User talk:Mel22

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Mel22!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

Autopatrol

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy to have your contributions automatically sighted. This will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to help users watching RecentChanges to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones. Thank you. Martin H. (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks e.g. for sorting images to appropriate subcategories in all our by country categories and many other good contributions. --Martin H. (talk) 19:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Projet Monuments Historiques français

Dear Commons user, We noticed you adopted {{Mérimée}}. Thanks for your work in the field of Monuments Historiques français ! In case you did not know about it, we invite you to take a look at the Projet Monuments Historiques français. We hope to see you soon ! — Jean-Fred (talk) 18:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Pompage illicite et intensif de photos

Ce site http://www.infotourisme.net/tourisme/apremont_oise a récupéré ta photo sans indiquer les mentions nécessaires : type de licence + ton nom. Je viens d'ajouter sur leur page ce qui est nécessaire ... mais l'affichage n'est pas automatique, et les responsables refusaient jusqu'à la semaine dernière de citer WP, Commons et les auteurs ! Gonflé, hein ! Voir http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro/16_mars_2011#Suivi_de_l.27affaire_Infotourisme.net et le Bistro des jours précédents et suivants, ainsi que User:Markus3/Photos réemployées. Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 06:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Idem (pour mon "intrusion corrective") sur :

• http://www.infotourisme.net/tourisme/aumont-en-halatte
• http://www.infotourisme.net/tourisme/avilly-saint-leonard
• http://www.infotourisme.net/circuit-touristique/1620/chantilly (jour 1 et pour 2 photos)

- Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 06:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Crédit signalé par toi ... mais en tout cas pas pris en compte

Pour répondre à ton message sur ma page de discu, tes 2 photos de Chantilly (jour 1 sur leur page) ... voir ci-dessus ... infotourisme ne mentionne à cette heure que le contributeur-photographe Tango7174 (1ère des 3 images) mais pas du tout toi-même pour les 2 autres. Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 08:10, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Certes, ... à cette heure, et APRES mon "intrusion corrective" matinale ! Si je t'ai prévenu, c'est bel et bien parce que leur site/page n'était PAS "dans les clous" - Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 09:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour Mel22. Après avoir vu ton intervention sur la page de Markus3 et sur Infotourisme, je te signale qu'en français le mot licence ne s'écrit pas avec un S. Cordialement. Père Igor (talk) 11:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Cisterc

Que devez-vous? S'il vous plaît, où habites-tu en France? J'adore votre architecture médiévale.--Acoma (talk) 10:37, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

euuhhh, désolé, je n'ai pas compris votre question. I don't understand your question. You can talk in English if necessary... Mel22 (talk) 10:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

That picture you need to de “Vaulerent Grange”? Are you from France? I like French medieval architecture.--Acoma (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I 'm from France and indeed, I need this picture to illustrate an article about a cistercian farm. It would be good if you can keep on completing the description of the images you uploaded on commons. Mel22 (talk) 15:46, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

image d'Aumont en Halatte

Il semble qu'il y ait une erreur : il ne s'agit pas de l'église d'Aumont EN Halatte très caractéristique pardon erreur de ma part cela dépend de l'angle de vue !!!

Chantilly

Bonjour
Un grand merci, en passant, pour ton suivi scrupuleux de mes contributions faisant suite à ma récente visite de Chantilly. J'ignorais, par exemple, que le portrait du duc de Chartres en hussard n'était qu'une copie d'après Reynolds. Cela ne figure pas sur la notice de "Joconde", et n'est pas indiqué sur le cartel de l'oeuvre, dans le musée. Merci d'avoir rectifié, donc. Je suppose que celà figure dans l'ouvrage que tu as ajouté dans les références ?
J'ai encore d'autres images de tableaux à charger, je compte sur ton amicale vigilance.
J'ai "loupé" tant et tant de choses, que je crois bien être prochainement obligé de revenir dans cet endroit magnifique.
--Jebulon (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Paintings_by_Nicolas_Poussin_in_the_Gemäldegalerie_Dresden

Category:Paintings_by_Nicolas_Poussin_in_the_Gemäldegalerie_Dresden has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

A. Wagner (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Use of {{Duplicate}}

Files should only be marked with {{Duplicate}} if they are exactly the same. For example, if two files show the same artwork, but the colours are different then they are not exact duplicates.

