User talk:Jcb/archive/5

~~Uploading files if needed for other projects, but only available for comments regarding my own uploads.~~ Jcb (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you back, even if only in a limited role. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some more activity from now. Jcb (talk) 00:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your question.

Hi, goedenavond, wat bedoel je over beelden van het artikel Nandini Sahu, Je hebt de toestemming van de auteur, het is niet de kwestie hoe het is gemaakt en door wie, wordt verantwoordelijkheid genomen door de auteur, niet maken het verwarring, bent u bespreken met de verantwoordelijke uitgever, en zaak werd door een beheerder van gemeenschappelijke ingediend Sreejith K. Ik denk dat er geen probleem als ik weet. Ik hoop dat dit helpt.Justice007 (talk) 20:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johan Bos good evening, what do you mean about images of article Nandini Sahu, You got the permissiõn from the author, it is not the matter how it is made and by whom, responsibility is taken by the author, do not create the confusion, you are discussing with responsible editor, and matter was submitted by an administrator of common Sreejith K. I think there should not be problem as I know. I hope this helps. Justice007 (talk) 20:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The copyright holder is the photographer, not the person on the picture. And yes, it does mather who is the photographer. Copyright is serious business. Jcb (talk) 20:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know very well copyright is a serious matter, please refer the rule that support your question's clarity, while there is a clear permisstion of the author, the images are also on author's official website which is public domain, it is very common sense that someone can take the images for the author while author is addressing or meeting somewhere. You are the first editor who is asking the question splitting the hairs. Just by the way, if you do not mind, how do you come specially on that images???.Justice007 (talk) 21:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Daily a lot of people get the same reaction from me or one of the other OTRS volunteers, because quite a lot of people don't really understand copyright and think, like you, that the person on the picture is the copyright holder. This is my last reaction here on this topic. Like I wrote in the mail, please don't spread the discussion over several places. Jcb (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do realy not accept your question's validity, I am not spreading the discussion, this the place to discuss the dispute, not on my personal email address, I am the creator of the article, not only that, many others too, with same rule, no one objected. You did not refer the rule that support your validity. Thanks for your last reaction on this topic. Happey weekend.Justice007 (talk) 22:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC).[reply]

(This discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Justice007 - Jcb (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jcb (readmin)‎

-mattbuck (Talk) 21:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I left a statement at the page. Jcb (talk) 22:07, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, your admin-rights are back. I'll save myself the template. You already know the stuff. -- Cecil (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All the best for your "new" role. --Túrelio (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats and good luck! Trijnstel_talk 07:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket 2013050810010397

Dear Jcb,

Thank you for placing the OTRS ticket tag regarding the books by Dejan Stojanović. The permission received covered the files below, which were listed, but not uploaded at that moment to avoid confusion. Since these files were uploaded in the meantime, would you please place the OTRS ticket tag on them as you did with other files so that everything is clear and in order. OTRS ticket 2013050810010397.

These are the files:

Best regards, --Mountlovcen8

Done - Jcb (talk) 09:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message

	Hello, Jcb/archive. You have new messages at Rahul Bott's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Rahul Bott (talk) 07:27, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification, responded. Jcb (talk) 09:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message

	Hello, Jcb/archive. You have new messages at Rahul Bott's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Türkçe ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Rahul Bott (talk) 06:11, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS Ticket #2013051810001682

Dear Jcb, I am sorry for bothering you again but since you placed the OTRS ticket for the previous files, I thought it would be best if you do the same for some other files. All this is to avoid further confusion and possible misunderstanding or tags from other users. The OTRS Ticket#2013051810001682 is for the following files:

Thank you and best regards, --Mountlovcen8

I saw ticket 2013051810001682 and I responded to it last night. The issue with this ticket is that D. Stojanovic is stated to be the copyright-holder, while he is also on the pictures. The copyright-holder normally is the photographer. Jcb (talk) 18:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He is the owner of the photographs and in many cases photographs were taken by accidental people who were nearby and nobody knows who they were (even the people who took photographs would not remember). In other cases, the right was transferred to him to publish under specified conditions. Also, many of these photographs correspond to old files ; for example: File:Bishop Irinej and Dejan Stojanovic.jpg corresponds to File:Dejan Stojanović, 1991 (3).jpg or File:Jacques Claude Villard and Dejan Stojanovic, Paris, 1990.jpg corresponds to File:Jacques Claude Villard and Dejan Stojanovic.jpg or File:Helen Delich Bentley and Dejan Stojanovic (2).jpg corresponds to File:Helen Delić Bentli i Dejan Stojanović.jpg etc.

E-mail was sent to avoid confusion since there are no problems with the files and it was a guaranty that the files can be used because the copyright was either transferred to him in some cases or in other cases the people who took photographs are absolutely unknown and also many files correspond to other similar files in similar settings with an OTRS ticket. Majority of these photographs are not typical photographs taken by professional photographers. Some common sense had to be used and therefore e-mail is a guaranty by the owner of the photographs (since in many cases people who took photographs are unknown and unaware of these photographs). This was the simplest way to clarify the thing although the template language used may not have been completely clear about this. The main point is that he is the owner of the photographs with the right to publish. Users were placing tags without any logic or reviewing similar files to connect the dots and realize that there is no problem with the files.

In the meantime, the files were provided with additional information and links to corresponding files and were already in a satisfactory order even without the ticket. The ticket is only an additional preventive measure and clarification so there is no need to waste time in the future about any of these files. For that reason, this had to be clarified. If needed, you can provide this additional information to the OTRS-permissions. --Mountlovcen8

I'm sorry, but I cannot place the confirmation template at the file description page. I'm one of the few members of this community with access to the highly confidential OTRS system. Other people from this community must be able to trust that I only place a confirmation template if I have seen a permission statement from the copyright holder. In this case the ticket doesn't contain any name of a photographer, nor does it contain any scan of a copyright transfer document. So unfortunately I cannot verify this permission. Jcb (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades...

Jcb, congratulations! You now have administrator rights on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and its subpages), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care. Have a look at the list of Gadgets (on the bottom there are the ones specifically for admins – however, for example the UserMessages are very helpful too).

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons ^webchat on irc.libera.chat. There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators: #wikimedia-commons-admin ^webchat.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading. You can find the admin backlog overview at COM:AB.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

--Sreejith K (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioning personal relationship

Could you review if it was appropriate to mention the personal relationship between the uploader and copyright holder at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pyrrhocorax graculus in flight.jpg? I think the information was told in an OTRS email, and I wonder if he is comfortable with having it disclosed in this manner. Shouldn't it be enough and safer to say "uploader says he will ask her to send her own permission" only? --whym (talk) 23:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern. To be sure, I removed the information. Jcb (talk) 23:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the speedy response. (and for a lot of OTRS work!) --whym (talk) 23:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket #2013050210011398

Thank you for checking the ticket #2013050210011398 for the picture File:Goddess of Democracy DC defy censorship.JPG I'm not always so sure how the fine points of the OTRS system works. In any case (I'm sure you know) this ticket covers the right of anybody to photograph this statue as long as the CC-BY "Statue by Thomas Marsh" is attributed. I had uploaded several other photos of the statue, which I've copied the OTRS ticket number to. I've also copied the ticket number to the category

Category:Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington (where all my photos of the statue are)

There are also photos which were deleted and have a notice that I gave that the OTRS ticket for the statue was in process. I'll check their status and likely get back to you on them.

