User talk:Xnatedawgx

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


Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Xnatedawgx!

--SieBot (talk) 18:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Interstate 5[edit]

Wouldn't it make more sense to create a Category:Interstate 5 in Seattle, Washington than to add Category:Roads in Seattle, Washington to so many images in Category:Interstate 5 in Washington (state)? - Jmabel ! talk 04:47, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely long category names[edit]

Why create categories with names like "Achmun Creek Bridge, Spanning Achmun Creek at County Road 222, Ola, Yell County, AR HAER"? They're unhelpfully long, and there's no good reason to include HAER or HABS in the names: if someone uploads a non-HAER image of this bridge, it won't belong in the category, because the category name is specifically for HAER images. Why not simply "Achmun Creek Bridge", since it's far far shorter, and it's easier to use and interpret? Nyttend (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but we are not the Library of Congress: we can retain the original descriptions without creating categories with such long names. Do you honestly believe that Category:Charleroi-Monessen Bridge is a poorer name than Category:Charleroi-Monessen Bridge, Spanning Monongahela River at State Route 2018, North Charleroi, Washington County, PA HAER? Do you honestly believe that these categories should exclude non-HABS/HAER images of the same subjects? Our categories always use just the title needed to define the subject, and I will be requesting administrative assistance to fix your hundreds of category creations that fail to comply with this project-wide convention; it would help if you didn't create more work for us in the mean time. Nyttend (talk) 04:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop creating long category names as requested above. As Nyttend says, this is not the LoC and there is little reason to be so descriptive. Instead I recommend you use the file summary for this purpose. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 19:06, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so you disagree with the category redirects like this one. Like Nyttend, I'm not happy with your whole approach of long-winded category names and reverting the edits of two other users without explanations. The very least you could do is go to one of our talk pages and explain why you reverted. Please respond to the requests in this section, before engaging in any more reversions. For someone who has been editing for so many years, you seem to have been a very sparse user of talk pages, which is not necessarily a bad thing but where there is criticism you shouldn't ignore it. I'm going to wait for a response because dialogue is always better on wikis. Please do respond because the alternative is to restrict your editing to just your talk page, and I would prefer not to do that. Green Giant (talk) 10:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not to pile on, but I agree with Nyttend and Green Giant that these lengthy category names are not good. The (visible) category system is for helping users find pictures of what they're looking for. By and large, tracking which things came from which repository is the job of hidden categories. If you want to make the case for splitting up the big HABS and HAER categories based on state and survey, say, as hidden categories, I think that would be reasonable, but that information shouldn't be gunking up our user-facing categories.
It looks like you've been able to do your work here for the past several years without having to talk to other editors for any extended period. That's fine; this is a big place, with lots of uncontroversial things to do. But in a case like this, you really do have to stop what you're doing and engage in a sustained, back-and-forth discussion with other editors until consensus can be reached. Choess (talk) 21:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the useful post at my talk page! I was confused by your recent revert on Category:Achmun Creek Bridge, which seemed to be going back to excessive category names without discussion. I see that you have shortened the title somewhat, although I can't imagine there are any other Achmun Creek Bridges to distinguish it from.
I understand the case you're making for these union categories better now. You're right: categories like Year in State or the photographer are ones we wouldn't generally make hidden, and it is convenient to be able to apply them to a single category rather than 20 photographs. Here's the problem that I see with what this does to our category tree. We have many structures that are *at present* only documented by HABS/HAER photos, but which could be documented elsewhere. (With all the NARA images flowing in, for instance, it's perfectly plausible that we could get a batch of pictures of destroyed structures as well as surviving ones.) If we pre-emptively disambiguate the HAER photos (that is, creating a category Unusual Structure and subcategory Unusual Structure (HAER images)), we wind up with a lot of parent categories that are empty except for one subcategory, which slows down navigation. On the other hand, if we only create the Unusual Structure (HAER images) category, then any new photos of the Unusual Structure will have no place to go and may get mis-categorized.
So here's an idea: what if we made the parent category in each of these cases (Unusual Structure) non-diffusible with respect to HABS/HAER images? It could have subcategories (Unusual Structure (HAER images) and/or Unusual Structure (HAER drawings)), but the contents of each of those subcategories would also be in Unusual Structure. That way, people drilling down to Unusual Structure would immediately see a bunch of usable images, while people looking in the year categories would see a nice list of subcategories indicating which structures were photographed by the project in that year. Each photo would have two categories instead of one, plus categories specific to that particular image, but you'd still have most of the benefit of the union categories and the category hierarchy would be easy to browse for pictures. Curious to hear what people think of this. Choess (talk) 04:27, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Green Giant and Nyttend: Any thoughts? Choess (talk) 17:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "non-diffusable"? Commons:Categories doesn't use the term, except for references to things like {{CatDiffuse}} that are used when a category contains images that need to be moved to the subcategories. It sounds like you're suggesting putting images both in the parent and the child category, which is prohibited by the clear wording of the COM:OVERCAT policy, "Don't place an item into a category and its parent", and very different from the Angela Merkel exception. But anyway, unless a subject has an exceptionally large number of images from a specific source or of a certain type (e.g. Category:Diagrams of Old Economy Village), so many that they're impeding navigation, making a separate category for them is unhelpful and impedes navigation. And unless we're at that point, categories related to the images themselves must not have image-related categories like "Black and white photos", "Photos by insertphotographernamehere", "HABS photos", "June 1984", etc. — go back to COM:CAT and read the section that talks about glass spheres. These categories are only for placement on images. Nyttend (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some of this is over my head. I would just like a solution to be made on how to categorize HABS/HAER images of individual structures. It appears that a Wikimedia Commons administrator needs to resolve this, but I don't know how to go about this. Xnatedawgx (talk) 00:12, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting administrator actions[edit]