For example, File:Limbourg brothers - Les très riches heures du Duc de Berry - Septembre (September) - WGA13026.jpg is not a duplicate of File:Les Très Riches Heures du duc de Berry septembre.jpg. Any deletions should be handled with {{Delete}} and a deletion request, not by tagging with {{Duplicate}}. Thanks.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Pompage par infotourisme (suite)

Bonjour ! Regarde ceci http://www.infotourisme.net/tourisme/pontarme#pagesTourisme ... Il semble bien qu'ils n'ont rien ou peu vérifié et corrigé malgré leurs promesses du printemps ! Amicalement ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 (talk) 09:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Scène de fiançailles - Avril - Très Riches Heures du duc de Berry (f.4).jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ASc%C3%A8ne_de_fian%C3%A7ailles_-_Avril_-_Tr%C3%A8s_Riches_Heures_du_duc_de_Berry_%28f.4%29.jpg&action=historysubmit&diff=60995968&oldid=60963583

I am interested: Do you know what kind of material the hat is? Thank you --Kürschner (talk) 07:32, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the removal of cat, perhaps a bit rough. Most of the hats are made in cloth. Some of them, like the woman's one, are decorated with feathers or with catkins. My source (sorry, in french) is : this pedagogic site. Thanks. Mel22 (talk) 12:45, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, mercy --Kürschner (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Très riches heures

Bonjour, bravo pour vos contributions. J'ai créé un petit modèle {{Folio}} pour un peu mieux ranger les titres. Ca marche bien quand il existe Category:Multilingual tags: Title un modèle approprié (File:Folio 182v - The Resurrection.jpg). Les deux points sont collés au mot précédent alors qu'ils ne le devraient pas mais bon) Dans les autres cas, c'est un peu plus lourd (File:Folio 86v - The Funeral of Raymond Diocrès.jpg) mais je pense que ça passe. Ca conviendrait ?

Ah et puis aussi. J'avais rajouté "strict=" sur certains fichiers pour éviter le vilain message "pas de source", mais en fait il est plutôt recomandé de préciser source=inconnue |source = {{unknown|source}}". --Zolo (talk) 12:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

En dehors des 2 points collés, c'est parfait, merci ! Mel22 (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

scan 2004

Voilà, j'ai enlevé ce qui dépassait, mais je n'ai pas su faire ce qui dépendait du numéro de feuillet. --Zolo (talk) 08:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Maître de Guise

Bonjour, j'ai créé creator:Guise Master. Tu sais si c'est le même que le "Maître de Guy de Laval" (Wikipédia en allemand, livre inaccessible) ?---Zolo (talk) 09:28, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Effectivement, c'est le même. L'appellation Maître de Guise est tout de même plus répandue. Merci. Mel22 (talk) 20:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

D'accord, je l'ai rajouté comme "alternative name".--Zolo (talk) 08:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Re: File:14th-century painters - Les Très Belles Heures de Notre Dame de Jean de Berry - WGA16014.jpg

Done. Added the rename request and new source. Aavindraa (talk) 23:16, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry scan 2004

I finally managed to complete your Commons:Bots/Work_requests/Archive_6#Category:Tr.C3.A8s_Riches_Heures_du_Duc_de_Berry_scan_2004 request to add {{BookNaviBar2}} templates to this book. --Jarekt (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Mel22 (talk) 12:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Belle Heures du duc de Berry - f183r - Saint Jérôme étudiant les philosophes classiques.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Belle Heures du duc de Berry - f183r - Saint Jérôme étudiant les philosophes classiques.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Denniss (talk) 14:36, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Fusion d'images

Bonjour,

Toutes mes excuses pour ce problème. J'ai cru bien faire en conservant le fichier le plus gros, c'est à dire celui dont la compression est la plus faible, or ce n'était pas toujours le fichier à conserver.

Pour restaurer l'image, il suffit d'enlever sa redirection, pour retrouver le texte d'origine, il faut consulter le journal des opérations (pas l'historique des modifications), il est accessible par là.

Si vous connaissez la liste des fichiers sur lesquels j'ai commis cette erreur, je me chargerai de tout rétablir.

Encore toutes mes excuses pour les désagréments. Bien cordialement. --M0tty (talk) 20:49, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Taiwan photos

Hi Mel22, just wanted to note that your tagging at File:Yau Leung - Comic stall on Reclamation - Google Art Project.jpg was invalid, as photos in Taiwan enter the public domain 50 years after first release, per {{PD-Taiwan}}. The author's death date is irrelevant. Taiwan's URAA date was 2002, so this work is PD in the US as well. Please nominate for deletion if you still have concerns. Dcoetzee (talk) 07:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Catégorie de tableau

