User talk:Christian Ferrer/Archive24

Active discussions


March - April 2017

Hi Christian, I have added a note on my talk page and on the deletion request page. Hope this resolves your concerns but if not, let me know what I can do to resolve. Ancientcoincollector (talk) 01:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Sète Harbour cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 10:15, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Phalacrocorax carbo, Hérault River cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 10:15, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Closing a discussion

I don't know if such requests are considered normal in Commons, but would you mind closing this discussion, please? I think some important points are raised there and it's left without any further improvements. Thanks. --Mhhossein talk 14:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Mhhossein: Your request is reasonably and normal though I don't understand exactly what you ask for. If you just want the discussion be closed and archived then me, or even you (as you started the proposal), can simply add this : {{section resolved|1=~~~~}} at the end of the discussion, and it will be archivied. However if you ask me to draw conclusions about what needs to be changed or added in the guideline, sorry but this is beyond my competence because I'm not abble to see a consensus in a way or in another. I don't say the guideline is perfect, or even good, but I don't know how to improve it. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. Something should be done, however. As you see, there are opposing views presented in the discussion. Thanks anyway. --Mhhossein talk 18:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Mhhossein: Just my point of view, a photo made by a professional is not necessarily made in a proffessional framework, even if there is a reasonable chance for that, e.g. a taxi driver is a professional when he do this job, not as soon he drive a car. And almost all professional photographers practice photography also in a private way, so when the photo is in a private space, hard to say if it is a "professional " or a "private" shoot, because it is only an assumption of the exact circumstances except for some obvious cases as explained by Jim. Furthermore a person who pay a professional photographer and a professional photographer who pay a model are two things quite different, especially regarding the "privacy rights", I mean if you go in a photograph shop to pay for a portrait, you don't lose you expectation of privacy simply by the fact the photographer is a professional nor the place where is taken the photo become magically a public place. Therefore professional photos taken by professional photographer have to be considered carrefully when it show a private space. Secondly on a personal point of view, except for that which are well done artistically and technically, almost all those nude pictures are for me out of scope, or at least not more in scope than all the "unused personal images" that are uploaded every day. And I don't see why a photo of an unknow person become magically in scope simply because this person is desnuded, but that just my personal point of view, and for those who say it's art, then it's no more in scope than a personal drawing or a personal artwork. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
You were interestingly looking at the issue from a new angle and I think, that would be a great improvement if you could bring your point to the discussion board. I learnt new things reading the comment, thanks. --Mhhossein talk 11:29, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  • No sorry, I'm happy if we agree but I currently don't want to participe in a wider discussion. Furthermore there is nothing very new in what I said above, it was just my point of view and I've not the courage nor the time to try to make my point of view heard. Just want to add that in this kind of discussions a lot of people cite as exemple laws and case law, but they forgot that, in justice, never a law is applied nor a case law taken as an example, before to listen to all possible points of view (photographer, model, employer), to see the evidences (verbal contract, written contract, mail, letter...), the relations between the parties, ect, ect.... And to draw a conclusion by looking at a woman's nipples is an insult at what is (should be) legal justice, an insut to the legal justice workers, may be totally unfair on a legal point of view as well on a moral point of view for one or even for both parties, this is also the exact opposite of our precautionary principle that we are supposed to apply here on Wikimedia Commons. And to top it all I think the files from where comes the discussion are likely out of scope. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks so much. I understand what you said regarding participating in a wider discussion. --Mhhossein talk 12:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Pont-canal de l'Orb cf07.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pont-canal de l'Orb cf07.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 13:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Phalacrocorax carbo, Hérault River cf01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Phalacrocorax carbo, Hérault River cf01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Phalacrocorax carbo, Hérault River cf03.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.

Comments
Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 14:13, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mazet in vineyards, Mèze cf01.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.

Comments
What a fine photo! Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 14:12, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Delete these files

Hello Christian Ferrer, can you deletes these files - File:Placeholder male superhero c.png dan File:Placeholder female superhero c.png? Both files were copyrighted because it has a copyright symbol?