Greetings: I see you have reverted administrator actions several times recently. This is highly unrecommended. Please consider this your most friendly greeting and polite caution/warning that reverting administrator actions is not something to be done without discussion and consensus. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:41, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Invisible Children, movie flyer.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!

Brianhe (talk) 18:08, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Campgrounds in the United States 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!


Note that this is a nomination to merge Category:Campgrounds in the United States into Category:Campsites in the United States.Davidwr (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fenwick Tower, rent banner.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!

Thekohser (talk) 21:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:AerialPhotoMontALSunset2.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!

Túrelio (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Hi. I rolled back one of your edits due to a mistake. "Sweet potato pies" are not all "Southern U.S. Cuisine". Just because some Southerner put them into a recipe book doesn't make them Southern. I baked that pie myself and I live in the Western United States. It is from a family recipe from New Jersey (state). Please do not make big assumptions and massive changes. There's nothing stopping you from leaving messages on the uploader's talk pages asking for information. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You should be aware that a discussion about this has been raised at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Overcategorization. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your talk page was a bit long, so I've archived everything from 2014 and earlier to User talk:Xnatedawgx/Archive1. Hope this is ok with you. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was just mirroring what I saw on WikimediaXnatedawgx (talk) 17:57, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 08:53, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The New Category of Shreveport skylines[edit]

Hey, I'm Replaced a New Category of the Shreveport, LA skylines from Shreveport, Louisiana skylines to Shreveport skylines, Old Category will be deleted and I'm have been Created a New Category calls Shreveport skylines today, thanks you

I'm going to move File:Steam_Locomotive_Dame_Ann.jpeg back to Category:Narrow_gauge_railways_in_the_United_States. Category:Miniature_railways_in_the_United_States is for scale replicas. Dame Ann is a full-sized tank engine, not a scaled down version of a larger model. Thanks. - Tim D. Williamson yak-yak 01:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

YMCA in Everett[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Everett_-_old_YMCA_building.jpg&curid=5900787&diff=191604629&oldid=139473684: is this really a former YMCA? I thought this was still part of the Y there. If it's no longer part of the Y, any idea what it is now? - Jmabel ! talk 04:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from User talk:Jmabel

Sorry, I saw 'old' and assumed it wasn't one anymore(was populating a new category). Xnatedawgx (talk) 23:55, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


END moved from User talk:Jmabel

Cat move[edit]

Hi Xnatedawgx, Just a heads up I've moved Category:Union Station Train Hall Pedestrian Bridge‎ but I've also moved Category:Views from Union Station Pedestrian Bridge‎ as I assumed you wanted that moved aswell, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 19:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for your improvements and hard work on images from the DoD. :-) (talk) 10:54, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Light rail stops versus tram stops[edit]