Bonsoir. Je viens de voir que vous avez supprimé (ou demandé la suppression de) la Category:Portrait de monsieur Bertin pour le nom très explicite Category:Louvre RF 1071. Je pense qu'il est tout de même plus logique de garder le nom du tableau plutôt que son numéro d'inventaire. Tout le monde n'est pas spécialiste des collections de musée et pour les néophytes de commons, il est déjà tellement difficile de comprendre le système des catégories, si on impose des noms aussi difficile à comprendre, cela ne facilite pas les choses. Enfin, je pense que cette question mériterait au moins une discussion et un débat avec d'autres contributeurs, car cela peut avoir des conséquences sur des milliers de catégories, je souhaiterais donc que la question soit posée sur le bistro avant toute suppression. Merci d'avance. Mel22 (talk) 20:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Mon travail est en fait circonscrit aux catégories du Louvre-Lens. Chaque œuvre a un titre différent selon la langue dans laquelle on en parle, par conséquent, seules des personnes parlant le français vont ici comprendre. En ce qui concerne le Louvre-Lens, dont je m'occupe, j'ai résolu le problème en utilisant les numéros d'accession qui sont uniques. La catégorie Object on display in the Galerie du Temps in 2013 regroupe les objets, mais la galerie Galerie du Temps (2013) les liste en faisant le lien entre les photographies et la catégorie du numéro d'accession, et l'article sur wikipédia Galerie du Temps (2013) les liste avec leur description (le n° d'accession reverra bientôt vers la catégorie Commons).

J'ai effectué une recherche sur Commons avec Portrait de monsieur Bertin et monsieur Bertin, et aucun résultat ne s'affiche. En revanche, pour une recherche sur Google, c'est l'article sur Wikipédia qui est premier, la catégorie n'apparaît même pas les trois premières pages. La solution la plus logique est donc d'avoir un article dans la langue du pays, et une catégorie ayant une dénomination unique, Commons devant être internationalisé, et compréhensible de tous les lecteurs.

En parallèle, j'envisage de créer en galerie des listes des œuvres, classées avec leur photographie par ordre alphanumérique, ce qui permettrait au lecteur de pouvoir consulter un inventaire simplifié des œuvres du Louvre (le travail n'est pas terminé en fait). Je ne suis pas un spécialiste du Louvre, c'est même la première fois que j'y vais, et encore, c'était à celui de Lens, et ce système de classification, je l'ai adopté parce que certains grands utilisateurs l'appliquaient déjà, et qu'il a l'avantage de pouvoir être utilisé uniformément pour toutes les œuvres du Louvre. Un grec, un chinois, un arabe, un russe ou même un allemand ne comprendra pas Category:Portrait de monsieur Bertin, mais il comprendra bien le numéro d'accession. Après, il faut aussi comprendre qu'il doit y avoir à terme plusieurs milliers d'œuvres, et qu'on ne pourra plus penser à se rabaisser au niveau le plus bas.

Je veux bien consentir à vous laisser la catégorie Category:Portrait de monsieur Bertin, mais je vais conserver toutes celles liées au numéro d'inventaire dont Category:Louvre RF 1071 parce que ce système aura l'avantage de pouvoir être agrandi indéfiniment, et de pouvoir retrouver chaque œuvre parmi toutes les autres et dans n'importe quelle langue. En ce qui me concerne, je ne débattrai pas, puisque je ne m'inquiète jamais de l'avis des autres, et je continuerai à appliquer ce système pour les œuvres du Louvre-Lens. Dans quelques jours, on commencera à avoir le résultat final, et les lecteurs y trouveront un intérêt. JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 10:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Le titre d'un tableau du Louvre est un titre en Français et est compris internationalement comme tel. Je remarque d'ailleurs que vous avez vous même appliqué ce principe puisque vous vous êtes bien gardé de renommer certaines catégories de peinture. Et comme vous l'avez dit récemment sur le bistro, le principal est que la description puisse l'expliciter si nécessaire. Enfin, si vous souhaitez appliquer une attitude anticollaborative dans les domaines où vous êtes le seul à intervenir, c'est votre problème, mais on ne peut pas fonctionner d'une telle manière sur des sujets où nous sommes nombreux à contribuer. Pour rappel comme vous le savez, les "œuvres du Louvre-Lens" n'y sont que provisoirement et retourneront au Louvre parisien tôt ou tard. Et pour info, on ne parle pas de "numéro d'accession" en Français mais de numéro d'inventaire". Merci d'avance. Mel22 (talk) 21:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Numéro d'accession se dit : la preuve ici, tout comme il y a d'autres noms, comme numéro d'entrée, par opposition au numéro d'usage. En ce qui me concerne, je continuerais d'appliquer le nommage par numéro d'accession pour toutes les œuvres qui passent par le Louvre-Lens, et à ensuite produire des galeries comme ici ou ici. Ce n'est pas anticollaboratif, juste adapté à plusieurs milliers d'œuvres. JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 09:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Évangéliaire de Godescalc

Merci pour la précision. J'espère que vous aimez l'œuvre ! --Jebulon (talk) 19:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Je viens de l'ajouter à fr:Portail:Enluminure/Image de la semaine. Mel22 (talk) 19:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: File:Dyck Hendrik van den Bergh.jpg