  • Hello, no these files may be indeed own work. I think these images are intended to replace the copyrighted images of superheros in the project that don't allows fair use, this is why there is a copyright symbol in order to make understand the "true image" is not there because it is copyrighted. Though there is a possibility that these files are derivative works of existing images, we can't do nothing without a link to the copyrighted source images, if they exist. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:51, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Bot and Flickr

Hi, I noticed File:Nightcraler Fantastic Fest.jpg which have been reviewed by a bot and "confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0.", yet the photographer have watermarked it with a ©. So,... what is done in those cases? TherasTaneel (talk) 02:10, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, the watermark "©..." is not really an issue, it is common that some photographer put this kind of watermark even for their free licensed work, though this is of course better without watermak. The issue is this is a derivative work of a film poster and the copyright holder of the poster have also rights on the commercial exploitation of this visual. I deleted the image, thanks you. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Deleteing my files

Yeah I have an issue. Why did you delete three of my files for; what seems to be the problem? I would like to inform that my files are totally and are all owned by me.--SaiyansOnSegways (talk) 02:39, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

  • I deleted its because there are older publications on the web e.g. for the first image : [1]. In case of a re-pulication, we requiert that the first publication to be explicitely free licensed or that the copyright holder send a permission to OTRS. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:44, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Reinstatement of deleted files

You recently deleted a series of images in response to my nomination Commons:Deletion requests/Files of User:Paulharding150. The uploader, User:Paulharding150, has reinstated two of the files that you have deleted, but please reconsider before re-deleting them.

  • File:Altaf Hussain.jpg I think this is a duplicate of a deleted file and I have nominated it for deletion again. However, the uploader has now added a link to a copyright page that may be acceptable: [2]. Is this copyright statement acceptable on Commons, and if so how should it be declared?
  • File:Welsh-and-British.jpg, this appears to be a duplicate of File:Welsh-and-british.jpg which you deleted. However, this was not one of the files that I nominated in Commons:Deletion requests/Files of User:Paulharding150 and you may have deleted it inadvertently. It is an image of two flags. The image may well be a derivative work from someone else's unspecified artwork. Is there a copyright exemption for national flags? Verbcatcher (talk) 12:16, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Verbcatcher: Thanks you for the notification, no this is not ok for both files. For the image of the politican, their website state "reproduced accurately", that mean "no derivative" and this is not allowed here. The flag was tagged "own work", but this is not, and it include a drawing, relevant source and PD tag must be provided. For both cases the images must not be reuploaded without a comunity decision/consensus. I deleted both files. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Christian Ferrer Hi, you've just removed two files I've uploaded this morning. One of apolitican which was correctly credited and referenced. Please reinstate it or explain why you removed it and what was wrong with it. Paulharding150 (talk)

The other - the two flags I'm less bothered by, but I made it.

  • @Paulharding150: The flag was indeed in the DR, I resored it because by looking in the relevant category and it's subcategories, there are a lot of similar flag, the design is likely in PD, but next time don't recreate deleted content. For the other image, the copyright statement of your source says "(...) material being reproduced accurately...", in this sentence , me, I understand that we can not make derivative works and modify the photo. This kind of restriction is not allowed here. I disagree to restore the file. Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:40, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

@Christian Ferrer:Could you explain that in clear English please - I can barley understand what you're saying. Could you also explain to me why many other Assembly Member pages have photos on them when the same copyright rules apply? Paulharding150 (talk) 09:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

  • I'm afraid that my english is at its maximum, but I can try a last time to explain it. Your source says "(...) being reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context.", this mean I can't take the photo of the politician, to add a white beard with photoshop, and then to make a photomontage of him with various farm animals. In summary, they don't allow to make derivative works of their material. Such restrictions is not compatible with the terms of the kind of licenses allowed here. Regarding other photos of politicians I'm not aware of these, but same rules apply for all content in Wikimedia Commons, it have to be free licensed by it's copyright holder, otherwise this content have to be deleted or nominated for deletion. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:57, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Former windmill, Salasc 01.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.

Comments
Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:54, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Phalacrocorax carbo, Hérault River cf05.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Mazet in vineyards, Mèze cf02.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.

Comments
Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:54, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Princess Hiyam (ship, 1975), Sète cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Peulle 19:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Phalacrocorax carbo, Hérault River cf04.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Basotxerri 11:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Vallée du Vernazobre

Merci Christian pour les photos auprès de vous empruntées dans le respect et la reconnaissance pour la générosité de ce partage, votre nom en tant qu'auteur apparaissant clairement.

Si j'ai été maladroit, si vous avez une remarque à faire, n'hésitez pas à me le faire savoir. Avec mes sentiments les plus cordiaux JFDedieu https://dedieujeanfrancois.blogspot.com/ et facebook aussi.

  • Merci beaucoup de m'avoir notifié l'utilisation d'une de mes images, et ravi qu'elle vous soit utile. Vous n'avez pas été maladroit, l'utilisation de l'image est très bien. Merci encore, Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:00, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Mazet in vineyards, Mèze cf02.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mazet in vineyards, Mèze cf02.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Blue Moon (ship, 1975), Sète cf01.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.