Hey, I noticed you just created Category:Light rail stations in the United States and its architecture. 'Light rail' tends to be pretty poorly defined; there isn't a strict divide between streetcars and full-on light rail but rather a continuous spectrum (the MBTA Green Line, for example, goes from mixed-traffic segments to tunnels with full flyovers). It's also not as commonly used outside the US. Category:Tram stops in the United States has been around for a while already, and its naming scheme is consistent with categories used for other countries, and with 'tram' being the generic word used on all Commons categories and enwiki articles. I think it would be best to merge the light rail category structure into the existing tram category structure, lest we have a duplicate parallel structure. Thoughts? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 12:05, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it may be a duplicate of the other category, though there could be arguments for distinguishing between tram(streetcar) and light rail, and station and stop. There's a category for light rail so I figured there should be a subcategory for stations, not knowing or having forgotten there was a tram stop category. With this said, I'm not sure where to go from here. Xnatedawgx (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this is a tricky one, since as you point out the light rail category has been around since 2008. My gut says that there's no good way to have the two category structures without them frequently duplicating each other, since there's no clear divide but a continuous spectrum. A wider discussion might be appropriate. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:30, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
File:-VOTEROX banner, Coors Field 2016.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!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Objection to state highway category moves[edit]

In short, in many states, to call them "state routes" is flat out wrong. There is nothing here that needs to be fixed, nor should a change of this magnitude be done without a wider consultation and discussion. Imzadi 1979  23:19, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • +1 - Why on earth did you not get consensus for these moves ? .. I've just spent a whole hour moving tons of images and categories for nothing, Well I'm afraid if you both can't reach a consensus (or consensus with a wider audience) then I'm afraid you're going to have to move them all back, If it were a few cats fine but there's over 20 odd and they'd all taken an hour to move ... I certainly am not spending another hour (and sitting up till 1am) moving everything back so as I said Nate you both either need to get consensus or I'm afraid you're going to ave to move these back, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 23:56, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed a lack of uniformity in category naming for the M1-5 State Route Signs. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices refers to these diagrams as State Route signs. For photos of route signs, categories can be named for what the individual states refer to these route signs. There could be a debate on whether they should be called shields instead of signs. Interstate and U.S. route signs look like a shield, but state route signs are rectangular. This began when I noticed that Colorado's category was poorly titled "Colorado road signs". From there I noticed a lack of uniformity among the diagrams for the State Route signs. So looking back, I should have gotten consensus before making the changes.Xnatedawgx (talk) 03:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Ramaksoud2000 (Talk to me) 01:38, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:1800 Larimer St, NE side.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, JuTa 22:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Sports in Seattle, Washington 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!


JesseW (talk) 19:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:USTC site map inside bus concourse.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Train2104 (talk) 21:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:FasTracks map at December 2014 Open House.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.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Train2104 (talk) 21:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:The-clare.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!

SounderBruce 02:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Renaissance Hotel and Conference Center, abandoned.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!

65.114.195.186 08:39, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Poolside, W Hotel Dallas.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!

Senator2029 ➔ “Talk” 02:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Denver County Fair billboard, Mississippi Avenue Next Signal sign.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!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:24, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Downtown Jackson Michigan skyline.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!

JWilz12345 (talk) 00:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Commuter train information sign, RTD open house.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!

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 08:34, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 08:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Polo Grounds after 1911.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!

B (talk) 20:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Rest areas in the United States 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!


Trougnouf (talk) 22:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

Dear Xnatedawgx, I was considering using your I-25 footbridge

as a pagebanner over at Wikivoyage. Would it be alright that I crop a few edges to fit their 3:1 ratio policy, regarding that I'll attribute you when I do so? Thank you, Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 15:00, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 01:02, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 15:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Community Insights Survey[edit]

RMaung (WMF) 19:58, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

Tunnels by length 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!


Josh (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NV road signs[edit]

Please keep a few things in mind. 1 "Shields" generally refer to independent markers, not ones included as part of larger signs. 2 Make sure to remember other signs in photos - those photos need to stay in the larger Road signs in Nevada cat. ThanksFamartin (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Social disharmony, Lansing.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.)


  • This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: COM:SS
Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 02:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stop the Traffik, Faces of Freedom painting, HeavenFest 2016.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!

Taivo (talk) 08:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CfD: College athletics programs[edit]

Hi, I have started a discussion to rename a large collection of categories, one or more of which you may have created or edited. Please see the discussion thread at Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/04/College athletics programs for details. Thanks, IagoQnsi (talk) 04:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Dorrell-tibbs-evergy-unsplash.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Dorrell-tibbs-evergy-unsplash.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, Ahmadtalk 20:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anchorage, Alaska photo by Mel Anderson.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!