Any help, corrections, or advice appreciated.

Smallbones (talk) 23:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is true, the ticket can be used for the sculptor part of the copyright. So where the photographer also agrees, the permission is ok. In any undeletion request you may use this ticket number, so that the permission can be verified. Jcb (talk) 23:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic - I see you already left a brief comment at the deletion request. I also left a note at User talk:MichaelMaggs who questioned the status at the deletion request, so I think we're all on the same page. Thank you again for everything. Smallbones (talk) 23:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as I got contacted by Smallbones - see here: I noticed recently on my watchlist some edits by him tagged with (OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member) and reverted these edits with the comment (This has to be done by an OTRS member), because only an OTRS volounteer can check and decide if the releases are valid or not. The pages in question are Category:Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington, File:Victims of Communism BnW.JPG, File:Victims of Communism Memorial DBKing B.jpg and File:Victims of Communism Memorial DBKing A.jpg. Could you please have a look and confirm the OTRS-release. An answer to his question how to handle this release by future uploads of images of this scuplure would be nice too. Could be a template created by an OTRS-member and then used for these new uploads non-OTRS-members an idea? regards --Ju Ta 17:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket contains a statement from the sculptor, in which he releases the sculpture into CC-BY-SA 3.0. So this ticket contains permission from the sculptor for any photo of it. The copyright of a photographer could be another issue, which is not covered by the ticket. Jcb (talk) 17:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at the pages mentioned above. Thanks for your notification. Jcb (talk) 17:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Silver Oak Cellars and Category:Twomey Cellars

Hi, thanks for OTRS the one or two but unfortunately Fastily deleted a ton of images I uploaded in here and the sub categories two days ago. Please restore them all and add {PermissionOTRS|id=2013040210009572|Jcb}. I spent absolutely ages uploading them and arranging it!Blofeld Dr. (talk) 21:18, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket only mentions one file: File:Silver Oak Cellars, Oakville3.jpg. To add files to the permission, the file names will have to be sent to OTRS. This log may be helpful to find them: Special:Log/Blofeld_Dr.. Jcb (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Must I really sent 60 urls to OTRS? Its pretty obvious that the OTRS ticket was intended for all of them. I sent one url in OTRS just so the ticketer (you) could find the rest of them.Blofeld Dr. (talk) 15:17, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the email from the Silver Oak and Twomey director which was sent to the commons or find out who looked at the original email and thought it only covered one image. It explicitly states that all images uploaded by Blofeld for them have been authorised for use under the same ticket. I should not have to send multiple links, you can find the ones which were uploaded from them and restore them.Blofeld Dr. (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of your uploads are from Silver Oak. We cannot just check all your uploads to see if this permission may apply. That's why we want to see file names at OTRS. Jcb (talk) 16:57, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are from that period. Silver Oak own Twomey, and part own the barrel company. All of the images I uploaded which are now empty categories are owned by them as they sent me them in batches after I requested them and the representative contacted wikipedia with a very clear images that Blofeld uploaded for |Silver and Twomey we own the copyright for.Blofeld Dr. (talk) 20:24, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These are the images. If you check the original email from Brady the media relations guy for Silver Oak/Twomey you'll see that he explicitly says the images uploaded by Blofeld are owned by them. It was only one or two more I uploaded from flickr under a free license which aren't theirs. The images were so crap that I requests the images. Please restore them as they were and add the OTRS.

File:Twomey Cellars, Healdsburg3.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars, Healdsburg1.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars, Healdsburg2.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars, Healdsburg.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars, Calistoga2.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars, Calistoga1.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars, Calistoga.jpg
File:Twomey Cellars Merlot soutirage.jpg
File:Soutirage2.jpg
File:Silver Oak Cellars, Oakville4.jpg
File:Silver Oak Cellars, Oakville3.jpg
File:Silver Oak Cellars, Oakville2.jpg
File:Silver Oak Cellars, Oakville1.jpg
File:Silver Oak Geyserville4.jpg
File:Silver Oak Geyserville3.jpg
File:Silver Oak Geyserville2.jpg
File:Silver Oak Geyserville1.jpg
File:Ray Duncan and Justin Meyer.jpg
File:Justin Meyer and Ray Duncan.jpg
File:Duncan Family.jpg
File:Justin Meyer4.jpg
File:Justin Meyer3.jpg
File:Justin Meyer2.jpg
File:Justin Meyer1.jpg
File:Dominic Orsini2.jpg
File:Dominic Orsini1.jpg
File:David Duncan3.jpg
File:David Duncan2.jpg
File:David Duncan1.jpg
File:Jean-Claude Berrouet1.jpg
File:Jean-Claude Berrouet.jpg
File:Jean-Claude Berrouet and Daniel Baron.jpg
File:Daniel Baron2.jpg
File:Daniel Baron1.jpg
File:Ben Cane Twomey2.jpg
File:A&K Cooperage2.jpg
File:A&K Cooperage3.jpg
File:A&K Cooperage1.jpg
File:A&K Cooperage.jpg
File:Ben Cane Twomey.jpg
File:Dominic Orsini.jpg
File:Twomey-Calistoga.jpg
File:David Duncan.jpg
File:Daniel Baron.jpg
File:Twomey Healdsburg.jpg
File:Soutirage.jpg
File:Silver Oak Oakville.jpg
File:Silver Oak Geyserville.jpg
File:Ray Duncan.jpg

-- (Blofeld Dr.)

Please reply to our 2013-05-06 email with this list. I want it to be in the OTRS ticket. Jcb (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just replied with the image names, I can't url link them because they've been deleted.Blofeld Dr. (talk) 20:38, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I have a macro to convert this to a list of urls's for me. Jcb (talk) 20:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated, thankyou. The pending and warnign tag just needs replacing with the proper ticket like File:Silver Oak Cellars, Oakville3.jpg now as you a no doubt aware. Thanks.Blofeld Dr. (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everything should be in order now. Jcb (talk) 21:08, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Impressed by your diligence in restoring and ticketing. You're a credit to the commons, thankyou! Blofeld Dr. (talk) 21:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - Jcb (talk) 21:08, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks indeed for your hard steady work in sifting through most likely very boring e-mails. You restored this file and I shall now go out and use it in many projects, thereyby validating your effort. Cheers, mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 17:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by ABarr