I am not claiming that it is original van Dyck!!!!!!!!!! ("after" is still in the file descr), I just removed unacceptable POV pushing. In this case quotation is required, so action from your side if you are claiming that some works are the only orignal (to be provided in the files that you are claiming are "original" in the first place). Besides Joconde database that you are citing in your file is clearly saying "Genèse - réplique", so how come it can be considered as original? BurgererSF (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

---

Hi Mel22, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

--Steinsplitter (talk) 16:02, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Facsimile of the Vatican Virgil - Lansdowne Ms834 - f4.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Facsimile of the Vatican Virgil - Lansdowne Ms834 - f4.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 23:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Albigeois

Bonjour. Cette légende, comme le titre de l’image, est sujette à équivoque. Ce ne sont pas les cathares, ou Albigeois, qui ont été expulsés de Carcassonne après la reddition de la cité, ce sont tous les habitants. Source, la Chanson de la Croisade et tous les ouvrages historiques sur le sujet. En 1209, c’est le début de la croiade, on ne s’embarrasse pas de trier les croyants cathares des autres, et si c’était le cas ils étaient arrêtés, pas expulsés. --Morburre (talk) 13:59, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Histoire universelle de Diodore de Sicile - Lettrine L - Musée Condé Ms721.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Histoire universelle de Diodore de Sicile - Lettrine L - Musée Condé Ms721.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 00:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Delaroche - Assassinat du duc de Guise (Musée Condé).jpg

File:Delaroche - Assassinat du duc de Guise (Musée Condé).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Zoupan (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

New York Public Library manuscripts

Hi there - just wondered what is your rationale for removing the category "New York Public Library manuscripts"? - Kosboot (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Your question is not very easy to understand. If you talk about this for instance, this file is already categorized in "Drexel 4180-4185" which is already in "New York Public Library manuscripts". The rule is that a file «should be put in the most specific category/categories that fit(s) the page (not directly to its parent categories)» (Commons:Categories). I just applied this rule. Thanks. Mel22 (talk) 21:12, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I was talking about all those images from which you removed the category "New York Public Library manuscripts." I don't see that they are already in "New York Public Library manuscripts" as you have stated - and in fact, they are now disassociated from the owning institution. If you could provide a link to where you see they are part of "New York Public Library manuscripts" that would assist me in understanding what you have done. - Kosboot (talk) 21:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

First, show me the images you're talking about, then I could answer you. Thanks. Mel22 (talk) 19:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I see what you've done. Because all those 19 images (various images Drexel 4180-4185) were in the "umbrella" category "New York Public Library manuscripts" you removed it from the individual images. I think the "umbrella" category is probably wrong, that each images should be categorized as "New York Public Library manuscripts." If you have no objection, I will remove the top category can put the category with each image. And if you do have an issue with it, let's talk. - Kosboot (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Just the same answer : read the principles. They should not be categorized in New York Public Library manuscripts if they are already categorized in Drexel 4180-4185, that's the rule ! Mel22 (talk) 12:39, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Charles VII - BNF Clairambault 633 - pièce 92

Bonjour, Mel22.

Ah, merci de la précision concernant la copie du fonds Roger de Gaignières. J'avais eu un doute en constatant la forte similitude (eu égard à la posture et la vêture de Charles VII) entre la composition de ce dessin anonyme et celle de la miniature L'Adoration des mages du Livre d'heures d'Étienne Chevalier... Mais je vous fais confiance là-dessus en tant que spécialiste de la question ! Bien cordialement. Guise (talk) 10:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Charles VI - BNF, Français 2705, Folio C recto

Bonjour, Mel22.

J'ai mis à jour les informations relatives à cette miniature du roi Charles VI représenté en costume de sacre. L'œuvre en question était attribuée à Jean Perréal dans une version précédente de la page Wiki Commons, ce qui m'étonne quelque peu eu égard à la datation. La fiche de la BNF ne faisant pas état de ce peintre, j'ai opté pour un auteur inconnu. Peut-être disposeriez-vous de sources à ce sujet... ?

De surcroît, pensez-vous que l'identification soit exacte ? D'après le texte du manuscrit, ne serait-ce pas Charles V, le père du roi fou, représenté ici ?

Bien cordialement.

