User talk:Szilas
 First steps tutorialOur first steps help file and our FAQ 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. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy.  Getting helpMore information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
 Goodies, tips and tricks
 Made a mistake?
| |
| (P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) | ||
Hello, and thank your for sharing your files with Commons. There seems to be a problem regarding the description and or licensing of this particular file. Could you please resolve these problems, which are described on the page linked in above? Thank you. --Orgullomoore 18:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
File:Ernest Joseph Bailly - In Contempt of Hate.jpg Hello Szilas, I am new to Wikicommons, don't know if there is a better way to communicate directly with you! Thanks for your photos! I wanted to get your permission to use your photo of the painting "In Contempt of Hate" in a youtube clip. I will of course list credits for all photos either on youtube (if there is room) or in a link. If you agree, can you please e-mail me permission: that you release any copyright you may have on the photo? Thanks very much, Aiton aitonbirnbaum@gmail.com
Please use the information template[edit]
Hi, please use the template {{Information}} for the the maps that you recently uploaded. You have provided insufficient information to establish PD-old quickly and without doubt at the moment and you can be sure that some of the uploaded images will be nld-ed. Please document all your uploads as complete as possible as it adds tremendous value to your work. Thanks and I wish you a lot of fun here, Siebrand 10:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear Siebrand,
the informations for the map sheets are mostly the same: 3rd Military Mapping Survey of Austria-Hungary - and the name of a characteristic place on the map sheet. The number of the sheet is in the title.
My source is also included into the article.
In my source I have also the name of the responsible officer(s) for the mapping of the individual sheets, but I don't think that they should be taken as the author. In principle, it is also possible that this person died later than 70 years ago. But in such an official mapping, I don't think that individual authors can be identified.
What is your view about this? What is the absolute minimum I have to do to safeguard the uploads?
I don't want to start the work all over again, of course.--Szilas 13:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Try to look at it from the point of view where you provide some textual information about the image: what is it, where does it come from, when was it created and by whom. This will allow more hits on a full text search and ultimately contribute to a more complete and useful media repository. Unfortunately you/we cannot be busy uploading images all the time. Take the beating now and do better next time :-) I see that you are already well on your way. Thanks and have fun. Cheers! Siebrand 18:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok.
- For your information: You can also use {{badname|Image:name of other file}} if it is a badly named upload, otherwise you can use {{duplicate|image:name of other file}} for duplicates :) Deadstar 12:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Mondriaan[edit]
I had to delete the picture of the painting. Mondrian died in 1944, so it will PD only on 1 Jan 2015. If copyrightholders complain, in the end you will be responsible for such copyright violations. Please make sure that a picture is in the Public Domain _before_ you upload it to the Commons. --AndreasPraefcke 18:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
FPC[edit]
Hi. When nominating for FP, don't forget to add the image: tag before your image name. Thanks Lycaon 06:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- No trouble ;-) Lycaon 07:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
.jpg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sculpture of official Bes.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Basilica of Tongeren[edit]
Hi! I improved your picture Image:Basilica of Tongeren, detail.JPG, I think it been much better, so I think no need to upload it as another version - if you agree I upload it as a new version of original file (may you have the original on your pc if you want undid it). I think this version may have better possibilities to be an QI. Best wishes --Beyond silence 02:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Kedves Beyond Silence!
Köszi szépen a segítséget, meg az előző képnél is a támogatást. Látom a magyar user lapodon, hogy azt pártolod, ha egy helyen vannak az eszemecserék, ezért ide írok.
Bár egész életemben sokat fényképeztem, de ez a szint még magas nekem. Van egy jó gépem - a 60. szülinapomra leptem meg magam vele (a life long learning erős híve vagyok :-)) - de még nem tudom kihasználni igazán a lehetőségeit. Különösen érdekelne, hogy miként lehet csökkenteni a zajszintet. Ha tudsz ajánlani erre vonatkozóan irodalmat a neten - angolul, magyarul, németül - nagyon örülnék neki.