Comments
  Comment Some jpeg artifacts, I guess saving in jpeg quality 93 would be OK. --C messier 12:37, 15 March 2017 (UTC)  Done thanks you, this was wrong seeting in photoshop, better quality now --Christian Ferrer 19:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)  Support --C messier 12:53, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Église Saint-Louis au dessus des toits.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.

Comments
Good quality. --W.carter 23:37, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Église Saint-Louis au dessus des toits cf02.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 19:53, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Trawlers in Sète cf01.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.

Comments
  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 19:12, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Chalutier au Quai de la Consigne, Sète cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Ermell 13:10, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! GNV ATLAS (ship, 1990), Sète cf03.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Ermell 13:09, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Je ne sais pas quoi mettre comme titre de section

Coucou Christian,

Nous nous sommes déjà croisés par le passé, je ne sais plus quand, mais suffisamment pour savoir que j'ai de l'estime pour votre contribution et donc par extension, pour vous... J'en ai autant sinon plus pour Thibault (avec des numéros derrière) qui est pour moi l'incarnation de l'administrateur pragmatique, fin, intelligent et pacifique. D'ailleurs pas seulement ici, mais sur wpfr et sur OTRS où j'ai eu affaire à lui il y a quelques semaines. Enfin je ne cache pas être très proche de Classiccardinal. C'est un ami, je l'aime, je l'adore. Il exprime souvent ses idées de manière disons, imagée, fleurie voire outrancière... Ce n'est pas bien. Surtout pas ici, ou la stricte communication écrite ne permet pas de savoir à qui on a à faire. Je comprends que vous soyez heurté par une terminologie comme "grouillot" à votre adresse (ou à celle de Thibault, je n'ai pas trop suivi). Je peux vous assurer, tout en ne cautionnant pas l'outrance, qu'il n'y avait pas rien de personnel. Il y a des gens qui ne savent pas gérer ce qu'il considère être de l'injustice autrement que par la révolte, et donc par conséquent par l'outrance in fine par la violence verbale. Je le sais car j'étais comme cela...avant :)... Un blocage n'y changera rien . Il ne participera en tout cas pas à un changement de modalité communicationnelle. Dites-lui juste que vous vous êtes senti blessé (c'est le cas non ?) et là ça servira à quelque chose.

Je suggère donc un déblocage. Classic n'est pas dangereux pour Commons. Au contraire il apporte énormément à ce projet. Sa communication n'est pas toujours adéquate ? Certes mais elle s'est beaucoup améliorée depuis quelques mois.

Je vous comprends et vous demande de tenter, si possible, de comprendre en retour mon propos.

Bien à vous, --Benoît Prieur (d) 21:23, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Bonjour, pas besoin de déblocage, il n'avait été bloqué que 3 jours et c'est terminé depuis un moment déjà, et dans la mesure ou c'était son deuxième blocage pour la meme raison (incivilité), il s'en ait plutot bien tiré. En ce qui concerne "grouillot" je l'ai simplement averti et j'ai trés bien expliqué la raison de mon avertissement, si cela vous intéresse je vous retrouverais les liens pertinents. Il a été bloqué pour la suite de ses paroles à mon égard, paroles inacceptables de mon point de vue, et constatant que je ne pouvais arreter son incivilité je l'ai alors bloqué, ce qui est exactement la raison d'etre d'un blocage. Je n'ai rien d'autre à dire à ce sujet, il n'est actuellement pas bloqué. Cordialement, Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Je croyais qu'un blocage était destiné à protéger le wikiprojet. Pas forcément à préserver sa petite susceptibilité. C'est sans doute cela que l'on appelle l'interprétation créative des règles.
Cordialement également, --Benoît Prieur (d) 21:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Request

Hey Christian can you please review this page? I think its ready. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Manuel_Calderon Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petemayor (talk • contribs) 23:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Petemayor: Hello, although English Wikipedia is a sister project, it is not the same thing as Wikimedia Commons. I am not competent to review an article or a draft. You will have to ask to an administrator or to an experimented user there, on Wikipedia; Sorry. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:36, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

RANDOM DELETE !

Please stop deleting photos without being sure My file : File:بطولة العالم لكرة السلة للشباب تحت 19 سنة 2017.png is the same english file : File:2017_FIBA_Under-19_World_Championship_logo.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by أبو تائب (talk • contribs) 00:54, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Why can't an arabic person can speak my language also verify this : File:Risala Logo.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by أبو تائب (talk • contribs) 00:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Logos

Hi again, erm... I suppose the Juventus Football Club 2012-2013 - 30 Sul Campo.jpg and Juventus Logo with 2 Star.jpg in the Category:Juventus FC symbols is copyrighted if Juventus Turin.svg is? TherasTaneel (talk) 22:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Please revoke the deletion requests

Hello. I was notified about deletion requests of the files I uploaded. Because it's an artworks of the artist about whom I created a wikipedia article, here it is: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%A2%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD I have the artist right here and he's ready to send the permition to use this images in the article. Where should he send it? And in what form?

