me rephrase things better then; Here I am putting lots of effort to enhance Wikipedia articles, doing my best to follow rules, and spending time arguing with people like you. I feel tired of it, and tired of dealing with editors like you. After 5 years of editing on Wikipedia and dealing with people like you I have had enough of it and that is why I put that message on your talk page. As of today I quit Wikipedia... the only editors you want are the ones like yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hooperag (talk • contribs) 23:15, 17 December 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]
Bye-bye then. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me with license issues! ... and you don't go anywhere![edit]

Hi LX!

I put a message here without adding any topic and consequently my message was added to the previous one. I read it and got horrified. I just want you to know that you are needed here very much and the majority of people appreciate your contribution. Ignore the unrespectful guy and continue helping new editors like me. You are needed here!

However: I hope this is the right page to post my questions! Now I'am a bit confused where to discuss my problems! I am a new user to Wikimedia and have recently uploaded a few images: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Roudaki_Hall_Opera.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 and https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Memorial_Stamp_for_Roudaki_Hall_Opera_in_Tehran.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 which were deleted because of uncertain copyright status. The source of the images where I got them, the foundation of Les Ballets Persans sent recently an email, a declaration of consent, to Wikimedia but the file is not undeleted yet. I also sent a request for undeletion. Is there anything else I should do? Please help. Thanks. Mittimoe (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that. As I mentioned in the deletion discussions, if the copyright has expired, the one thing that's most likely to help in both of these cases is verifiable source information – specifically, source confirming the date of the first publication and/or the death of the author. That source information would be crucial in an undeletion request.
Submitting a consent declaration is a different process, which is appropriate if the copyright has not expired. As it says at the top of Commons:OTRS, "[t]he volunteer [who processes the permission e-mail] will also act to restore any files which may have been deleted before the permission could be verified, so when following the procedure described here, there is no need to request undeletion." In order to be useful, the declaration must be issued by the legitimate copyright holder. The foundation of Les Ballets Persans may or may not be the copyright holders of the photo, but it seems unlikely that they would be the copyright holders of the stamp. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanations. Here is the problem: In the case of File:Roudaki Hall Opera.jpg, the copyright has definitely expired since the photograph was taken around 1970 and the image has fallen within the public domain in Iran. I have forwarded the information and also requested the source of the image (Les Ballets Persans) to confirm this. And they did. But the image is still unavailable. Does it mean that my request for undeletion has been ignored? In regards to File:Memorial Stamp for Roudaki Hall Opera in Tehran.jpg, this is a photography of a stamp published in 1968. Obviously the photography is in the public domain in Iran since it was taken more than 30 years ago. Moreover, the legitimate copyright holder of this stamp or photography should be the Imperial Postal Service of Iran, which is a non-existing company since the Islamic revolution of 1979. So there is no copyright holder to turn to for request of permission or even mention as the source of this file. Please advice! Mittimoe (talk) 23:38, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First, it's important to note that creation is not necessarily the same as publication. Since the 30-year rule in Iran depends on the date of publication, that's what you need to provide evicence of. With regards to the stamp, it's not the photographic reproduction that matters (that probably does not merit any copyright protection), but the engraving of the stamp itself. Since the 30-year rule only applies to photographs, whether or not the stamp is in the public domain probably depends on if and when the engraved died. Commons:OTRS has a big backlog – there are more people sending permissions in than there are volunteers processing them, so as stated on the page, it may take approximately 20 days before you hear back from them. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:48, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stockholm category maintenance[edit]

This discussion has been moved back to User talk:Paris 16#Category:Stockholm category maintenance. 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) 21:58, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LX/Archive/2014:_October_to_December&oldid=148563408"