Kösz még egyszer.--Szilas 07:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Csak mert egyszer akinek magyarul írtam visszaírt hogy angolul szokás, bár tényleg az az angol Wikipédia volt - na mindegy, jó lesz magyarul. Hát vérprofi én sem vagyok, de azthiszem a zajszint csökkentésére kontrétan az ISO alacsonyabbra vétele segít (ez az érzékenység). Jó lehet ha még növeled az expoziciót, ha nincs elég világos... Irodalmat netről még nem nagyon néztem a témába, keresőbe beírod talán találsz valamit. De a zaj szint csökkentésére a leghatásosabb módszer ha Photoshop nevű programot használód utómunkának - én is ezt használom, egész jól lehet vele zajt csökkenteni! Akkor felül írhatóm a képed? Minden jót --Beyond silence 12:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Persze, légyszi írd felül, csak jobb lehet.--Szilas 13:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Megtörtént.--Beyond silence 14:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I think that your newer upload on Image:Signac - La Calanque.jpg went a little too far; the contrast boost blew the whites a good portion of the picture. Keep in mind that when adding contrast, you stretch a thinner range of input over a larger range of output, so if you go too far, you will clip some of the detail off. I uploaded a slightly more conservative edit Image:Signac - La Calanque edit.jpg here. Thegreenj 22:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I added the edit at QI, with you as the photographer on the image page. Thegreenj 19:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Kösz[edit]
Köszi szépen a reviewot a képemhez! Minden jót --Beyond silence 15:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Signac - La Calanque edit.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
| Image deletion warning | Image:Signac_-_La_Calanque.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. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. |
Szilas 04:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Siipikarja,
thanks for your help with my Lissabon picture. If you like it now, you can easily promote it also :-).--Szilas 16:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Szilas,
for some reason your picture is not visible right now atCommons:Quality_images_candidates so I could one more take a look at it. Meanwhile, I translated your quality image descriptions to Finnish at User:Szilas. From your profile I learn that you can speak many languages very well:
- hu
- en-3
- de-3
- fr-3
- ru-3
Could you do me a favor, and translate the description of the following photo taken by me to those languages? I promise I'll promote your picture as a QI, when it becomes visible again. :) --Siipikarja 00:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rossio - Praca Dom Pedro IV.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rua Da Santa Justa, Baixa, Lisbon.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Julia Domna - Cologne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Commodus - Cologne.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Duplicate images[edit]
Hi, for the images you mention for deletion on User talk:Marcelloo, can you please give the name of the duplicate file? In the future, you can also use the {{duplicate|name of other file}} template for these cases, it is faster :). Kind regards, -- Deadstar (msg) 08:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Category:3rd Military Mapping Survey of Austria-Hungary[edit]
The maps in Category:3rd Military Mapping Survey of Austria-Hungary are quite interesting, thanks for uploading. I've added some categories. Is there an overview index file available? Alphabetic ordering is of little help when looking for a specific area without knowing what the map is named after. --Matthead 11:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
RE:3rd Military Mapping Survey of Austria-Hungary[edit]
These maps are fantastic- thanks for your effort in uploading them! I was wondering if you knew of any similar maps that cover areas to the east- particularly Anatolia. Any resources you know would be outstanding, thanks!
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Church of St Anne in Budapest I. district.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Azamara Journey closing in to dock.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! View over the Botanical Garden in Brussels.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Valued image promotion[edit]
Congratulations! The image you created was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
A protest against the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968.
_-_The_Kitchen_Maid.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Dear Szilas, congratz with your first VI. I find it very interesting and sorry for being so suspicious. -- Slaunger 20:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I uploaded a noise reduced version of your nice image. However, Adobe colour space was in the process converted to RGB colour space. Please revert if you don't like it. Regards. Lycaon (talk) 18:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Ingelborchtoren.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Brooklyn Bridge - detail.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Island section from below.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Freedom of Panorama[edit]
Hello: I saw your deleted comment on my talk page. It's a difficult subject for many people. Can I help, or do you understand it now? Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:00, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the reaction.
I think I understand, but it is extremely difficult to accept that I can't upload a picture about a building in a city.