P.S. : Je rêve d'un fichier image en très gros plan du Goldenes Rössl (pris en photo par un wikipédien local), ce qui nous permettrait d'afficher sur WP les traits de Charles VI reproduits dans ce chef d'œuvre d'orfèvrerie... (soupir) :-)

Guise (talk) 11:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Bonjour @Guise: . En fait, il s'agit bien de Charles VI, en tout cas, c'est comme cela qu'est légendé l'image sur la base image de la BNF qui me semble fiable. C'est confirmé par cet ouvrage. Et la BNF indique bien Jean Perréal comme auteur de l'image, ce qui est possible si l'ouvrage date bien de la fin du XVe siècle (ce qui semble probable vu le style et confirmé par l'autre source). Pour une fois, il n'y avait pas d'erreur ! Il faut se méfier des portraits du XVe siècle qui sont rarement ressemblant et les notices de Gallica sont souvent très lacunaires. Pour le Goldene Rossl, j'ai même de gros doutes au sujet de l'image actuelle sur commons, il semble bien qu'elle ait été pompée (scanné) sur un document papier probablement sans autorisation... Bonne continuation ! Mel22 (talk) 12:19, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Un énorme merci !!! Je remets immédiatement Perréal comme auteur. :-)

Bien cordialement. Guise

Category:The Golf Book (1520-1530) - BL Add MS 24098 and the Category:Heures de Hennessy

Hi, Mel22, I noticed your revert. Did you take a closer look at the image? I merely added the Category:Heures de Hennessy, because it is a very, very close copy of File:HH Mei.jpg. Copyvio then also? Lotje (talk) 12:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Lotje: Indeed, this is a very close copy (but not exactly the same, you could find some "errors" ) from the miniature of the Hennessy Hours because this is the same painter, Simon Bening who painted both of them (or his workshop). This is very usual at that time to reuse same compositions in differents paintings or miniatures and that was not considered as "copyvio" ! I add the Hennessy Hours image as an "other versions" in the file desc. Thanks. Mel22 (talk) 12:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Thnks Mel22! I from my side added the Hours of Hennessy to the Golf book and vice versa. Lotje (talk) 12:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Rognages intempestifs

Toutes mes excuses. Cordialement, — Racconish^☎ 20:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

L'été des régions

Bonjour, merci de vos contributions aux catégories des photos de l'Été des Régions. Pour info, la catégorie Category:Images from Été des Régions 2016 to check permet de voir ce qui arrive et de catégoriser correctement. Cordialement. Pmau (talk) 15:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Maria Carolina of Bourbon-Two Sicilies (1822-1869) who has the incorrect name.

Hello/Bonjour, a while ago I hads an account on the commons and I moved Maria Carolina of Bourbon-Two Sicilies (1822-1869) to Princess Carolina Augusta of the Two Sicilies. And you moved it back. Even though my move was in fact correct due to various pieces of evidence pointing to that name such as :

1. She was a member of the House of Bourbon, yes. BUT she was a Princess of the Two Sicilies. The House of Bourbon simply were its rulers, as a result Bourbon-Two Sicilies is just stupid and unnecessarily complicating things.
2. Her names did in fact include Maria Carolina yes, but I uploaded a signature by her own hand clearly showing that she used the names Carolina Augusta (It was in French admittedly but still) Therefore my move was in fact correct and more sensible than the name that category/gallery has. I think The problem is that a majority of Bourbon[s] of the Two Sicilies are named Prince[ss] X of Bourbon-Two Sicilies on the main Wikipedia. Which irritates me greatly because it's just idiotic. Less is more people. Anyway, I'm unable to move said page at all because one of the bureaucratic bastardos that calls itself an admin blocked me because they're a petulant and spiteful dictator. I just thought I'd explain. Her name was Carolina Augusta though. I think that all of these categories should simply be moved to Prince[ss] X of the Two Sicilies. Again less is more. Merciii pour votre temps. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.243.45.16 (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Démolition de la Tour 6 des Minguettes à Vénissieux.jpg

File:Démolition de la Tour 6 des Minguettes à Vénissieux.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Mel22 (talk) 21:46, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Réponse de Jmenj (en français au sujet d'une photographie d'un lieu en France), il s'agit d'une photo en creativ commons, je l'ai écrit en toutes lettres en dessous de la photo et j'ai même indiqué l'url. Je ne les ai peut-être pas mis dans la bonne zone (?? ), mais cela ne vous aurait pris aucun délai de temps de rajouter ce sigle (puisqu'il y a l'url source indiquant Creativ commons et les attributs), plutôt que de supprimer cette photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmenj (talk • contribs) 07:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmenj (talk • contribs) 07:43, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Bellini - Trois histoires de Drusienne et de saint Jean l'Évangéliste - Berchtesgaden, Schloss museum.jpg

File:Bellini - Trois histoires de Drusienne et de saint Jean l'Évangéliste - Berchtesgaden, Schloss museum.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

185.19.199.199 07:07, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Bellini - Trois histoires de Drusienne et de saint Jean l'Évangéliste - Berchtesgaden, Schloss museum.jpg

File:Bellini - Trois histoires de Drusienne et de saint Jean l'Évangéliste - Berchtesgaden, Schloss museum.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

185.19.199.199 06:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Statuts de l'ordre de Saint-Michel de Jean Fouquet

Bonjour, Mel22.