Hello Jcb,

I see that you restored all those files according to an OTRS ticket. Are you sure that whoever wrote that e-mail is actually the holder of rights to all those images? Including the 1965 newspaper article from the Nice Matin, text by the newspaper reporter, photos and all? I do have some doubts about that, simply because it does not seem likely. Judging from some comments it seems to me to be another case of someone believing that because he owns the prints of some images he also owns the rights to them. And we both know that this is not so. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 22:45, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a comprehensive ticket. The family archive contained the names of the photographers and the sender is a legal heir. But I'm afraid you are right about the interview. The two pictures in it are OK. (One taken by Rene Bauchet, died more than 70 years ago / one taken by Michel Bauchet, permission by heir), but there should be permission from the newspaper as well about the text. I will contact the uploader about this and I have changed the OTRS template. Jcb (talk) 23:03, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

italian otrs tkt

Hi there. I would like to thank you for your work on commons queues. They probably contain many e-mails in italian. Still, this morning i received a few messages about your answers which puzzled the first-time users. Can you please unlock tickets in italian you processed recently? Italian volunteers will take care of them asap, i should be able to access that queue as well. Thanks for your work again, Elitre (talk) 11:29, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry, I missed this message yesterday) - as far as I can see I don't have any Italian ticket locked. If I'm listed as 'owner', that's because I was the most recent one to do something with the ticket. You should be able to access all of them. If you continue to have problems accessing a ticket, please tell me. And feel free to deal with any ticket listing me as owner. Jcb (talk) 22:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, after writing to you I actually checked the queue and fixed the few cases I referred above. Since I later started a full time job at WMF, I am afraid there's no much time left to actually add this to the list of things I still care of as a volunteer :( . What I can do is looking for a better way to handle this, I'll ask my OTRS fellows and get back to you ASAP. Apologies for any inconvenience. --Elitre (talk) 12:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC) PS: after re-reading my message, I'd like to clarify that my only concern was about any tickets that you might have locked to you, I was not implying that you should not answer tickets in Italian! It is actually fine and I thank you for this, I would just suggest that you simply close them even if you're waiting for a reply so that when it arrives everyone is allowed to jump in if needed :)[reply]

I work differently, in that I lock it to myself when I expect or request an answer and close it after a few days if it does not arrive, to avoid wasting other people's time studying the case. Of course you'll work as you like, mine was a suggestion to make you feel more comfortable when dealing with our language. --Elitre (talk) 12:55, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Otrs

Hi Jcb;

thank you very much for validating so quickly the many OTRS tickets sent by Georges Biard for the Cannes Film Festival pictures. Just one thing : sometimes, like here for example, you forget to remove the "otrs pending" sign, or you just paste it somewhere else, and the result is that the photo remains in the "otrs pending" category, even though it has been validated. But thanks a lot anyway ! Cheers, JJ Georges (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. This should not have happened. I will report this bug. Jcb (talk) 16:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Should be resolved. Jcb (talk) 22:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ; a photographer (Olivier Strecker) has just sent an authorization for about 60 photos that he has uploaded here during the past two years (see here for an explanation ; it hadn't been properly explained to us that you need an authorization even if the photo has been published only on a facebook account). If you have the time to validate them, that would be really great. Thanks. JJ Georges (talk) 09:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but I am having a busy weekend. Anyway, there are other volunteers processing the queue as well. Jcb (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I was asking just in case. JJ Georges (talk) 07:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Banderas.

Hola Jcb. Es una lástima que un administrador haya decidido mantener las banderas a pesar de que los argumentos en contra tuvieron más lógica que los argumentos a favor, por supuestamente no haber consenso. Saludos--Inefable001 (talk) 08:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pienso que esta conclusión fue inevitable, porque los archivos todavía están en uso en ES.wiki. Si un archivo está en uso, solamente podemos borrarlo si hay problemas con el copyright. Lo que puedes hacer es borrar todo el uso y entonces nominar los archivos de nuevo. Entonces otro administrador va a tener que tratar con la nominación. Jcb (talk) 12:16, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Intentaré hacer lo que me dices, saludos.--Inefable001 (talk) 14:05, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Paulbrugman = Ries Mulder ?

Hi, I just wonder about changes like this. Is the uploader a heir of the uploader, or why its own work by the uploader? In this case the license should be changed to {{CC-BY-SA-3.0-heirs}}, shouldnt it? --Ju Ta 21:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He is a legal heir. And thanks, I didn't know this template. Jcb (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot (2013053110004654)

Please pay more attention when you ask a user to upload a file that is screenshot of a television broadcast. Immediately delete that file, please. Bye, --Gnu marcoo 12:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In that ticket I've only asked for additional information. I did not place any template or whatever. If you think a file should be deleted, please press 'Nominate for deletion' at the image description page and explain why. At Commons, almost every DR gets processed after about one week. That will be fine I think. This ticket has been untouched for 22 days, so we are apparently not in a hurry. Jcb (talk) 21:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You marked the files as confirmed? So on a closer look it was fine for you? Ok, so problem resolved. Jcb (talk) 21:26, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have asked at the user to upload files without checking what kind of images were. This is copyviol. --Gnu marcoo 10:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The upload of that file took place in March, while my message dates from June. Without my message you won't have found this file anyway, it would still have been on Commons. Jcb (talk) 16:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS Ticket 2013070110008346

Hi, I uploaded recently two photos of Sara Schätzl (File:Sara Schätzl 1.jpg and File:Sara Schätzl 2.jpg) which I got from the subject with the filled out form indicating that she is the copyright holder (I made it clear to her beforehand that usually the photographer and not the subject holds the copyright). I contacted her again but didn't receive so far any satisfactory explanation why she claims to hold the copyright, if it was transfered to her by the photographer or if she made the photos herself with a self-timer or whatever other reason may be the case. I therefore removed for now the photos from the Wikipedia articles which linked to them. I guess we will see what happens quicker, the deletion of the photos or the receipt of prove of copyright transfer. Optimale (talk) 08:16, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Files tagged as 'something received via OTRS but not yet in order' stay for one month (until 5 August in this case) before they get deleted. If a valid permission arrives after deletion, we will undelete the files. Jcb (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info! Optimale (talk) 10:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as it seems quite certain now that there won't be a valid permission coming forward for those two files I think they should be deleted. I thought that would happen automatically after the 5 August but maybe I should tag them too with a deletion request by the uploader? Thanks Optimale (talk) 08:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a backlog in the deletion of these files, due to holidays. The files will be deleted shortly, no further action is required. Jcb (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Logo

Beste Jcb, ik zie dat je Nederlands als moedertaal hebt, dus ik hoop dat je het goed vindt dat ik in die taal met je spreek. Ik zag je bericht op mijn OP, maar eigenlijk begrijp ik het niet goed. Door het logo van Verisign zijn die logo's toch niet puur tekstueel? En is het logo van Verisign dan zo onorigineel dat het zomaar mag overgenomen worden? In elk geval sorry voor de blijkbaar verkeerde daad van mijn kant. M.v.g., --MichielDMN (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nivedita_Tiwari_Photo_by_Anil_Grover.jpg‎