What about people in the street? I met a week ago a Dutch royalty in the Netherlands in the street in civil, she smiled, I made a couple of photos, her bodyguard did not protest. May I upload it some time later?--Szilas (talk) 08:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe it will help if you think about it this way -- you certainly know that you cannot make and sell copies of a recent book or a recent painting -- the whole point of copyright is to protect the creator from copying so that he or she can make money from his or her work. It gets a little harder to understand that you cannot make a photograph of a 3D sculpture -- after all, a flat photograph is not really a copy of a sculpture, but the same rule applies, except in FOP countries. Then, even harder to understand, is the fact that a photograph of a building is an infringement on the architect's copyright, but that is the law, except in FOP countries. The FOP rules are actually fairly complex, see COM:FOP
- As a general rule, in most countries, people in the street are not a problem. Public figures -- including royalty -- are generally even less of a problem than ordinary people. In some countries, you have to be careful if the person is doing something that might expose him to shame -- something stupid, or illegal, for example. For more on this, see Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
- And, I should add, thank you for your effort and your work at understanding. Remember too, that photographs of older buildings are OK -- the rule in most countries is 70 years after the death of the architect. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:42, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thank for your explanations; I'm getting more and more clever all the time :-))))--Szilas (talk) 06:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
|
File:Open_day_2007.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. |
84.61.186.139 19:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
I am writing to ask about the 16th century Antwerpen Passion of Christ altarpiece, of which you have put up a photo. Where is the altarpiece located?
A barnstar for you![edit]
|
The Photographer's Barnstar |
| Köszönet a kiváló képekért. Tamba52 (talk) 18:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC) |
TUSC token 35451007c711a9e4f16f8b574cb4402b[edit]
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
TUSC token b3d6f874f1639d79c29b82f5aa52874f[edit]
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
Congratulations, you are now a verified TUSC user! Weep tears of joy, or something.
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the 
→ Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 20:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
_-_The_Kitchen_Maid.jpg){kind=link}
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the → Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 14:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion[edit]
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Rodin - Head of Pierre de Wissant.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Eleassar (t/p) 11:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Hotel Aquapark Zusterna.JPG
- File:Swimming pool of Aquapark Zusterna.JPG Eleassar (t/p) 15:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
|
|
File:Schengen - text of memorial in Luxembourgish.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. |
Stefan4 (talk) 23:18, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Eleassar (t/p) 09:24, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
|
Hello, Szilas. You have new messages at Eleassar's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
|
vandalism[edit]
What are you doing? Removing 8 or 9 categories per photos at a time? I restored all of your deleted categories on the photos I've seen you remove. You gave no explanation of the removal of the categories. --Mjrmtg (talk) 10:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- Just because you think a category is meaningless Category:Libraries in the United States photographed in 2012, there is no reason for you to remove the category from the photos. You brought the category up for discussion but didn't discuss it with anyone. You cannot blank a category Category:Libraries photographed in 2012 just because you do not like it. Please stop this vandalism. --Mjrmtg (talk) 10:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- Please tell me why you removed each of these 8 categories with this edit https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AOdum_Library_3.jpg&diff=107109518&oldid=104913331 All of these categories are fine, they don't need to be checked. --Mjrmtg (talk) 11:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- Removing the template from this category is Vandalism! Stop! Category:Libraries in the United States photographed in 2012 --Mjrmtg (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- Please tell me why you removed each of these 8 categories with this edit https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AOdum_Library_3.jpg&diff=107109518&oldid=104913331 All of these categories are fine, they don't need to be checked. You have no explanation for why you removed each of these 8 categories? Just stop removing categories. Vandal. --Mjrmtg (talk)
- Removing the template from this category is Vandalism! Stop! Category:Libraries in the United States photographed in 2012 --Mjrmtg (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Rodin - Head of Pierre de Wissant.jpg[edit]
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Rodin - Head of Pierre de Wissant.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. |
--Eleassar (t/p) 12:08, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Dear Eleassar,
I find it very strange that you always find me with your deletion ambitions. You do not read, only throw around stamps. This photo was obviously marked as my own (photo by Szilas in the Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Gent). Besides it is one of mine Quality Images. There are so many other important problems on the Commons which need your energy.
