Vaya

Welcome to the Commons, Vaya!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Yann 16:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Flickr review

Ask the user on their talk page to leave a comment on one of their flickr images that they are the same as the user on Commons. You may also want to tell the user to put some more describing filename up. -- Bryan (talk to me) 15:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If the Flickr user and the Commons user are the same, yes. You can multilicense your own work with as many licenses you want. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:Commons trusted users

Image deletion warning

Category:Commons trusted users has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Lcarsdata 10:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty

Is it possible for you to perform a human review on this image? For the record I was instrumental in getting this image properly licensed (although someone else uploaded it obviously) so I can confirm that the image has been licensed appropriately at my instigation. I would request a human review asap because the image is in use at w:Shilpa Shetty and had just been deleted because of potential copyvio, so I would like to hurry up the process if possible. And also for Image:Amitabh_Bachchan.jpg, used in w:Amitabh Bachchan. Again I was responsible for making this freely licensed and would appreciate a quick human review to fend off copyvio accusations. Many thanks, Ekantik 02:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok I will do it, but can you link to that copyvio statement, or deletion log.--Vaya 04:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Flickrreview

1. No this is not ok. I see that Yonatan has already left him a message on his talk.
2. Yes, FlickrLickr is a bot that automatically uploads images from Flickr with the correct licensing, and don't need review.

-- Bryan (talk to me) 08:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for late answering, but I appeared to have looked over your question. I'd rather have a diffent place to discuss Flickr images, and keep the reviewers page strictly for stuff related to the reviewers. I am planning to create a portal/wikiproject for Flickr, but I am atm quite busy. Feel free to set up a discussion page. -- Bryan (talk to me) 11:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Flickr Review

If the image is from flickr and tagged as {{Self}} then you need to see if it's likely that the user who uploaded it is the same as the flickr user (same name or other similar characteristics) and if not removed the self tag and just leave the license. Regarding the license change, reviewing of FlickrLickr and changing of licenses (the creative commons license are technically non-revocable) is a topic that has been argued about before. If you feel strongly about it, go ahead and talk to User:Eloquence who runs FlickrLickr, however I would not feel comfortable deleting such an image without discussing it with him first. Thanks, Yonatanh 01:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Tagging the image with Template:Flickr-change-of-license is sufficient. If you want, you can contact the photographer and inform them about the situation, i.e., 1) their image was uploaded here when it was under CC-BY, 2) this license is not revocable [1], and we have every right to use the image, 3) it is currently used on 10 pages, including the English, French, Italian, Finnish, Norse Wikipedia, and the English, French, German Wikibooks 4) if they insist, we will remove it from all these pages and delete it from Commons, as a courtesy. Needless to say I wouldn't be happy about a removal, and there are cases where I wouldn't agree to it at all. This one is borderline.--Eloquence 12:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

As I said, it's up to you to extend this courtesy to the uploader, and I think it should be dependent on how frequently an image has become used since it was released under CC-BY. If it's an orphan (see the "check usage" tab on the image description page) and not of particularly stunning quality, then we can delete it if the uploader doesn't want it here. If it's an image that has become very widely used, I wouldn't want it to be deleted. Perhaps this could also be expressed through a variant of the Template:Flickr-change-of-license which notes that, due to frequent use, the image is unlikely to be removed even if the photographer requests it.--Eloquence 17:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Commons:WikiProject Flickr

I have started this as a central place to discuss issues with Flickr images. Please take a look. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image Tagging Image:Puerto olimpico.jpg

Hi.

Quote: I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear.

I thought this was enough:

Photography by: Vincent Boiteau

{{Cc-by-sa-2.0}}

An author name, a link and a license.

What do you mean the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear ? --OsvaldoGago 02:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Aundrea Fimbres.jpg

I received the message saying the image "doesn't specify who created the content..." but when I originally uploaded it from flickr, I attibuted the author, source, description. Although the image is now deleted, I looked at the file history of it and found that the source information was deleted (vandalised) by an anonymous IP, and the image subsequently deleted. Anyway, I re-uploaded the image under a different name. Spellcast 18:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Undeleted and reviewed. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah well, I didn't read the last sentence, I'll delete the image again. -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

:)--Vaya 20:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Population density of China by first-level administrative regions(Russian).png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Population density of China by first-level administrative regions(Russian).png. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|cc-by-sa-2.5}} to release it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Fica Blok38 11:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I have uploaded it several minutes ago :)--Vaya 12:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Need a human review for a Flickr image

Hi Vaya, I recently uploaded a cc-by image from Flickr, but because I applied some noise filtering to the image prior to uploading it, the automated FlickreviewR bot wasn't able to confirm the license. Could you perform a manual review for me? The image is Image:Nashville_star_under_bridge.jpg. Thanks! Kaldari 22:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

•  Done--Vaya 08:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks a million! Kaldari 15:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Well, i'm not in the flickr trusted list, but... i have this ;) Platonides 22:09, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

BennyHill

I have translated that you think flickr uploaded doesn't have authority to set the license. However, i don't understand the deletion point. Drawing? Old enough? It's not being claimed pd-old, but cc-by-sa (Flickr licence ddidn't match) so the point would be about being derivative of Benny Hill work... Platonides 11:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

DJ Hapa

Fixed the source I had uploaded a ton of pics from that user guess I cut and pasted the worng source once. Thanks for the note. Quadzilla99 23:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem.--Vaya 10:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Note

Hello, Vaya, and thanks for your contributions to the Wikimedia Commons! I have noticed that you're using the {{user trusted}} ^{(or the babel alternative)} template on your user page. This template is generally reserved for users that review Flickr images and are trusted users. It is easy to apply and become trusted in order to review images from Flickr, and I welcome you to do so if you are interested in helping out. Please feel free to discuss any concerns on my talk page. Cheers, --Pumpmeup

File source is not properly indicated: File:Liaquat Ali Khan.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Liaquat Ali Khan.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. 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!

--feydey ^(talk) 10:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images

---

Hello, Vaya!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 04:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

• Image:Tst-ru.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.

I need you review my photo

Please it reviews my photo: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Sebastianortega-2008.jpg

Thas ok?

--Esperants (talk) 03:35, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Mig-1 am37.jpg

File:Mig-1 am37.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!

russavia (talk) 15:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Spirin Ivan Timofeevich.jpg

File:Spirin Ivan Timofeevich.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!

russavia (talk) 07:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Yuriy Vizbor youth.jpg

File:Yuriy Vizbor youth.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!

russavia (talk) 13:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Yuriy Vizbor and mother.jpg

File:Yuriy Vizbor and mother.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!

russavia (talk) 13:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Inactive Image-reviewers

Hello Vaya, there is a discussion about a request regarding your image-reviewer userright, which have never been used or not used recently. You can participate discussion in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Inactive_Image-reviewers. This is just a notification of discussion you may be involved. Best regards, --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Shvak1.jpg

File:Shvak1.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!

Jcb (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Shvak.jpg

File:Shvak.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!

Jcb (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Shvak127.jpg

File:Shvak127.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!

Jcb (talk) 22:21, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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:

• File:Chervonetz 1706.jpg

Yours sincerely, Sealle (talk) 13:32, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Magnetron02.svg

Hi, You sent me a message a few days ago but it did not get through because my email was not up to date. Hakunamenta (talk) 18:16, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah, well, the only source I had, was the raster graphic that it is directly based on. See the original file here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Magnetron00.png Hakunamenta (talk) 14:54, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Filin Aleksandr Ivanovich.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Filin Aleksandr Ivanovich.jpg, 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:Filin Aleksandr Ivanovich.jpg]]). 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!

PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)