RadioKAOS (talk) 14:47, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warning[edit]

Hi Xnatedawgx. I noticed that you've made a malformed deletion request. When you want to delete a file with the {{Delete}} template, you must follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion. Alternatively, you can click the "Nominate for deletion" link in the left sidebar, under the "tools" section, which does all of the work for you. Please do one of these, otherwise you create a lot of work for other people. If you don't see the "Nominate for deletion" link in the left sidebar, you can use the JavaScript method of enabling AjaxQuickDelete on Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets once and then refresh once.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 00:16, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You did it again in these three edits[1][2].   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:09, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cleopatra's Wedge.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!

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:35, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:CheyenneAveLameDeer.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!

2603:8081:1602:181B:90BB:F103:5971:C2EE 06:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion warning

TCF Bank Stadium 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!


Lectrician2 (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to copyright
File:New York Life Building 2.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.


Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Contributers2020Talk to me here 06:42, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:New York Life Building 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.

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!

clpo13(talk) 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elvis Presley statue at the B.B. King Elvis Presley Welcome Center.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!

Stefan2 (talk) 19:08, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category question[edit]

Not a type of categories I work on, but on [3] this edit, why would placing the building in Category:150-199-meter-tall buildings in the United States involve removing it from Category:192-meter-tall buildings? Did you have some reason to doubt that more precise height, or what? - Jmabel ! talk 05:19, 14 November 2021 (UTC) Oh thanks for the catch! It looks like I hit the wrong line on the Cat-a-lot for several buildings in that category, so I corrected it by putting them in the U.S. category as I had intended. Xnatedawgx (talk) 05:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rick Husband statue at Amarillo Airport.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!

Sennecaster (talk) 16:35, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright status[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikimedia Commons. While everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the project, one or more of your file uploads had missing or false information regarding its source and copyright status. Please note that Wikimedia Commons takes copyright rules and infringement very seriously. Files may only be uploaded and included if their copyright status meets the conditions stated in our licensing policy, and if their provenance is clearly documented. Files that fail to meet those conditions may be deleted, and users who fail to meet them may be blocked. Please follow our first steps, if you haven't already. If you have questions, feel free to ask at the Village Pump copyright question page or on my talk page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:HerronSoA.jpg[edit]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:HerronSoA.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:HerronSoA.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Missvain (talk) 16:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Buildings in Vancouver, Washington[edit]

Huge thanks for categorizing images of buildings in Vancouver, Washington! Big help. -Another Believer (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bremer Tower, cropped.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!

2600:100C:A213:9783:D83E:7B2A:2875:774A 04:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:The 400 Building, St. Paul, cropped.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!

2600:100C:A213:9783:D83E:7B2A:2875:774A 04:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Minneapolis Hilton & Towers cropped.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!

192.231.40.122 15:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:El Paso County Courthouse.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:El Paso County Courthouse.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:1873 first hospital, Saint Joseph Hospital, Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth, Hospitals, Religious--history--Colorado.jpg

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:1873 first hospital, Saint Joseph Hospital, Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth, Hospitals, Religious--history--Colorado.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) 04:07, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am taking these photos from the Saint Joseph Hospital website where each photo states: Public domain - non-commercial use only (PD-NC).Xnatedawgx (talk) 20:33, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
File:Boston Market cup.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!

Dronebogus (talk) 04:01, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

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

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mt. Massive broad view.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!

Gaep13 (talk) 14:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


File:Wildcat Center sign 2023-05-15.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion. (Reason: CSD G7 (Author or uploader request deletion))

Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Johnj1995.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 19:55, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Acqua Grylli.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) 08:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:WinSalSkyline12.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!

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:22, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eads bridge (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.

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!

Abzeronow (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fairbanks,Alaska First Settlers.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!

Abzeronow (talk) 17:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"red" categories[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Gas_Works_Park&diff=prev&oldid=793356942: may I presume you plan to create the categories you added here? - Jmabel ! talk 06:52, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

yes ```` Xnatedawgx (talk) 23:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly[edit]

It looks like you've added a lot of images subcategories to categories like Category:Structures in Whatcom County, Washington, Category:Structures in King County, Washington, and doubtless a lot of other categories like these, and not created the categories. - Jmabel ! talk 21:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adventureland in East Farmingdale, New York[edit]

Are you making any plans to expand this new category? --DanTD (talk) 23:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, all I did was move a pic that belonged there.Xnatedawgx (talk) 23:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
File:Albuquerque Plaza entrance, statues.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!