By the way, what is your opinion on the tsunami of such categories: "Category:Libraries in the United States photographed in 2012" and the kind? The date of a photo should not be a reason for a category in case of a building. and there are so many such meaningless categories with dates! I think they are very much wrong. Is there any discussion on this subject? I would appreciate your opinion on this.--Szilas (talk) 12:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- I have not dealt with these categories, but in general I have no problem with them if there are plenty of files that need to be dispersed. If there are only two or three files in each such category, this is redundant. Otherwise, as the photo has been clearly marked as your own, you won't have a problem adding a copyright tag such as {{PD-self}} or {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}}. That's all that is needed, but a copyright tag must be cited at all image description pages. Currently there is no such template, so the copyright status of the photograph remains unknown, which prevents its further reusage. I can't choose the license instead of you, even though I see that you have created the image, because I'm not the copyright holder. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for having added the missing template. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
My problem is that during the years I've uploaded many hundreds of such images: photos of artworks from many museums around the world, mostly paintings, but a lot of photos from sculptures, too. Is it really necessary to double all the copyright tags in case of the sculptures? (I hope that in case of two-dimensional objects it is really not necessary.)--Szilas (talk) 15:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- In general, we do not use doubled licenses for photographs of works that are in the public domain; it's enough to state that the author died 70 or so years ago (or that the work was created in 19th century or before), to prove that the original work is free. The derived photograph's license, however, must be stated in all cases for images to be freely available for reusage and thus eligible for Commons. I'd suggest that you go through your uploads (use Special:MyUploads) and provide the license for the photographs where it is missing. As they're valuable, this will be highly appreciated and will prevent them from being unnecessarily deleted. See the above image for how it has been done. Photographs of public domain 2D works don't need a license of the photographer, but you have to know that coins and bas reliefs are not considered 2D works. --Eleassar (t/p) 19:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your informative message.--Szilas (talk) 04:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
sculptures by Imre Varga[edit]
Hi Szilas, thanks for your photos of sculptures by Imre Varga. However, as these sculptures are still copyrighted, which also includes any depictions of them, you need to put the country of location into the description. In case sculpture are located in Hungary, you should also add {{FoP-Hungary}} below the license template. --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Copyright request[edit]
Dear Szilas,
First of all, I just wanted to say thank you for your work in making pictures available on Wikimedia Commons.
I would like to use one of your photos in a publication I am working on at the moment, and since it will be produced by a charity organization my royalties are not large (and would quickly be swallowed up if I had to pay for images).
My publisher, however, has requested that I confirm with you that you are willing to give me permission to use the following:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Haystacks_%28Effects_of_Snow_and_Sun%29.JPG
Are you fine with this? If so, could you please email me at achalmers@adelaide.tabor.edu.au
Once again, thanks for your work and I look forward to hearing back from you.
All the best,
Dr Aaron Chalmers
Copyright tagging[edit]
- Hi Szilas, I noticed that you uploaded an image of Les cypres a Cagnes. Since you include the frame, which is a copyrightable 3D element, would it be possible for you to explicitly state the license under which you release the photograph (i.e. not just the painting's copyright)? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
|
|
File:Catholic Church in Reykjavík.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. |
Poco2 10:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- Same applies to File:Interior of the Catholic Church in Reykjavík-2.jpg Poco2 10:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Josve05a (talk) 17:05, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Can you please refer this Revert. --Trzęsacz (talk) 02:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
PD[edit]
Szia! Szeretném felhívni a figyelmed, hogy ilyen sablon {{pd-Art}} nem létezik. Ha megnézed az előnézetet, láthatod, hogy piros hibaüzenet jelenik meg. Üdv. Tambo (talk) 09:33, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Drawing of the Sword of St. Stephen in Prague.jpg[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Drawing of the Sword of St. Stephen in Prague.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. |
Jarekt (talk) 12:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Deleted content[edit]
File:Drawing of the Sword of St. Stephen in Prague.jpg
- use in any work, regardless of content
- creation of derivative works
- commercial use
- free distribution
See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons, and Commons:Image casebook for some specific examples. Some other Wikimedia projects have different licensing policies. For example, the English Wikipedia allows fair use of sounds and photographs. This is not the case on Wikimedia Commons; "fair use" materials are not acceptable here.