Auriez-vous l'amabilité de m'ôter un doute affreux ? :-)

En effet, j'ai voulu illustrer l'infobox de Charles de France, frère cadet de Louis XI, par un un fichier image de la fameuse enluminure de Jean Fouquet. Or, j'ai l'impression de m'être trompé dans l'identification des personnages représentés...

Ainsi, la BNF identifie le personnage à gauche au premier plan comme le duc Jean de Bourbon (ce fichier sur Commons fait de même).

Selon vous, Charles est-il bien le chevalier de l'ordre représenté à droite, au premier plan, avec un autre personnage qui lui pose la main sur l'épaule ? Certes, il ressemble davantage au souverain... Mais Paul Durrieu n'est pas de cet avis, comme il l'expose dans le vieil article « Une peinture historique de Jean Fouquet. Le roi Louis XI tenant un chapitre de l'ordre de Saint-Michel », Gazette archéologique, p. 75, Gallica.

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Bonsoir @Guise: . Je me suis replongé dans ma bibliographie pour vérifier tout cela. Dans l'article sur WP, je n'ai cité que l'identification de Durrieu car c'était la seule véritablement "officielle" par un historien de l'art. Dans la monographie sur Fouquet, François Avril se garde bien d'identifier les 2 chevaliers concernés par votre question (alors que le mini-site de la BNF est normalement basé sur cet ouvrage). Nicole Reynaud dans Quand la peinture était dans les livres n'identifie personne non plus. Je n'ai pas moyen de consulter la notice de König dans France 1500 pour voir ce qu'il en pense. En l'état actuel des choses, d'après les infos à ma disposition, j'aurais tendance à croire Durrieu dont l'argumentation semble sérieuse d'après l'article de la Gazette archéologique que vous venez de m'indiquer. Dans le doute, je mettrai un autre portrait pour illustrer les articles des deux personnages, mais manque de chance, Durrieu indique lui-même qu'aucun autre portrait de Charles de France n'est connu ! Voilà ce que je pouvais vous dire. Mel22 (talk) 19:52, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Un grand merci pour votre réponse habituellement ultra-pointue ! Je suivrai donc votre exemple en me fiant également à Durrieu ; il conviendra juste de mettre ses identifications au conditionnel... Bien que certaines déductions (l'évêque Guy Bernard, notamment) soient plus que vraisemblables ! Merci encore pour vos lumières.

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

P.S. : Rien à voir avec ce qui précède mais pourriez-vous m'indiquer une page d'aide sur Commons qui expliquerait comment créer des sous-catégories ? Je ne suis pas vraiment pas doué pour ce genre de choses, or je souhaiterais que la Category:Henry IV of France comporte une sous-catégorie dédiée aux portraits dessinés (pour l'instant, ceux-ci sont classés dans Category:Henry IV of France in engravings‎...).

@Guise:  : C'est fait. Mel22 (talk) 20:26, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Parfait, merci beaucoup ! A présent, il ne vous reste plus qu'à poster la vidéo du tutoriel sur Youtube pour que j'y comprenne quelque chose... Nan, je plaisante. Grâce à vous, je vais enfin pouvoir classer tous ces fichiers, encore merci !

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

File:12th-century painters - Christ in Majesty with Angels - WGA16030.jpg

Sorry about my geolocation mistake. I'm geolocating items in Museo Arqueológico Nacional in Madrid, but some categories include items placed in other locations. I realized that when I saw an item from a museum in Pretoria, but at that moment I had modified some dozens of files. Arghhhh! Thanks for your help, B25es (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

File:The Seventh Angel of the Apocalypse Proclaiming the Reign of the Lord - c. 1180.jpg

Sorry again! I think that I've ended by now with all stuff in Museo Arqueológico Nacional. I've left some 40 pictures, mainly people who worked there but whose photographs were taken somewhere else (or maybe there but I'm not sure). One picture I found to be from Buenos Aires! B25es (talk) 10:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Dijon Philippe le Hardi1.jpg

You strike me as rather difficult and unpleasant. There are paths to do things, and you took the least attractive. Ceoil (talk) 02:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Château de chantilly

Bonjour Mel vous avez demandé la suppression de ma photo du château de chantilly car elle était publié sur mon compte Twitter... Randy110912 (talk) 17:00, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

de l'epoche

It's fine it says that, but it also clearly states at the top that it is attributed to Poussin - thus end of story. It doesn't have to be the first version in order to be by him after all. The text also demonstrates how the experts over time disagreed with each other. Best to give the institution the benefit of the doubt: they say attributed, so we should do the same. Jane023 (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