Hi, Sorry to bother you but had a question that I'm hoping you can help with since you had processed the OTRS for this file. The author didn't realize that the metadata was attached to the photo which I had uploaded. I edited the photo to remove the metadata and reloaded the photo but the original photo was restored by another member to restore the metadata. The author emailed Wiki permissions to ask about removal but never received a response so I nominated the photo for deletion with the above reason. The user who restored the metadata opposed the deletion so the deletion did not go through. I understand the user is doing what they think is appropriate but just wanted to ask someone else as well. I'm wondering what else I can do at this point? I did not think removing the metadata would be that big a deal since the author is licensing the image and not the embedded data or that was my impression. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Is there any way for me to get the photo with the metadata removed so that the same photo without metadata can be provided? Is there an email address I can have the author send their reason for the removal? Thank you. (Raasta123 (talk) 00:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC))[reply]

The user who reverted the removal did respond to the message of the author. He asked him to explain why he wanted this information removed. The author has received this message and replied to it, but without explanation. The exif doesn't contain any personal information. If the author really has a plausible reason to have it removed, he can reply again to our message. But I am not going to overrule the other volunteer without a good reason. Jcb (talk) 16:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok thank you I didn't know about this. Appreciate the info. (Raasta123 (talk) 23:53, 23 July 2013 (UTC))[reply]

File:Alessio Roberti foto ufficiale.jpg

Hi, could you have a look at that image. You confirmed OTRS permission, but there is still no license. Thx. --Ju Ta 19:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The same applies to File:DuartePimentel03.jpg, File:Ota Ginz. Esperantisto en Ĉeĥoslovakio (Vlastimil Novobilský).pdf, File:Petro Ginz (Vlastimil Novobilský).pdf, File:Vladislav Kurasov is a Guest Performer at The X-Factor-4 Ukraine Auditions.jpg and File:Legeforeningen-2009.jpg. --Ju Ta 20:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I opened the tickets and added the licenses. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Nl-Bakspatel-article.ogg

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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Nl-Bakspatel-article.ogg. 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.

Ju Ta 19:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Jcb (talk) 18:26, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sarathkumar and Ajithkumar hunger strike for Srilankan tamils.jpg

Hii! I have send permission mail to Commons but no response, Can you please check the status. Thank you Perumalism Chat 08:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not find it. Jcb (talk) 17:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bono as The Fly

Greetings, Jcb. Back in 2010 you confirmed the OTRS situation for File:Bono as The Fly Cleveland 1992.jpg. Do you know if permission was granted to release all of Steve Kalinsky's photo at u2gigs.com under a free license? Or did the permission only refer to this image specifically? (U2gigs hosts other photos by the same photographer here, here, and here.) All the best, – Quadell (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This ticket is only about this single file. Jcb (talk) 22:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Drat. Thanks for looking that up! – Quadell (talk) 12:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket 2010111810000293

Hi, I'd like to know what the OTRS ticket 2010111810000293 says. The picture from User:Missdenise22, for which this OTRS ticket is, is also released at the official facebook page of Sander Klerk. But for some of this facebook pictures the User:Sander 198 gave another OTRS ticket. The picture of User:Missdenise22 is clearly copied from [1] and shows a sign of a tv station. So I'm asking, if this OTRS ticket of User:Missdenise22 is right…--CennoxX (talk) 00:52, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I don't understand why I pasted the permission tag instead of deleting the file back in 2010. In the OTRS ticket I did explain to Missdenise that taking a picture of her television doesn't transfer the copyright to her. I deleted the file. Jcb (talk) 12:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I want to make it clear that this is a picture/still I created myself on the set. It is not from tv but from my own camera. Stills from tv always have the Nickelodeon logo. So this is a misunderstanding, and I would like to ask you to put it back. Thank you.Missdenise22 (talk) 11:49, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I have sufficient reasons not to believe you. Jcb (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is my own work! I took this with my own photocamera. It has nothing to do with a tv. I have sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to affirm this. Please do not make up wrong assumptions. Missdenise22 (talk) 09:44, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did read the message at OTRS, which didn't convince me. Jcb (talk) 16:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you making up things? This is MY OWN material. It is not even from a tv series. I took this clip after rehearsals. I really don't like the way I'm being treated here, you are portraying me as dishonest. If you are assuming things that is fine, but please don't judge things by assmumptions. I ask you to undelete it, or come up with something other than assumptions. I appreciate your effort to do things right, but please be reasonable here. Thank you. Missdenise22 (talk) 18:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Making a drama of it won't help. I'm not going to undelete that file. Period. Jcb (talk) 20:03, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to underpin your delusion, come with evidence. Do not ignore the guidelines of handling this matters.Missdenise22 (talk) 20:13, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You tried to get the file undeleted with the regular procedure, which was declined by one of my colleagues. You ran out of options to get the file undeleted. We are just not going to facilitate your copyright violations. Jcb (talk) 20:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I followed the regular procedure, that's the rules. The clip is filmed with my own photocamera, back in 2004. If it is going to be declined I want to receive a message of that, including the official reasons. Missdenise22 (talk) 20:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can find it here - Jcb (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that link. I just want to say I really appreciate the time and effort you put into Commons, but I hope you understand my point of view too. That photobucketprofile is mine too. I have put several pictures on there, pictures I took myself and pictures I collected over the years. There are also screenshots on there (which I know cannot be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, I completely understand the difference), but they are clearly recognized by the Nickelodeon logo. That is why the other files are called "zoop screenshot" and this one is not. There is a difference between "set photography" which happens on every set, and a broadcast. This particular file is from a short movieclip I filmed with my own photocamera on set during a rehearsal one day. I really don't know what else I can do to prove it to you. If you have any tips for me on how to prove it really is my own material, please let me know, if not, I think I just have to agree that this particular file is not placed back. I don't know what else to do. Thanks. Missdenise22 (talk) 21:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I keep-closed the DR on File:Sander Jan Klerk.JPG because of the evidence via Facebook, but I still find the Zoop file problematic. It has a very low resolution and the upper right corner shows a fragment of a logo. Jcb (talk) 20:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyright Watcher Barnstar
	Hi, I want to thank you for our conversation and your time. I see you put a lot of hard work into it. Even though the poster and administrator might not always agree, we both do our best to prove the point and the intention is good. Missdenise22 (talk) 10:24, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the photo of me with my dogs? I sent wikimedia commons persmissions forms twice

You deleted Dog_best_July_1_2013.jpg, which came from my computer's hard drive. I took the photo of myself using a timer and a tripod. {{help me}} Somebody also deleted my profile photo in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Sanello

Do I need to resubmit the release forms for both photos? 98.154.236.205 16:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)FrankSanello[reply]

98.154.236.205 16:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)FrankSanello[reply]

I remember the mails, where I was called a 'Wikifascist' and where I was said to go F*** myself. Jcb (talk) 21:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Wikimedia File Ticket#2013081510006043

Hello there Jcb, recently you have deleted a file claiming its description did not provide substantial details for its maintenence within Wikimedia, however I have recently talked with its creator and he agreed to release the file to Commons using a CC 3.0 by NC, can you check the ticket and also undelete the file?