Thank you --Ira Ivanova (talk) 18:24, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Ira Ivanova: Hello, no I can't revoke the deletion request, without the permission the images stay copyright violations. However the artist can send the permission to OTRS where you can read the instructions on how to do so. Note that OTRS is administered by volunteers, and they may have work late and this may take some time. Note also that if your files are deleted, these files will be automatically restored as soon as a valid permission is received, so don't worry. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ira Ivanova: Don't put the mail on my talk page, first it is private, second the OTRS team will be in charge of that, you can put the license and the "OTRs pending" in the file page if you want. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:53, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Podarcis muralis, Rosis cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Ermell 22:31, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! GNV ATLAS (ship, 1990), Sète cf01.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.

Comments
  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 17:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/Photoelasticity - TDK Head Cleaner

This FPC seems to be stuck. Do sets need to be done by hand? I don't know what to do. I guess it goes in Commons:Featured pictures/Objects. -- Colin (talk) 20:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

  • @Colin: Indeed I guess it lacked the category, I fixed it, lets wait if the BOT do its jod now, if no we will do it manually. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:23, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
It processed it but did a really bad job. It added the featured template to the candidate page rather than the images. And none of the templates were properly formed. I added just the first image in the set to the FP page -- I assume that is what we do for sets. -- Colin (talk) 07:37, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I added the second image too. In case of sets, all images have been promoted so they all have their place in the galleries... And it is usually what I do, I put all images of each set. The BOT is always doing that failure for set. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:05, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

FLORA KARIMOVA Pictures

Good Christian Ferrer. My name is FLORA KARIMOVA. I am writing you on behalf of my won pictures that you deleted. I am deeply shocked also stunned why? what wrong I did? what you showed some reason I totally disagree. It is not case and impossible. I am Flora Karimova and deleted pictures are my own history. I am democratic activist who had been defending liberty and human rights in my country in Azerbaijan thus I was tortured, punished and removed from my own countries history. Not only my country forbids and prohibits me from TV Radio and public, You WikiPedia Team also demolished my history, I am buried each day while I am alive. I am who started a big campaign against Soviet Union to regain Independence for Azerbaijan and played a key role making significant contributions to my country. I shared my historical pictures but you deleted WHY? It is my history, I do not understand what is wrong if I share my own history on my devoted page. Please help me understand why is it wrong and unfair to share one's own Honourable Historical proof in images, and what can be a strong evidence to b subjected that those are inappropriate Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Florakarimova (talk • contribs) 20:32, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello, all the deleted pictures show FLORA KARIMOVA, and if you are FLORA KARIMOVA you can not be the copyright holder of these photos. The copyright holder is usually the photographer, some of the images seemed to be disc covers, TV screenshots, and in these cases the copyright holders may likely be the editor(s), the TV chanel(s). And mostly the other images can be found with google. You can upload in Wikimedia Commons only the works you are the copyright holder. Otherwise the copyright holders have to send permission(s) to OTRS, where you can read on how to do so. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:39, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

FLORA KARIMOVA poster.jpg

Good day! Since I uploaded some more picture life event of my won personal life I am subjected unfairly terminating my facts in images. I do not understand the reason? Wikipedia is the most reliable and precious resource to share reality and history not only in mere word of combination but fact in images where those words are proved. I posted some my own very important life events by proving them with pictures what I had. Unfortunately You and others sever time unfairly attacked me and deleted my pictures for minor and useless reason. I have right to ask for testimony what on earth to demolish one's life story in picture -facts? Is it evil or wickedness? I consider you just only having free time jumping into conclusion and misjudging others. I am not astonished if any maltreatment can be in this matter, intentionally and deliberately to attack my pictures facts to terminate them. It is not just nor even acceptable and mostly I am displeased by your wrongdoings and unruly outlaw taking a grant of Wiki-rights abusing others' genuine right like me who became a victim of your savage judgment! I hope you can find a courage and honesty in your deep bottom of kind heart to make fair decision before undermining one's historical picture facts. Best regards including those are below