Please make sure that you only upload educational content you have created yourself, those which are out of copyright, or those for which you have the required permission for the work to be used in all the ways described above. Please note that derivative works of copyrighted material are also considered copyrighted. Again, please read through Commons:Licensing, which is quite crucial, to understanding how Wikimedia Commons works. Thanks for your contribution, and please do leave me a message if you have further questions.Yours sincerely, Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
van Gogh - my dream[edit]
Hi ! Thanks for all the pictures you took during the exposition, for some paintings it is the only available picture in Commons in colours, for instance Category:Girl in the Woods (F8a). I still have a lot of work to do (here and on wikidata) and after that, I can tell you how many times your picture is the best one so far :) Léna (talk) 16:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 18:57, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Capture Date[edit]
Hi Szilas, I have noticed that you removed the exif date (automatically added to the {{Information}} template) e.g. [1], [2] and some more (I did not check all). The capture date is valuable information and it is still in the exif data (although less readable). Could you set the date to a correct value other than the exif value? Or, if your concern is that you somebody could check your movements in time, could you at least set the month (e.g. using 2017-03)? regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:38, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Hall_of_Fame,_HGM,_2017-03-08.jpg&diff=237482878&oldid=237481120){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Arsenal,_Wien.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=237485017){kind=link}
I move this from my talk page to here to keep things together:
- Dear Herzi Pinki,
- I usually remove this because I use very often the artwork template, and in that case the date means the date of the production of the artwork. In general cases I did not see the meaning of this date value, because the exif data are visible anyway. In some cases I have put in this place the date or the production of the object on the photo, like here [3] I do not want to cover my coming and going, it would be useless, I know, on the contrary, I often put the date of the photo even into the title of the file to ensure the uniqueness of the title as against possible other photos of the same object.
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AFranz%C3%B6sischer_Kriegsballon%2C_HGM%2C_2017-03-08.jpg&type=revision&diff=237483665&oldid=237481032){kind=link}
- The explanatory text of the information template says: Date of creation, when the original source (such as photograph of 3-D scene, digital file, or original 2-D artwork) was created. By original source I did not understand the date of my own photo.
- If you tell me that you are sure that in the information template the date should be the repetition of the exif data, I have nothing against it, but I do not wish to go back on my nine years of work and thousands of photos to change this, I hope you understand.--Szilas (talk) 08:44, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Szilas, thanks for your answer. I have no experience with {{Artwork}} and its documentation is clear, but I'm sure about the date in the {{Information}} template. It is the capture date and it is valuable. Exif always may be doubted. (See the peak for e.g. Category:Photographs taken on 1980-01-01 and other 1sts of January compared to neighbouring days - camera default value.) But even the Upload Wizard extracts the exif date (as a changeable default) and puts it to the date parameter. For objects that might change the state (buildings, people, landscapes over seasons and time, …) the date helps to sort the images in decades from now (we are optimistic about the WP future). This is even true for your balloon example from above: it shows the state of the object, which might be removed, destroyed by fire, vandals, etc. If your exif date is correct, you have nothing to do than NOT remove it from the {{Information}} template. I understand, that it is not feasible to restore dates for your tons of images already stripped the date off. In case, it is still in the exif. regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thanks, I accept your advice and I'll change my practice. Best --Szilas (talk) 09:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- thanks --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:34, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Portrait of Infanta Empress Margarita Teresa of Austria[edit]