Hi, I will read the ticket and respond to it. Jcb (talk) 21:39, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A CC-by-NC doesn't suffice for Commons, so it's correct to not use such a file in Commons.--CennoxX (talk) 00:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. I wrote that in my response to the ticket as well. Jcb (talk) 00:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch OTRS

Hi, I emailed the sculptor of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Canoe1967/Rights_holder_contacted in English with no response yet. A Dutch email may help to http://www.florentijnhofman.nl/dev/contact.php See also https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Canoe1967/Sculptors --Canoe1967 (talk) 20:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as there is no permission, you should not upload a file in the first place. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to send this kind of mails. Try the NL village pump please, this is not the job of the OTRS team. OTRS will process the permission when received. Jcb (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Jcb's conduct

I have filed a complaint on your conduct at the linked page. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 16:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jcb, it would be good if you could comment on the complaint and provide context from your point of view. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded sufficiently at the OTRS notice board. Trijnstel also replied to him at her user talk page and other users have replied sufficently at ANU, also showing that it was actually complainer who, illegally added {{PermissionOTRS}} to the disputed template (not being a member of the OTRS team). It has also come to light that complainer already has been knowing for a year that the OTRS permission was not in order. If complainer disagrees with a deletion, it's not the right why to keep and keep boring the administrator who deleted the files. I clearly stated to him (as you can see at the OTRS noticeboard) that I was not going to undelete them. The right procedure is UDR, althought there is not valid reason to undelete in this case. ANU is not the place to complain to an admin decision. I responded sufficiently to complainer at other places. Jcb (talk) 13:49, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, when looking at ANU I think you mean the JKadavoor comment. Ok, I will leave something there. Jcb (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No hurry, please see this as an opportunity to avoid it blowing up into more drama, a reasoned short reply on AN/U with regard to criticisms about admin action/comments is handy to point back at. --Fæ (talk) 14:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Klaus Basdorf.jpg

See User talk:Florentyna, 15 days time for the delivery of OTRS, you deleted it much too early. Please undelete. --Florentyna (talk) 14:35, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for the confusion. The 14 September notification does not belong to the procedure. The {OTRS received} was added 24 June, so the file could be speedy deleted from 24 July without further notice. I did open the OTRS ticket before I deleted the file. If a valid permission arrives, we will undelete it. Jcb (talk) 14:39, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Follow up

1. This is a follow up to the email conversation we had about my image uploads from the Indian Navy website. The permissions to use the image were submitted by me via OTRS and you added the OTRS permission tickets at here and five other such images. Thank you for doing that!

2. Since then, I have uploaded five more images from the Indian Navy website, under the same OTRS ticket. See File:President on-board INS Sindhurakshak.jpg, File:INS Ranjit (D53).jpg, File:INS Nirbhik.jpg, File:INS Kozhikode.jpg and File:INS Chakra.jpg. The permission given in the OTRS ticket covers all images published/hosted by the Indian Navy website, so these images are also covered under that. After uploading the images, I filled in the OTRS permission myself like this. But since my edit is tagged with a "OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member", I am guessing I shouldn't have done that. Did I mess up? What procedure should I follow when uploading any more images which are covered under #2013090610005872? Thanks! Anir1uph (talk) 22:51, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The usage of {{PermissionOTRS}} is reserved to members of the OTRS team. I made a template for you. In case of future uploads, you can specify {{Indian navy}} as a license. It includes the license and the OTRS permission tag. Jcb (talk) 23:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for my mistake. I am quite new to Commons, and still learning about stuff here. :) Thanks a lot for the template! I will use that in future. If I could trouble you a little more, can I point out two problems with it? The second line says "Italian Army" instead of "Indian Navy". The first line too seems to be missing a word after "and it is". I would have made the changes myself but the template is edit protected. :) Anir1uph (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in the first line, it should read "This work". Thanks! :) Anir1uph (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed it. Jcb (talk) 16:05, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Anir1uph (talk) 10:10, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Natasha Falle images

Hi Johan,

Thank you for responding to my question about the Natasha Falle images (File:Natasha Falle and Salvation Army officers.JPG and File:Natasha Falle.jpg). Will the images be restored once someone gets to them in the backlog? Also, do you know how I can merge my "Ambassador Neelix" and my "Neelix" accounts? I only want the "Neelix" account, which is the one I use on Wikipedia.

Ambassador Neelix (talk) 01:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merging two accounts is not possible. But you can redirect the user page of one account the the user page of the other account and do the same with the user talk page.

And yes, if we process a valid permission for a deleted file, we restore it. Jcb (talk) 09:02, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding so quickly to my questions. My situation with the "Neelix" and "Ambassador Neelix" accounts is more complicated than redirection. My main account is the "Neelix" account, which I have on Wikipedia, but I don't own the "Neelix" account on the Commons because someone created a barely used account by that name on the Commons. Is there some way for that account to be overwritten or transferred to me? Switching to the "Ambassador Neelix" account every time I come over to the Commons is less than ideal, particularly because it logs me out of my main "Neelix" account on Wikipedia. Any advice you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Ambassador Neelix (talk) 03:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see. We have a request page for that: Commons:USURP. Jcb (talk) 10:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for directing me to it! I will be sure to post a request there. Ambassador Neelix (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nelson - chemistry.pdf

File:Nelson - chemistry.pdf 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Leyo 16:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About ORTS ticket 2013092510006701

Hello Jcb,

On the pages of image I uploaded shows this massage:

An email has been received at OTRS concerning this file, and can be read here by users with an OTRS account. However, the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file. This may, among other reasons, be because there was no explicit release under a free license, or the email address that the permission came from is not associated with the location where the content was originally published. For an update on the issue, please contact the user who added this template to the page, or someone else with an OTRS account, or the OTRS noticeboard.

Note to OTRS volunteers: If the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with {{PermissionOTRS|id=XXX}}

Ticket link: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2013092510006701.

In fact, the artist Fu Wenjun gave me the permission to upload these images. I am wondering what is the problem and how we should solve it?

Thank you very much!

At 5 October I sent a request for more information, to which we did not yet receive an answer. The current tag will prevent deletion for one month, so that we have sufficient time to wait for the answer. Jcb (talk) 16:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you review this undeletion

As far as I can tell, those OTRS tickets are not sufficient, but maybe I've overlooked something. --99of9 (talk) 09:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I'm puzzle, how a non OTRS member like Fastily thinks he can use the {{PermissionOTRS}} template. And yes, I agree that this permission is not in order. I processed those tickets. I will delete the files and ask Fastily for an explanation. Jcb (talk) 11:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification regarding the deletion of File:Alice Ann Munro.jpg