First of all, good evening. Thanks for your message. In fact, all recent historians specialists of Poussin (Friedlander is dead in 1966) say Cardiff version is the original and this one is a copy, not by the hand of Poussin (Thuillier, 1994 ; Rosenberg, 2016). This text (and so, the institution, the simple legend of an image could include a mistake) say there is a consensus to see an ancient copy... If you find a recent source to say explicitly the opposite, you could change the description of the file ; in the current state of things, "copy of Poussin" is the most accurate description. Thanks. Best regards. Mel22 (talk) 19:55, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

That's fine, but as I said, the holding institution is leading, and they clearly say "attributed". When it comes to the Wikimedia projects, we are not supposed to be making original research, and the only informmation you have included in the file is the link to the institution. Let me also remind you that in this instance it is much more accurate to claim it is by the master, since the painting is undisputed as being Poussin's design. If you insist on calling it a copy, then please add the quotes above along with the complete references to the file in order to back up your claim. I am only asking you to stop being creative. All claims must be sourced. Jane023 (talk) 19:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Une enluminure bien mystérieuse...

Bonjour, Mel22.

J'ai récemment (et vainement) proposé de supprimer ce fichier multi-utilisé dans les diverses versions de Wikipédia.

Présentée comme une enluminure du XIVe siècle, l'illustration a été téléchargée sur Commons en 2004 sans aucune indication de source. On n'en trouve nulle trace par ailleurs, sauf sur un site commercial qui semble avoir "repompé" Wikipédia.

En outre, le style de l'enluminure m'apparaît fort curieux.

Bref, j'aurais bien besoin de vos lumières ! :-)

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 11:59, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Bonsoir @Guise: Je ne connaissais pas cette miniature (plus précisément extrait de miniature) et je n'ai strictement aucune idée d'où elle peut provenir. Effectivement, j'ai de gros doute sur une origine française ou anglaise du XIVe sièlce vu le style, et si cela date vraiment de cette période, on pourrait penser à une origine plus exotique... Après recherche, rien dans les bases icono de la BNF, de la British Library ou de bildindex (la base de donnée allemande). Chou blanc donc... Dans ce cas, pour une image controversée, je pense qu'il faut au maximum y substituer, dans les pages de wikipedia, une image sur le même sujet mais sans équivoque. J'ai bien trouvé cette image qu'il faudrait importer sur commons, le manuscrit est bien daté et l'image légendée sans ambiguité. Désolé de ne pouvoir en dire plus. Bonne continuation et n'hésite pas à me tenir au courant si tu trouves plus de choses. Mel22 (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup, votre proposition est excellente ! Cette image convient parfaitement pour remplacer l'autre dans tous les projets wiki. Hop, motion adoptée à l'unanimité. ;-) Je me charge très prochainement de télécharger le fichier avant de procéder aux substitutions. Encore merci pour votre expertise toujours aussi enrichissante !

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 20:51, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour, Mel22.

Je tenais juste à vous informer (avec un peu de retard) que le mystère a été résolu : il s'agit d'une copie XIXe siècle d'une enluminure peinte au XIVe siècle. De plus, les personnages représentés ne sont nullement Charlemagne et Roland mais Louis de Tarente et un chevalier de l'Ordre du Saint Esprit au Droit Désir.

Ouf, affaire réglée ! Cette histoire me travaillait à chaque fois que je voyais l'image reproduite et légendée incorrectement dans toutes les versions de Wikipédia, voire sur d'autres sites... :-)

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Images from Gallica with broken source

Bonjour, Les images proviennent de la BNF, et la source est incomplète. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 05:28, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

@Yann: Bonjour. Toutes les images de la BNF ne sont pas présentes dans la base Gallica, c'est le cas de ces deux images (qui proviennent de la banque d'image Daguerre), vous ne trouverez pas le manuscrit Fr2610 dans gallica (en couleur en tout cas), donc cette catégorie n'est pas pertinente (ou alors il faudrait renommer la catégorie). Par ailleurs, le lien indiqué en source est tout à fait valide, il renvoie vers la liste des images de ce manuscrit (car il n'y a pas possibilité sur Daguerre de faire un lien stable vers une seule image), deuxième raison pour laquelle cette catégorie n'est pas pertinente, ce qui suffit pour la supprimer en l'occurence. Merci. Mel22 (talk) 19:36, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

category for one painting

The category "Paintings in the Musée Condé by artist" is a Meta-Category, that means there are no paintings in it, only other categories. I think, the artists should be completed in this Meta-category, also other users shall grow the content of the categories. Your --Dguendel 07:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Wanted : Bob n°1

Bonjour, Mel22.