File:FLORA KARIMOVA main.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA profile.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA and Abulfaz Elchibay GALA.jpg File:FLORA KARIMVOA in an election.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA performs in concert.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA in Parliament election rally.jpg File:FLORA KARIMVOA and Ebulfez Elchibey.jpg File:FLORA KARIMVOA sings on TV 3.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA on ATV.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA Profile.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA in retrospective 2.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA on TV show.jpg File:Concert poster of Flora Karimova.jpg File:BILMEZDIM 2015 Flora Karimova.jpg File:FLORA KARIMMOVA funs.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA on theater performs.jpg File:FLORA KARIMVOA ft. Mirza Babayev.jpg File:Flora Karimova concert poster 1980s.jpg File:Flora Karimova Painted.jpg File:FLORA KARIMVOA with Mirza Babayev.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA on TV.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA after concert.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA performs Jazz.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA on stage performing.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA in rally.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA on Azadliq Radio.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA in musical night.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA sings Ozunle Apar.jpg File:2005 Prliament Election poster.jpg File:FLORA KARIMOVA and Pirat.jpg

File:Phare de Sète (1).jpg

 
File:Phare de Sète (1).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 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!

Ymblanter (talk) 20:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I need your permission.

I'd like to view a specific editing history. The URL is https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ringmaster32571&diff=prev&oldid=202613258 My email address is zillot.ogre@gmail.com 61.205.101.193 04:43, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

  • No you can not, this is not visible for unauthorized persons, nor I can not give you more infos. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:34, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pamela Castro Tamayo.jpg

Salut, Vraiment une très mauvaise décision, d'autant plus qu'il y a 7 votes pour conserver et 5 votes pour supprimer. :(( Yann (talk) 09:37, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi, I respond in english for the watchers, when following our policies I don't have to count the number of votes.
"The uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project.".
As you can see I putted in bold the two words active and participant.
If you make one, two or tree edits, in one wikipedia, you may indeed be considered as a participant, but there is also the word active, I can cite "...4.Given to action; constantly engaged in action; energetic; diligent; busy..."
The intentional use of this word in our policy is not a coincidence. The use of this word active implies that our policy means:
"The uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant constantly engaged in action; energetic; diligent; busy on that project."
Which is absolutely not the case for the image and the user mentioned in the dr. The user was a participant, indeed, but in no way an active one. Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:11, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Trawlers in Sète cf02.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.

Comments
Good quality. --A.Savin 13:59, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:17, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Este no es el Paraiso y otras

05:07 4 abr 2017 Christian Ferrer (discusión | contribuciones) borró la página File:Este no es el Paraiso.jpg (Copyright violation: Derivative work of copyrighted material. album cover) (global usage; delinker log)

Cual es el problema con la licencia? no entiendo! Te agradezco la ayuda!

Por favor entra a https://web.archive.org/web/20170403051718/https://darkness.rocks El sitio web tiene CC BY SA

Muchas gracias por la colaboración. Espero restituyas las imágenes lo más pronto posible o q me digas q debo hacer. Mucha suerte gracias!

Darkness Colombia Darkness_Colombia (talk)

  • The issue is that, in case of disc cover, the disc publishers may have the rights on the visuals of the discs. Not sure that even if you are a member of the musical group you have the right to license these disc covers. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:00, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
  • the website https://darkness.rocks has the CC BY SA license for ALL images and pictures. Please check the site out and look in the footer...

Darkness Colombia Darkness_Colombia (talk) 9:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes but as I already answered above, the visual of album cover are likely owned by the publisher who is for this album Este no es el Paraiso "Psychophony Records" [4] Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:38, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

05:07 4 abr 2017 Christian Ferrer (discusión | contribuciones) borró la página File:Este no es el Paraiso.jpg (Copyright violation: Derivative work of copyrighted material. album cover) (global usage; delinker log)

Cual es el problema con la licencia? no entiendo! Te agradezco la ayuda!

Por favor entra a https://web.archive.org/web/20170403051718/https://darkness.rocks El sitio web tiene CC BY SA

Muchas gracias por la colaboración. Espero restituyas las imágenes lo más pronto posible o q me digas q debo hacer. Mucha suerte gracias!

Darkness Colombia Darkness_Colombia (talk)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Môle Saint Louis Lighthouse BW cf02.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Ermell 12:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

'iHunch analysed'

Dear Christian

I attempted to restore the image 'iHunch analysed' myself and appear to have breached copyright. I apologise for that and draw your attention to the email below that covers the use of this image. Can I please request that the image be reinstated?

Thanks you,

Michael Findlay


Permissions - Wikimedia Commons permissions-commons@wikimedia.org via otago.ac.nz Mar 27 (13 days ago)

to Michael Dear Michael Findlay,

Thank you for your email. This is an automatically generated response to inform you that your message has been received. Because all emails are handled by volunteers, it may take some time for us to reply. We kindly ask for your patience and understanding as we try our best to reply as quickly as possible. If your article or file has been deleted in the mean time, please don't worry. Any administrator can restore these later.