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:59, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you are up to with putting this in Category:Dams on the mainstem Columbia River in Washington (state). It's in the Columbia Gorge (and already categorized as such) on the Oregon-Washington border (and, indeed, the dam straddles the border). Not saying you are wrong, but saying that if you are right then I don't understand the exact intent of Category:Dams on the mainstem Columbia River in Washington (state). - Jmabel ! talk 01:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The category for dams in the Columbia Gorge doesn't seem to make much sense since there's only 2 on the river in that location. Since the river is located in 3 states/providences I decided to create a category for the 11 listed dams in Washington.Xnatedawgx (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But surely then we ought to have a category distinct from that (possibly a child of that) for the many (including Bonneville) on the Oregon-Washington border. - Jmabel ! talk 21:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Street naming[edit]

Hi, please note from similar categories (Streets in Philadelphia, Streets in Manhattan), that typically, the format is "Street Name (town/city)", not "Street Name, Town/City". I noticed that your latest work "Streets in Allentown" does not go by the accepted format. Famartin (talk) 01:33, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's because there are other places with that name besides the one in Pennsylvania, so I don't understand why there wouldn't be a designation.
Xnatedawgx (talk) 02:10, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) It's not all that consistent how we do this. Category:Streets in Seattle, Category:Streets in Vancouver, Category:Roads in Winnipeg, Category:Roads in Perth, Western Australia all use the comma form, as do many others. - Jmabel ! talk 02:48, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Explain this then: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Streets_in_the_United_States_by_city There are two other Pennsylvanian cities in that category that include the state. It's important to note that large, major cities that you were mentioning are the exemption.
Xnatedawgx (talk) 02:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstood me. I was replying to Famartin and he, in turn, wasn't referring to the name of Category:Streets in Allentown, Pennsylvania itself, but how the categories for individual streets are named. - Jmabel ! talk 03:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did misunderstand so I looked at other cities and I understand now. Someone who had done some prior work in the Allentown categories had, in my opinion, overcategorized a lot and used "Allentown, Pennsylvania" at the end of categories where it was unnecessary or where it should have been in parentheses. All that to say, I did make the mistake first mentioned; sorry about that.
Xnatedawgx (talk) Xnatedawgx (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terminal Tower categories[edit]

Hi there. I noticed that you've been moving categories to titles that lack the word "the." The building is typically referred to as the Terminal Tower, so I think it would be preferable to include the definite article in the category names. Titles like Category:Views from the Terminal Tower should be preferred, similar to categories like Category:Views from the Chrysler Building and many others. Thanks! - Eureka Lott 18:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was changing these because the Wikipedia article doesn't use 'the' in the title, the beginning of the page or in the 'box', so I presumed it was correct, so I'm not sure what is correct.Xnatedawgx (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then may I suggest consulting reliable sources, like [4], [5], [6], [7], or [8]? I think you'll find them to be pretty consistent. - Eureka Lott 18:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm simply mirroring what I saw on the corresponding Wikipedia article, so if that needs to be changed, then it should be changed. Might I suggest you do so on the Wikipedia article, and leave your reference links there since that is the parent medium to Wikimedia? If the Wikipedia pages are wrong, we can't expect the Wikimedia pages to be correct. Thanks for the information. Xnatedawgx (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EurekaLott: how would this be different from Category:Eiffel Tower or Category:Space Needle? - Jmabel ! talk 20:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel, since you are an administrator, do you suggest one over the other, or does it matter? Xnatedawgx (talk) 22:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Eiffel Tower categories are a good model, IMO. The root category is Category:Eiffel Tower, but its subcategories, like Category:Elements of the Eiffel Tower‎, Category:Remote views of the Eiffel Tower,‎ Category:Views from the Eiffel Tower‎, etc. generally use the definite article. - Eureka Lott 04:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That (what Eureka Lott describes) is how I would do it as well. - Jmabel ! talk 20:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, thanks. Xnatedawgx (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category discussion warning

Expressways 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!


Sbb1413 (he) (talkcontribs) 16:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Old main.gif[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Old main.gif, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Old main.gif]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, 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. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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!

TheImaCow (talk) 20:06, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]