Grâce au forum Passion Histoire, j'ai pu renommer correctement ce fichier avant de supprimer l'illustration inappropriée de l'infobox consacrée à Robert Ier (roi des Francs).

A ce sujet, connaitriez-vous une enluminure représentant ce roi robertien ? Pour ma part, j'ai fait chou blanc sur Gallica et le site de la British Library... Sinon, tant pis : on se contentera sans problème d'une infobox vide. :)

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 14:54, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Bonsoir @Guise: Merci pour ton message. Je t'ai trouvé deux généalogies des Robertiens comportant une représentation de Robert Ier datant du 14 siècle. L'une est là, l'autre ici. Tu n'as plus qu'à en extraire le médaillon dont tu as besoin. Bien cordialement. Mel22 (talk) 22:21, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Un immense merci !!! Bénis soyez-vous, toi et ta fabuleuse érudition ! :-)

Bien cordialement. --Guise (talk) 01:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Mozart

c:File:Louis Carrogis dit Carmontelle - Portrait de Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (Salzbourg, 1756-Vienne, 1791) jouant à Paris avec son père Jean... - Google Art Project.jpg

nobody will be suppressed, have a look at c:Category:Leopold Mozart and his children, Wolfgang and Maria Anna (Carmontelle) and try to understand what's about categories und hierarchies in cat-trees. --Goesseln (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

@Goesseln: Sorry that was a mistake that I correct myself immediately. You could also suppress a lot of other cats, that's what I have done. Mel22 (talk) 17:32, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Mel22,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia Commons and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 01:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Mel22,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Mel22,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Mine Trémuson 01 (3139310886).jpg

File:Mine Trémuson 01 (3139310886).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Portrait d'Alfonso de Valdés - Musée Jacquemart-André de Chaalis.JPG

Copyright status: File:Portrait d'Alfonso de Valdés - Musée Jacquemart-André de Chaalis.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait d'Alfonso de Valdés - Musée Jacquemart-André de Chaalis.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 21:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Coucher de soleil sur l'île de Philae - Edward Lear.jpg

Copyright status: File:Coucher de soleil sur l'île de Philae - Edward Lear.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Coucher de soleil sur l'île de Philae - Edward Lear.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 19:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Portrait d'Elisabeth Stuart - Atelier de Mierevelt - Musée Condé.jpg

Copyright status: File:Portrait d'Elisabeth Stuart - Atelier de Mierevelt - Musée Condé.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait d'Elisabeth Stuart - Atelier de Mierevelt - Musée Condé.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 16:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Portrait d'un gentilhomme inconnu - Musée Condé PE242.jpg

Copyright status: File:Portrait d'un gentilhomme inconnu - Musée Condé PE242.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait d'un gentilhomme inconnu - Musée Condé PE242.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 14:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:La_Vierge_trônant_avec_l'enfant_entre_saint_Jérôme_et_saint_Pierre_-_Musée_Condé

La Vierge trônant avec l'enfant entre saint Jérôme et saint Pierre - Musée Condé has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Oursana (talk) 15:39, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:La_Vierge_trônant_avec_l'enfant_entre_saint_Jérôme_et_saint_Pierre_-_Musée_Condé

La Vierge trônant avec l'enfant entre saint Jérôme et saint Pierre - Musée Condé has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Maltaper (talk) 16:37, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Portrait de Philippe de Clève - Musée Condé PE110.jpg

Copyright status: File:Portrait de Philippe de Clève - Musée Condé PE110.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait de Philippe de Clève - Musée Condé PE110.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 10:11, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Wieżowce_KTW

Category:Wieżowce_KTW has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

MacQtosh (talk) 13:40, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Histoire d'amour sans paroles - exposé à la bibliothèque Condé.JPG

Copyright status: File:Histoire d'amour sans paroles - exposé à la bibliothèque Condé.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Histoire d'amour sans paroles - exposé à la bibliothèque Condé.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:05, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Esquisse pour Diane au repos - Paul Baudry - exposé dans la galerie des Cerfs Musée Condé.JPG

Copyright status: File:Esquisse pour Diane au repos - Paul Baudry - exposé dans la galerie des Cerfs Musée Condé.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Esquisse pour Diane au repos - Paul Baudry - exposé dans la galerie des Cerfs Musée Condé.JPG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 18:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Morgan Hours - M.358-fol.-25r.jpg

Copyright status: File:Morgan Hours - M.358-fol.-25r.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Morgan Hours - M.358-fol.-25r.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

• File:Morgan Hours - M.358-fol.-13r.jpg
• File:Morgan Hours - M.358-fol.-17r.jpg
• File:Morgan Hours - M.358-fol.-20v.jpg

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 22:08, 28 September 2023 (UTC)