Hi Szilas, I saw that you add some photos of works of art from the Hungarian National Museum. Maybe did you take too this nice portrait of Margarita Teresa of Austria, Infanta of Spain and Holy Roman Empress? You can see the photo on the site of the restaurator [4]. Because it's not simple to find good photos of her non-Spanish portraits, could be useful to have this good portrait on Wikicommons. Thanks for your attention.--Kaho Mitsuki (Dis-moi) 18:17, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Change of Categories Kings in Sweden[edit]
Hi, thank you for your edits, can i please ask you to create the next time the categorie xxx in art, so the structure can be respected? regards--Carolus (talk) 08:52, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your mail, I'll do it so. --Szilas (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
|
|
File:Rottmann - Korinth 1847.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. |
Marsupium (talk) 13:40, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
|
|
File:Rottmann - Marathon 1847.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. |
Marsupium (talk) 13:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
|
|
File:Rottmann - Olympia 1839.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. |
Marsupium (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
[edit]
|
|
File:Ships at Berga navy base, Sweden-3.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. |
Berkan~svwiki (talk) 21:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
|
|
File:Auckland War Memorial Museum, Maori wooden carvings 2016-01-21.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. |
Sarah (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Regasterios (talk) 16:12, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Bust of József Farkas, founder of the 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. |
Regasterios (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Weltkulturen Museum, interior, 2017-10-14-2.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. |
Regasterios (talk) 18:13, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Missing descriptions[edit]
Several of your recent uploads have no descriptions at all, so perhaps you could review them and add something useful so other editors know what they are looking at. It looks like most were on 14 February. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 17:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Virág Judit Gallery - Paris-Budapest exhibition November 2017, detail.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. |
Regasterios (talk) 09:50, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Weltkulturen Museum, Frankfurt, 2017-10-14-2.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. |
Regasterios (talk) 10:34, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Regasterios (talk) 10:51, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Alice Endresz - Company at the table.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. |
Regasterios (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
|
|
File:Placodus drawing, Munich, 2017-09-11.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. |
Regasterios (talk) 14:25, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Draft map of the Moscow Kremlin in Hungarian.png[edit]
Copyright status: File:Draft map of the Moscow Kremlin in Hungarian.png
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Draft map of the Moscow Kremlin in Hungarian.png. 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. |
Jcb (talk) 10:05, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:University Library, Kosice, 2018-05-2.jpg[edit]
Copyright status: File:University Library, Kosice, 2018-05-2.jpg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:University Library, Kosice, 2018-05-2.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. |
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:13, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 |
File:Sockelflak - German AA cannon.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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.
|
Mhhossein talk 16:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Document of Andrew II of Hungary mentioning the settlement of Kokat from 1215 (copy).jpg[edit]
.jpg){kind=link}
|
| This file may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Document of Andrew II of Hungary mentioning the settlement of Kokat from 1215 (copy).jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
Jcb (talk) 23:00, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Document of Andrew II of Hungary mentioning the settlement of Kokat from 1215 (copy).jpg[edit]