Hi, why was the file deleted? the source website says it is Creative Commons Attribution or am I missing something? --Jayarathina (talk) 02:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jcb, I also wanted to ask about this: This photograph is still declared as available under a Creative Commons Attribution license at the official nobelprize.org web site, see the link by Jayarathina. What was the exact nature of the photographer's complaint? Did you tell him that the Nobel Prize website makes his photo available as CC-BY? In case he didn't really agree with this, maybe he should be told, so he can take the necessary steps to remove the CC-BY license from the Nobel Prize website and other people don't re-use it in good faith under the given license. Gestumblindi (talk) 13:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that at the source site they just don't understand the meaning of a CC license, because at the same page you can read: "Copyright © Derek Shapton 2013 Photo: Derek Shapton Strictly editorial use of these photographs is allowed provided that a copyright notice is applied "© Derek Shapton 2013" along with the name of the photographer.", which is clearly conflicting with a CC license. I will ask the source site to remove the CC. Jcb (talk) 14:19, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but why is that a conflict with a CC license? the license requires an attribution and they have mentioned how to attribute. (The Nobel price (@Nobelprize_org) tweeted the source url I mentioned before to some user who asked for a cc photo of Alice Munro. Sadly it seems they have deleted that tweet now.) I am pretty sure Nobel Media knows what CC license is. Not all pictures there are licensed under it. Also if the Author complained, we should first ask the author to complain to the source (Nobel media) because 1)they are not going to respond to our request 2) as long as the picture is there some one else can upload it again to Wikipedia. --Jayarathina (talk) 14:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The statement restricts the situations in which the file can be used, where such restrictions are not compatible with the CC license. Jcb (talk) 14:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taartschep

Beste Johan Bos,

Ik ben een groot fan van je werk als 'Voice of Wikipedia'. Ik heb samen met vrienden met veel plezier naar je ingesproken teksten geluisterd en ik heb er nog een boel van geleerd ook! Als eerbetoon heb ik daarom een remix gemaakt van 'Taartschep'. Je kunt hem hier beluisteren:

https://soundcloud.com/lynchlynch/taartschep-featuring-jcb

Ik hoop dat je het leuk vindt.

Groetjes,

Karl.

LOL. Het wordt zo meer een taart-rap ipv een taart-schep :-) - Jcb (talk) 16:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saint Vorles.jpg

Bonjour, Le courriel d'autorisation a été envoyé le 01/09/2013 à 'permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org' avec le titre Saint Vorles Convaincre les auteurs et remplir les différents formulaires n'est pas choses facile. C'est démotivant de voir supprimer le fichier mais en plus de voir supprimer les liens. S'il y a un problème prévenez avant de supprimer et est ce que des délais d'un mois et demi correspondent à la pratique courante ? Cordialement. --Bildoj (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

J'allais à traiter le courrier électronique, mais je devais partir. Je vais le faire aujourd'hui. Jcb (talk) 20:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merci beaucoup. --Bildoj (talk) 12:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I initiated WP:OTRSN about OTRS # 2013072010003761

I initiated Wikipedia:OTRSN about OTRS # 2013072010003761. Geo Swan (talk) 15:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification, I left a response. Jcb (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Tell me please what else do you need regarding this image? Thank youǃ --Anastan (talk) 21:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We received a permission from the depicted person, but we need to receive permission from the photographer instead. Jcb (talk) 21:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But he is the holder of the copyrights? Photographer gave the rights to him. --Anastan (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two weeks ago, I sent him a request for clarification, but this email message remains unanswered till now. Jcb (talk) 19:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File Urs Wäfler

I saw there was a deletion request. I would support such a deletion. There is no public interest, this person is not a public person like for instance Barack Obama. Maybe he is a sort of a busybody, which should not be supported. We should rather respect his privacy. Also there were doubts if this person really exists, maybe it is a fake. A ticket in OTRS is not an evidence for the an existence in the real world. In general there seems to be something wrong. It is a kind of a poverty testimony, if Wikimedia Commons is dependent on an image of private person. Shame on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.230.130 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your message. This file was used in the 2011 WMF board elections, and now, all of a sudden, there's some controversy. I'm wondering why. Anyway, I was the one who nominated the file for deletion, using the rationale provided by 188.62.78.219 on Meta-wiki. The deletion request was closed by Jcb, so I'd advise asking him your questions instead. Mathonius (talk) 11:11, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Probably there is nobody against a deletion of this image. Please proceed.

There is a valid permisssion from the photographer and there is a message from the depicted person in which he states to be the depicted person. The picture has been up for a few years and there seems to be some re-use outside Wikimedia projects. Till now we do not have a valid reason for deletion, but we do have good reasons to keep it, e.g. prevention of troubles for re-users. Jcb (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think it is valuable to promote this person. The image was used for the 2011 WMF board elections only, it makes no sense to continue to keep it. It is just legacy.

It doesn't make sense to delete it either. (It would not save storage space anyway, because any 'deleted' file is just invisible for non-moderators.) Jcb (talk) 21:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This person is not notable. Please follow the notability guidlines for people and delete this image.

OTRS ticket number 2013092210000266 - Permission for photo sent

Dear Jcb, I sent the permission for the photograph by e-mail to permissions@wikimedia.org that was previously uploaded as File:Михаил Сергеев.jpg (OTRS ticket number 2013092210000266), which appeared with the article about Mikhail Sergeev which is available at https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2,_%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BB_%D0%AE%D1%80%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87. The photograph was removed from the Wikipedia website because appropriate permission was not provided. It was provided in the attached e-mail document, and I ask to have the photograph appear again on the Wikipedia website. Andrei Strokov

That ticket is in a queue I cannot access. (Probably the queue of the Russian Wikipedia). I think the best thing to do is to ask it here: Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard - Jcb (talk) 21:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:OTRS

Hola Jcb, lo único que he hecho es añadir el número de ticket que ya había sido asignado a las imágenes de esa web. File:Tessera - Legion de María.jpg fue la primera, con la cual el usuario solicitó el permiso a OTRS. El problema es que el usuario no entendió bien el procedimiento y pensó que debía enviar la solicitud de permiso para cada una de las imágenes de la misma web. Puedes ver el intercambio de mensajes con las correspondientes explicaciones en su talk page, donde también intervino otro voluntario de OTRS, de ahí que yo procediera a la restauración de un par de imágenes (borradas por la falta de permiso) y añadiera la plantilla, algo que debería haber hecho el mismo usuario al subir las imágenes, puesto que ya tenía el ticket para todas ellas. Lo siento si me he excedido haciendo esto, la próxima vez avisaré a alguno de los voluntarios. Un saludo. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 21:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removing file

Hi Jcb, I would like to replace [2] by a corresponding WEBM file which has increased quality as well as some improvements according to the discussion de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Stephanderpfeifer. Moreover I need to correct the file's name (to Time_lapse_floodwaters_Germany_June_2013.webm). As an administrator, could you completely remove the old file, please? Regards --User:Cm.albrecht 16:00, 05 Nov 2013 (UTC)

Normally that would not be possible without a Deletion Request, but now it's just a few days after upload, I am allowed to fulfill your request. Jcb (talk) 17:25, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response. The new file is online at [3]--User:Cm.albrecht 21:30, 05 Nov 2013 (UTC)

File:A.acre-ac.jpg

Why?