If you want to send more emails about the same subject, please add the following to the subject bar of the email: [Ticket#: 2017032610012321].

Yours sincerely,

The Volunteer Response Team

  • Hello, firstly for image files the PDF format is not allowed, see our Project Scope. Secondly you have uploaded again the file a second time after it was previously deleted by another administrator. Don't do this again or you will lose your editing privileges. If a permission have been sent and that the file meets the criteria for a restoration, then it will be resored, note that volonters have a lot of permissions to deal with and this may take a long time. In the meantime do not re-upload this image. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Ships by IMO number

Dear Jordiferrer,

is it possible to get a CSV list of all IMO numbers and the corresponding ships from Category:Ships by IMO number?

Cheers, --Nāvika (talk) 13:09, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

I guess it is possible, but I am not an expert. You can try to ask Help Desk here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Help_desk --Jordiferrer (talk) 21:59, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Photo de châteaux pinardiers ?

Bonjour, auriez-vous en stock des photo de châteaux du biterrois pour illustrer l'article que j'ai débuté ? Encore bravo et merci de partager vos très belles réalisations. --FHd (talk) 15:39, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

  • @FHd: Bonjour, merci pour vos compliments. Non, je n'ai rien en stock. Mais si je passe dans les environs de l'un de ces châteaux je me ferai un devoir d'essayer de faire quelque bonnes photos, et à chaque fois que j'y parviendrai je vous préviendrai. :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

DELETE WITHOUT REASON

Please do NOT delete images that I OWN COPY RIGHT TOO! Whne i Have stated the copy right is owned and permission given. I also manage the twitter account and have used the image there... because I OWN THE IMAGE!!!!

Deleting images of just one canidate, when lawfully provided, within a UK election, is electroal fraud and can carry prison time. This issue has been reported to the UK police. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tecsatan (talk • contribs) 13:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

  • The image can be found previously published, therefore we must have an evidence the copyright holder agree for a publication under one of the licenses allowed here, or if it is in PD for a specific reason, then we must know this reason. Furthermore electoral frauds in UK are not a concern for me. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Just a small question

Hi there. I saw Commons:Deletion requests/File:Görkem Sala 2017.jpg but the pic was deleted before I could check it. Having said that, I checked Category:Görkem Sala and I see that I had opened that category -with this pic- almost two weeks before the "internet news" shown as proof of copright violation in this DR. Therefore, could it be that "they took the picture from Commons" instead of vice-versa? Thanks in advance for your reply. --E4024 (talk) 14:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi, you seems right that the upload is prior to the article linked in the dr, google image search [5] gave me a result prior to the upload, it maybe made me making a mistake, that and the fact there is the worl "album" right next to the image in the article. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I restored the image, as I'm not sure what to think now, feel free to comment in the DR, sorry for the inconvenience. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Blocking Flora Karimova

Good day Christian Ferrer! Thank you more that you have decided to talk to me! As far as my politeness concerned, I must to clarify some important issues. Firstly, I ask for apology Yes I talked harshly and offensively. It is because when you over and over deleted my own pictures by issuing Violation. Only this is what I disagree. How possible for one whose own presence on photo can be a subject of violation of the rules? I still disagree with your desicion over my uploaded my own real pictures. Otherwise I pleaded fervently not to remove my pictures, instead you did eliminate most of them. Now again I ask, I beg please please do not remove my own face described pictures. I hope my entreaties will be taken into consideration. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.135.163.180 (talk) 02:38, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Breaking waves, Sète cf03.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.

Comments
Very good image and gut quality -- Spurzem 14:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Port crane, harbour of Sète cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality -- Spurzem 14:24, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Harbour of Sète at dusk cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality -- Spurzem 14:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

HRIFF photos

Dear Christian,

Ok, I am new and dont know what I am doing, granted. But it seems that it must be protocol that is incorrect in this instance, as logically and looking at other wikipedia pages, I cannot see how what I did violated what is Free or Fair Use.

1

File:Hilary Duff at Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival.jpg
File:Joe Mantenga at Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival.jpg
File:Josh Brener at Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival.jpg
File:Martin Landau at Hollywood Reel Indpendent Film Festival.jpg
File:Pierce Brosnan at Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival.png

Are all photos taken by myself, so I know they are "free" and open for others to use. These photos were taken in public places, and were of celebrities, who by being on a red carpet gave consent to be photographed.