Copyright status: File:Document of Andrew II of Hungary mentioning the settlement of Kokat from 1215 (copy).jpg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Document of Andrew II of Hungary mentioning the settlement of Kokat from 1215 (copy).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. |
Jcb (talk) 23:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Fő utca 2 in Párkány at the end of the 19th century on a postcard.jpg[edit]
Copyright status: File:Fő utca 2 in Párkány at the end of the 19th century on a postcard.jpg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Fő utca 2 in Párkány at the end of the 19th century on a postcard.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:Hlavna ulica-Fő utca 2 in Sturovo-Párkány-2.jpg
- File:Hlavna ulica-Fő utca 2 in Sturovo-Párkány.jpg
- File:Town Museum of Sturovo, detail.jpg
Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
|
Imre Kálmán Museum 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! |
Globetrotter19 (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Stolbovsky (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
|
|
File:Cook Strait map, txt.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. |
Jnestorius (talk) 09:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
|
|
File:Kádár Gyula2.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. |
Regasterios (talk) 17:34, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, Regasterios (talk) 19:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Elnézést, úgy akartam létrehozni a törlési megbeszélés lapját, hogy nem hivatkozok a te nevedre a címben. Úgy látszik, a program nem engedi (egy scripttel jelöltem törlésre csoportosan ezt a három képet). --Regasterios (talk) 19:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
File:Book cover from 1583 - Cover of a book in Transylvania- Collection of Transylvanian Saxon legislation - Brasov.jpg[edit]
Szia! Köszönöm, hogy feltöltötted ezt az értékes képet, viszont a GFDL+CC+PD licenccel nem értek egyet. Szerintem a közkincsen kívül a többi licencnek nincs semmi keresnivalója ezen a fájlon – maga a több mint négyszáz éves borító nyilvánvalóan közkincs, azon túl viszont szerintem semmilyen egyéni, eredeti jellege nincs a fájlnak, így nem jogosult további szerzői jogi védelemre, ami alapján nem közkincs licencet helyezhetnél rá. Arra kérlek, hogy – amennyiben nem tudod alátámasztani az érvényességét – távolítsd el a GFDL+CC licencet a fájl leírólapjáról. Előre is köszönöm! – Tacsipacsi (talk) 09:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Tacsipacsi: Persze, már töröltem is. Kicsit túlbiztosítottam. Inkább amiatt szoktak szólni, hogy nem elég a licenc. Elvileg nem vagyok híve a túlzott szerzői jogi védelemnek, magamra vonatkozóan meg egyáltalán nem, de amiatt is szóltak már. Egyébként kérdeném, milyen licencet tegyek fel, ha saját fotómat egyáltalán nem akarom védeni? Szilas (talk) 10:53, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Lehet, hogy kimondatlanul rám is történt az utalás, miszerint rád szóltak már licenckérdésben, ezért pontosítanék. Ha például lefényképezel valamelyik múzeumban egy amúgy már közkincs festményt (volt ilyen már emlékeim szerint, azért ezt hozom fel példaként), és úgy töltöd fel, hogy a képen látszik a képkeret is, akkor tényleg kétfajta licencet kell tenni a kép alá: egyet a festményhez, egyet pedig a képkerethez, mert utóbbi lefényképezése – háromdimenziós kiterjedésű tárgyról lévén szó – már eredeti, egyéni jellegű munkának számít. Ha semmilyen korlátozást nem szeretnél a képhez fényképészként hozzáadni, használd a {{PD-user}} sablont, a felhasználódi nevedet egy | karakter után beszúrva. Ezen a kétdimenziós borítót ábrázoló képen viszont semmi nem látszik magán a borítón kívül, nem szükséges más licenc hozzá. A Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag oldalon olvashatsz arról, milyen esetben kell engedély a fényképésztől egy kép feltöltéséhez. Ahol azt írják, hogy kell engedély, akkor értelemszerűen szükség van egy saját licenc kihelyezéséhez, amenyiben te voltál a fotós. Ezen az oldalon írják le azt is, hogy például ennek a borítónak a feltöltéséhez miért nincs szükség az Erdély története című könyv szerzőinek engedélyére sem. Ugyanazért, amiért neked sem kell külön licencet kihelyezni a könyvben megjelent szkenkép újbóli beszkennelése miatt. --Regasterios (talk) 11:41, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Regasterios: Köszi szépen szavaidat, de sajnos mások, külföldiek is felhívták már a figyelmet ilyen jellegű hibáimra, és valóban, a képkeret miatt kértek tőlem kétfajta licencet. Ezért estem most a másik irányú hibába, mert elejét akartam venni mindenféle kritikának. De most már értem a problémát, és köszönöm az ötletet a sablonra, ezt fogom alkalmazni.Szilas (talk) 14:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) @Szilas: Köszönöm!