Yanguas (talk) 15:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is perfectly explained in the license template at the file description page. Jcb (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You admins

If you think I don't know what this really is about, you're a fool. This user doesn't even get a warning on their talk page to not continue in personal attacks, something that is pretty much the bare minimum standard. Moreover, their personal attacks are excused by an admin who is supposed to suppress such things rather then encourage them. Meanwhile the rest of your flock turn a blind eye and do nothing!!! You really think I don't know? Don't insult my intelligence. Fry1989 ^eh? 02:30, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful, you would better have a break right now. Jcb (talk) 02:34, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I'm being very careful. I know exactly what I desperately want to say but can not. Whether I say it or not does not change the truth however; If ANY other recipient user had reported those personal attacks which were completely uncalled for, Ovigilante would have garnished some other sort of response than just the excuse of "you reap what you sow" so that makes it ok. Fry1989 ^eh? 02:38, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I told you that making excuses for personal attacks would only encourage them. It is absolutely pathetic that it would take 4 instances of personal attacks to finally warn a user on their talk page not to continue. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:41, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop this. I am not involved in your conflict, don't try to involve me. (Please do not respond to this message.) Jcb (talk) 17:45, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Reichstag-Plenarsaal.jpg

You closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Reichstag-Plenarsaal.jpg as Kept. - this is a public place, so FoP. There is no FoP inside of public buildings in Germany. See de:Panoramafreiheit#Deutschland. sугсго 12:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am an admin at Wikimedia Commons and I have to reckon with the information as offered at Wikimedia Commons, in this case: Commons:FOP#Germany. I don't read there that a 'public place' has to be in open air. Jcb (talk) 13:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Nonetheless, Syrcro is right, FoP in Germany does not apply inside buildings. German law uses the words "an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen", which is translated at COM:FOP as "on public ways, streets or places (e.g. squares, plazas)". "Platz" in this context specifically means a square or plaza, a public open space. --Rosenzweig τ 16:40, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to clarify this in COM:FOP and/or renominate the file. I will not touch it. Jcb (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Verlust an Prestige für die niederländische Architektur

Hi Johan Bos (Jcb). Im 20sten Jahrhundert spielte Holland mehrmals eine führende Rolle in der zeitgenössischen Architektur. Bei der internationalen Strömung "Structuralism (architecture)" z.B. waren Aldo van Eyck und Herman Hertzberger immer die prominentesten Persönlichkeiten. Am 6. Oktober 2013 haben Sie die berühmte Foto File:Estec.Aldo van Eyck.1c.gif entfernt, obwohl Sie genau wussten, dass die Fotografin Jacqueline Midavaine das weltweite Copyright für Wikipedia gegeben hatte. Durch das Wegfallen dieser wichtigen Foto ist Holland vom ersten Platz auf den dritten Platz gefallen, weil keine andere repräsentative Foto bei Wikipedia vorhanden war. Darf ich Sie freundlich fragen, die File:Estec.Aldo van Eyck.1c.gif erneut zu laden. Tun Sie das nicht, dann machen Sie sich schuldig an "Beschädigung der eigenen niederländischen Kultur". Leuk2 12:00, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ich kann das Bild wieder setzen, wenn wir eine gültige Genehmigung durch OTRS erhalten. Jcb (talk) 17:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User_nerdspeak

Category:User_nerdspeak 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!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

188.104.98.218 10:26, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nl-Het Geheugen van Nederland-article.ogg

File:Nl-Het Geheugen van Nederland-article.ogg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Meerdervoort (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Just in case, after seeing this, I confirm that 1) File:Helmut Fritz.jpg was a wrong merge. Actually, I'm responsible for that : I tried to explain to the uploader how he could send his otrs authorization but I made a mistake with the ticket. I am not the uploader nor the author~, but I was involved as I gave the uploader a hand, in order to avoid the picture's deletion. 2) I have no relation with User:JGeorges, who was apparently trying to impersonate for his copyvios. thanks, JJ Georges (talk) 14:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. JGeorges has been blocked in the meantime. Jcb (talk) 16:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editor @ ar.wiki

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 13:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Jcb (talk) 13:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bericht Fotoherman

Goedemiddag Johan,

Op 15 november zijn wij elkaar tegen gekomen bij Coen en Sander in Hilversum. We hebben het toen gehad over een nieuwe foto van zanger rinus. Jij hebt dat dezelfde dag nog keurig geplaatst hier op wikipedia. Keurig zoals afgesproken, maar ik zie nu dat iemand onder de naam "Meerdervoort" zich erin heeft gemengd en e.e.a. heeft verandert. Zou jij dit weer terug willen zetten naar de afsproken situatie met een stukje erbij 'zoals afgesproken met de fotograaf' zodat een ander er met de kleine vingertjes vanaf blijft. Zou je bij de externe link rinus zijn fotowebsite www.zangerrinus.net willen vermelden? Alvast bedankt! Met vriendelijke groeten, Fotoherman.

Beste Herman, ik heb even gekeken wat er gebeurd is. Op Wikimedia Commons is het beleid dat credits op de afbeeldingspagina worden gezet, in dit geval dus op File:Zanger Rinus.jpg. Mochten er credits in de afbeelding zelf staan, dan worden die er altijd uitgepoetst. Hier kan ik dus niets aan veranderen. Eigenlijk is het ook wel logisch, want degene die de tekst van een artikel schrijft heeft net zoveel recht op vermelding als degene die de foto heeft gemaakt. De auteurs van de tekst zijn te bekijken door 1 keer te klikken op 'geschiedenis' en de auteur van de afbeelding is te bekijken door 1 keer te klikken of de afbeelding.

Wat betreft de externe link is het goed om te weten dat Wikipedia een vrij streng beleid heeft voor het toelaten van externe links. De officiele website kan worden vermeld, maar een link naar een aparte fotowebsite past niet binnen het beleid, waar ik ook aan gebonden ben. Groetjes, Johan - Jcb (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Its quite important one. Do take a look at it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:45, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have read it. Jcb (talk) 19:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:EmmyDerek.jpg

About [4] I was under impression that we wait 30 days (or more if necessary) for OTRS process to complete, However, license needs to be included from the beginning. I know that OTRS will likely mention license too, but uploader should know the license at the upload time - how else would he know if it is valid or not. --Jarekt (talk) 04:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. I was somehow thinking to delete a 'No permission' template. You are right, there has to be a license. And the ticket doesn't yet mention one. Jcb (talk) 06:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:IBEI Logo.jpg

Hola, he cometido un error al usar la batch task. Creo que es una mala idea buscar copyvios de manera masiva.Cameta (talk) 10:26, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no pasa nada. Jcb (talk) 11:25, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aure Atika

Hello. I noticed this discussion. FYI, I have been myself contacted by Georges Biard, who had been contacted by the agent of this actress : apparently, she had an issue not only with this photo but also with this one, because she does not like herself on it. I uploaded the 2012 photo precisely to replace the 2006 photo, which was a bit blurry. I told Georges Biard that there was no reason whatsoever to remove these photos from commons (Aure Atika was making public appearances, in very important film festival : one should expect to be photographed. Anyway, the images are definitely not detrimental to her image.) but that this actress and her agent could provide another photo more to their liking, which could be used in the wikipedia articles. JJ Georges (talk) 13:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, in general we do not fulfil such request by depicted people, unless it's a reasonable request. At OTRS we deal with such requests almost daily. Jcb (talk) 13:26, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nl-Coen en Sander Show-article.ogg