I have always allowed anyone to use my photos. I am an amateur photographer of celebrity, and the festival allowed me to take these photos and when i asked them if I could put them on their Wikipedia they loved the idea. I did not put my name on them as "photographer", as I do not wish to make it seem like was doing this for any crass personal gain. I just enjoy the festival and feel that it was not accurately represented on its wikipedia page to keep with the ethos of wikipedia I wanted to help show the cold facts about this event so people could have a more correct understanding of the facts. I did not put up photos of non-clebrities, as I feel that would be an invasion of those who may want to have privacy.

Now, I am brand new to this and so the "rules" are something I am learning, but considering these images are from the festival and could have been taken by anyone, are not "press" photos for sale, nor held by copyright I do not see where the problem lies.

These are pictures that help people understand better this event, and the photos are honestly taken of folks who are important to the masses and gave approval. As the photographer I also give approval for their widespread use. So, as far as I know those images are all fair use public information. As the photographer, I KNOW this to be true.

Also, when HRIFF is Googled a Red Carpet Photo appeared that the festival very much disliked, as it is of a person who is a non-celebrity, holding awards that were not his, and seemed to be playing a prank in the photo. So Why is this image allowed when it is also a red carpet photo, how is this image, which was allowed any different then these celebrity photos that help explain who of note attends this event??

It just makes so little sense to me.

But I know it cannot be a rights issue as I OWN THE RIGHTS to these images, as I took them.


2

OK, Now with

File:HRIFF Official Logo.jpg
Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival logo.

The logo on the site was out of date, and it seems the whole purpose of editing such a thing is to keep the marks and logos current. Right? I know I may not know everything about this process, but I see company logos all the time on wikipedia pages...

Other wikis have logos for companies, like this NBC logo on the NBC wiki = File:NBC 2014 Ident.svg

I am sure NBC has very strict rules about who can reproduce their logo, yet there it is on their wiki page. I am struggling to see the difference, what made the old HRIFF logo acceptable, but now a current one is not? This seems incongruent with the practice of every other Wikipedia page for almost every other corporation or business on wikipedia whos pages have some sort of logo used.

Now I admit this logo is not my own work (although they gave me permission to upload it), and of course I am sure the festival does not want this logo used in anyway they do not approve of and so I can perhaps see how this does violate the rules. It is not really "free" like my photos are.

But still, in that case I just cannot see how this does not then make every logo (coca cola wiki etc) also now need to be removed from Wikipedia. As I bet my life that Coke, Pepsi, etc would never want their logo images used in their wikipedia pages to be 100% "free" and fair use for any and all purposes, but are still ok with them on wikipedia. HRIFF was fine letting me use their logo image for this purpose, but would not (I assume) like their logo to be fair use to all on the internet (same as Coke, Pepsi, NBC), so if that is what I am doing to their Trademark, then I guess it is best to leave it off the wikipedia page for HRIFF.

But, my question is how is the NBC image a different outcome, then the logo I uploaded? I do not see it.

I mean, how could any image be up on any wikipedia page. Every photo is taken by somebody, and if the person who takes the photo and the person in the photo do not mind it being online, then I do not see a use issue, only an issue of if the image accurately reflects the subject, which I think these pictures do.

Also I replaced an old logo, that for some reason there was no issue with, so what is the diference, they both were from the same place, taken from the same source, and the only difference was my edit was more up to date.

3 File:LA LIVE - Staples Center - Home of Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival.jpg Now, this was taken from the HRIFF site and I assume it was (like the logo) created by HRIFF, but as I have no proof of this, this edit is the one I understand most.

File:LA LIVE - Staples Center - Home of Hollywood Reel Independent Film Festival.jpg


So, I get some of it. But it seems like to take down all LOGOs and all PHOTOS, that you are really more upset at a protocol I must have used, for I could use this definition to take down almost all images on wikipedia.


Hopefully you can explain how all those images, most taken by myself are somehow different from every other red carpet photo of a celebrity or logo image on wikipedia.

Approved by the festival, and the subjects, and the photographer, and used to depict what was happening at the public event the page is supposed to describe...I just dont see it.

Maybe there were too many, maybe the ariel photo I cannot know the true author, maybe the logo needs approval from the vent, I can get that.

But the rest of the edits just dont make any sense. Even with the Fair Use or Free use argument.