- @Regasterios: Én úgy tudom, hogy a {{PD-user}} elavult a homályos szerzői jogi háttere miatt (ezzel a szerző közkinccsé nyilvánítja a művet, amire viszont pl. a magyar Szjt. sem ad lehetőséget). Helyette tudtommal a {{CC0}} ajánlott (én is ezt szoktam használni) – ez praktikusan ugyanaz, mint a PD-user, viszont van mögötte egy jogászok által megfogalmazott licenc, amit remélhetőleg magyar bíróságon sem lehet megtámadni. – Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Igen, nekem is derengett valami, hogy volt már olyan, hogy jelezték: túl egyszerű a jogaimról való lemondásra használt sablonom. Nem egyszerű az élet, különösen a nemzetközi magánjogban (ez itt a smiley helye, de azt se találom...).Szilas (talk) 14:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
@Tacsipacsi: a sablon leírólapján nem szerepel, hogy elavult lenne, de hiszek neked. --Regasterios (talk) 14:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Regasterios: A sablon leírás részében nagyjából nulla információ van, még azt sem írja le, hogy milyen licenc (illetve hogy a PD nem is licenc jogi értelemben), a w:Wikipédia:Kocsmafal (képek)#PD mark szakasz viszont erről szól. Tgr függője éppen egy hónapja töltötte be a tizedik születésnapját… – Tacsipacsi (talk) 23:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Szia! Ezt a képet miért tetted be annak idején a Category:Sándor Nagy (painter)-be. --Regasterios (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Ha jól emlékszem, ő rajzolta vagy festette a képet, amit aztán Róth Miksa üvegtáblára alkotott. Újra meg fogom keresni a forrásomat, de most nincs kéznél. Szilas (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Oké, köszönöm. Nem értettem, azért kérdeztem. Ha meglesz a forrás, odaírnád majd a leírólapra is ezt? --Regasterios (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Bocsánat, most látom, hogy már odaírtad. --Regasterios (talk) 09:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
File tagging File:Denar of Solomon.jpg[edit]
|
|
This media was probably deleted.
|
Thanks for uploading File:Denar of Solomon.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.
Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Denar of Solomon.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request. |
And also:
- File:Denar of Wenceslaus I of Hungary.jpg
- File:Ducat of Ferdinand V.jpg
- File:Golden florin of Sigismund with the image of St. Ladislaus.jpg
- File:Thaler of Gábor Bethlen, 1621.jpg
Yours sincerely, Regasterios (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Szia! Ne haragudj a jelölésért, de a pénzérmék háromdimenziósnak számítanak, emiatt a fotóstól is kell engedély a felhasználáshoz, hiába régiek maguk a pénzérmék. Több más hasonló képet is törlésre jelöltem egyébként, nem csak a tieidet természetesen. --Regasterios (talk) 16:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Rendben, megértem, üdv Szilas (talk) 18:55, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
|
|
File:Details in Paris in October 1991 10.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. |
Poudou99 (talk) 15:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Update request[edit]
Hello.
Can you remove Russia (including all its islands) from the widely used maps File:Council of Europe (orthographic projection).svg and File:European Charter of Local Self-Government.svg? Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe as a member on 16 March 2022.
.svg){kind=link}
Here is an official source from the Council of Europe: https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/the-russian-federation-is-excluded-from-the-council-of-europe
Can you add the border of South Sudan in File:Members of the Venice Commission.png (the map it is based on, File:BlankMap-World-NoAntarctica.png, has the border of South Sudan)?
Yours sincerely, 31.200.10.226 05:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't have the necessary expertises to do these changes. - Szilas (talk) 06:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- I understand. Thank you for the reply. 31.200.10.226 12:43, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
|
|
File:2008-10-26 NYC detail 30.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. |
A1Cafel (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Martin Sg. (talk) 19:35, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
|
|
File:Délivrance, statue, 1916.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. |
Rosenzweig τ 20:38, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Lukas Beck (talk) 17:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Kopergravure van Zierikzee 1648.jpg[edit]
Copyright status: File:Kopergravure van Zierikzee 1648.jpg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Kopergravure van Zierikzee 1648.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, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Ziekrikzee van den West-Haven-Dijk 1775-1800.jpg[edit]
Copyright status: File:Ziekrikzee van den West-Haven-Dijk 1775-1800.jpg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Ziekrikzee van den West-Haven-Dijk 1775-1800.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:
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
|
File:Dési Huber István - Expecting Woman.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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.
|
Pallerti (talk) 08:45, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
- Szia Szilas, bocsánat, elszámoltam magam 10 évvel, kérlek vedd semmisnek a fenti üzenetet. Elnézésedet kérem a kellemetlenségárt. --Pallerti (talk) 08:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
- Semmi baj. Örülök h szerkesztesz. 80.99.11.4 10:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
|
|
File:Mitrailleuse a 224 coups, cal 8.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. |