Best,

goofy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goofyfoot92 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi,
1/regarding the photos you say you are the author, the main issue is that they have been previously published on the web, exemple there or in many places in the web exemple. In case of previously published artworks we requires that that the first former publication (the source) be explicitely free with a clear statment compatible with the licenses allowed here. Otherwise the copyright holder of the photos, even if it is you, must follow the instructions at OTRS and must send a permission. This is done in order to protect the rights of the copyright holders, if no, then anybody can come and say it's me who took the photos.... If a valid permission is sent then the images will be restored, but do not reupload the images by yourself. Note that the OTRS volonteers may have a lot of work and there may be waiting time in case a permission is sent.
2/Regarding the logo, the difference between the deleted logo and your exemple above is that the logo above may be too simple to be protected by copyright. However the logo deleted was very artistically crafted and has without a shadow of a doubt a copyright protection, then as above the first publication done by the copyright holders must be free or an officer of the film festival must send a valid permission to com:OTRS.
Hope this help. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:24, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Harbour of Sète at dawn cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! ETAB (ship, 1966), Sète cf01.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.

Comments
Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! GNV ATLAS (ship, 1990), Sète cf05.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.

Comments
Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Deadly Buda artwork

Hi Christian, I control the copyrights to those images and am comfortable putting them on wiki for all to use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deadly Buda (talk • contribs) 05:32, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, in case of previously published artworks we requires that that the first former publication (the source) be explicitely free with a clear statment compatible with the licenses allowed here. Otherwise the copyright holder of the artworks, even if it is you, must follow the instructions at OTRS and must send a permission. This is done in order to protect the rights of the copyright holders, if no, then anybody can come and say "it's my artwork".... If a valid permission is sent then the images will be restored, but do not reupload the images by yourself. Note that the OTRS volonteers may have a lot of work and there may be waiting time in case a permission is sent. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:03, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Breaking waves, Sète cf03.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Breaking waves, Sète cf03.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Mara Aranda

Saludos, has marcado recientemente unas fotografías que aparecen en mi ficha de wikipedia como posible violación de copyright. La persona que ha utilizado las fotografías me ha pedido permiso para publicarlas y yo, como objeto de la fotografía, le he dado permiso. Las fotografías, a parte de ser yomisma la fotografiada, son de mi propiedad, no tienen copyright.

Gracias.

Mara Aranda. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.159.144.119 (talk) 11:07, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello, I delete a lot of images every days, and without a link I can't answer with precision.
    However if you have the right or the necessary authority to give a permission for a publication here, on Wikimedia Commons, under the licenses allowed, then you must send this permission to OTRS where you can read on how to do so. In cases of deleted images, if a valid permission is sent then the images will be restored, otherwise the images must not be uploaded again. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:23, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Mara Aranda

Saludos de nuevo, no sé exactamente porqué la portada y contraportada del disco son susceptibles de ser borradas, ya que son imágenes libres de derechos. Gracias. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.159.144.119 (talk) 11:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Sadly, as per above, without links I don't know about what files you are talking about. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Mike Merrill Photo

Hello,

I'm confused with your edit on the Mike Merrill photo. The photo was shot by that photographer. Are you saying Mike Merrill name should be there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Merrill (talk • contribs) 12:39, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hello, a photo is a work protected by copyright law. When publishing a photo here you do that under one of the specific licenses allowed here. However, only the copyright holder of the photo have the right to put such a license. Usually the copyright holder is the photographer, here "Keilan Scott", however your user name is "Mike Merrill". In order to protect the rights of the photographer "Keilan Scott" we require now that he send a permission to OTRS, even if it is you. Or at least we requires an evidence that the copyright holder agree with a publication of his work under such licenses. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Brian Jagde artist photo

Mr. Jagde purchased all rights to his portrait image from the photographer Simon Pauly who is credited for the image. The image is allowed to be posted on any site for promotional or educational purposes. I have written permission from Mr. Jagde to post this photo. Where do I submit this information so the photo may be displayed? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spark spec (talk • contribs) 06:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:Harbour of Sète at dawn cf01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Harbour of Sète at dawn cf01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Possible sock (I'm in the automatic translator.)

I tried to insert a checkuser request but I could not. That's why I'm informing you here. Check this account AHBVP (talk · contribs) With these accounts Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cidade Falcão By having the same behavior and possible blocking outline . O revolucionário aliado (talk) 20:10, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the notice, that have been notified too by a CU. Sorry for the delay as I had no internet connexion. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Christian Ferrer/Archive24".
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Christian_Ferrer/Archive24
commons.m.wikimedia.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-31
222047
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:IGB57DQS7TMLB4NUC4L6OHT7AXRZ6USR
<urn:uuid:4abb3beb-f9ad-4c8a-90c4-048296b856d5>
2021-08-01T10:23:05Z
208.80.154.224
text/html
sha1:27UTW6R5JBHIL577CCP56BXY4F2KM6ER
<urn:uuid:7876c969-b93b-4ada-be91-c57cacc117ba>
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Christian_Ferrer/Archive24
response
<urn:uuid:4894601f-c441-421f-9273-929bf36fded1>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-31
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for July/August 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-198.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/