File:Nl-Coen en Sander Show-article.ogg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Kattenkruid (talk) 23:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/12/Category:Dutch Colonial Architecture in New York

Thank you for deleting this category. The "Categories for discussion" entry still exists. I don't know how to close it. Can you close it for me, please? Thank you very much. Vzeebjtf (talk) 05:58, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Jcb (talk) 10:29, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Jcb, just wanted to come along to thank you for helping out in the info (es) queue, especially in your case, that you are not a native speaker. Btw, I just cleaned up the queue. All the best, Poc o² 15:21, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as well! Jcb (talk) 17:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Verlust an Prestige II

Hi Jcb. Beim obigen Artikel "Verlust an Prestige..." schreiben Sie persönlich: "Ich kann das Bild wieder setzen, wenn wir eine gültige Genehmigung durch OTRS erhalten." Um eine hinderliche Bürokratie auszuschalten wäre es vorteilhaft, wenn Sie alle Forderungen an fremde Copyright-Besitzer einmal klar formulieren würden wie zum Beispiel:

1. Der Copyright-Besitzer ist einverstanden, dass ...
2. Der Copyright-Besitzer ...
3. Der ...

Den fremden Copyright-Besitzern werden dann all diese Forderungen vorgelegt (via Email). Wenn sie alle Punkte mit "Ja" beantworten, dann ist der Weg frei für Aufnahme bei Wikipedia. Thanks, Leuk2 13:00, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sehe Commons:E-Mail-Vorlagen - Jcb (talk) 23:28, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinmukhamet_Akhimov

Greetings Jcb,

I've sent requested email made by the provided template to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and still the image was unlinked(deleted?), please tell me why? Email was sent at Dec 21 2013. I can forward it to you as well.

This image was unlinked from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinmukhamet_Akhimov

Unfortunately our mail system has a backlog of about two weeks. If the permission is processed, we are able to restore the file. Jcb (talk) 13:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

	Happy Holidays!
	G'day, just a quick greeting wishing you and your family happy holidays and all the best for 2014. And of course, a big thank you for putting a leg up by doing what you do on Commons, and helping to make it the fantastic project that it is. Greetings from a warm west coast of Aussie. russavia (talk) 01:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Jcb (talk) 01:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blokada

No speak english. Nie rozumiem za co dostałem blokadę. Za to zo że oznaczam szablonami zdjęcia rodzinne na commons? Za to że bezwartościowe grafiki uważam za zbyteczne na commons? Nie rozumiesz co piszę ja też nie wiem o co ci chodziło. Jest między nami bariera językowa ale pragnę byś wiedział że nie działałałem w złej wierze, chciałem dobrze, nie jestem szkodnikiem ani wandalem. Jestem pożytecznym userem, Twoja blokada wobec mnie była pochopna i niesprawiedliwa. Zapytaj o mnie User:Wpedzich. 16:50, 24 December 2013 (UTC)Grzegorznadolski (talk)[reply]

Mam nadzieję, że wiesz, to tłumaczenie Google. Powodem zablokowany przez jedną godzinę jest to, że chciałem, aby przeczytać stronę dyskusji. Byłaś plików nominowaniu do szybkiego usunięcia, ale nie było żadnego ważnego powodu, dla szybkiego usunięcia. W przypadku "poza zakresem", proszę użyć "zgłoś do usunięcia" z menu. Jcb (talk) 22:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Działałem po rozmowie na kanale IRC z admin User:Wpedzich, Twoją wiadomość przeczytałem tyle że nie za bardzo wiedziałem o co ci chodzi i nadal nie za bardzo wiem. Popełniłem błąd formalny? Tylko tyle? Nie wandalizuję. Ponadto zablokowałeś mnie bez ostrzeżenia. Tak się nie robi, jestem pożytecznym user. To było nie fair. Jestem Polakiem i wtedy na commons z pewnością był jakiś wikicommons-admin Polak i jak co bym robił źle to on by mnie uporządkował, poinformował, poinstruował. Nie znam Twojego języka a brak reakcji to nie wyraz lekceważenia, ale po prostu nie zrozumienie treści w obcym języku. Twoja blokada było pochopna i krzywdządza. Grzegorznadolski (talk) 09:28, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone through a number of photos uploaded by one user, in cooperation with Grzegorznadolski. I deleted those which I considered private photos, where the uploader and/or members of his family were visible, or where passers-by on the streets, with identifiable faces were. I asked Grzegorz to tag for deletion those which do not represent "educational content" as I put it. Knowing Poland, its places and the value of the photos I trust that he did a good job (although I will recheck). I understand that the uploader might be an older gentleman who might not be well-versed in the mission of Commons and WIkimedia in general, hence the "family album" character of his uploads, but some of his pictures do hold real value. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 12:10, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I understand your intentions, but I think that in case of a contributor who also uploads useful content, speedy deletion is a bad idea. A normal DR will give the contributor and others the opportunity to respond to the nomination. We currently do not have a backlog on DRs, so a normal DR will get the file deletion after one week if there are no valid objections. Can you explain to Grzegorznadolski that I did not block him for vandalism? I just blocked him for one hour, to make him read his talk page. I requested him to stop tagging the files for speedy deletion, but he continued, so I had to do something. Jcb (talk) 17:20, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mass DR Request?

I asked Fastilly here whether this uploader's images can be placed in a mass DR? I see he has uploaded more images on December 25....and they are unlikely free like this image with no direct source but from a flickr account with ARR images. Can you do a mass DR on this user's images? It may be better if he is blocked for a few days too. Just wondering? --Leoboudv (talk) 20:11, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, see Help:VisualFileChange.js for instructions how to install the mass nomination tool. Jcb (talk) 21:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steve Wiest Studio with the One O'Clock.jpg

Hoi Jcb, ik zag dat je dit bestand verwijderd had maar ik vond nog een OTRS-ticket dat hier bijhoort. Het gaat om ticket:2013121510006321. Misschien wil jij deze afhandelen aangezien je al ontdekt hebt dat er iets niet klopte? Mvg. Natuur12 (talk) 16:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Jcb (talk) 16:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dankjewel. Natuur12 (talk) 16:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Teatro de la Zarzuela.jpg

Do you, or any Spanish speaking Admin, know if this image is free for Commons? Just wondering since its an important image but the source doesn't say if its free. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The linked page does not say anything on copyright. Source unclear. I have started a DR. Jcb (talk) 22:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That was what I thought but an Admin such as you will have more experience here. The link is expired and I can't ask Ecemaml since he/she has retired. I will vote to delete in the DR. Thank You for your input, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright tag removal

I assume this edit was a mistake, with which you removed the copyright tag while adding the OTRS ticket from the image I found in Category:Media without a license: needs history check today. I sure you are well aware that we need to be careful when editing such image details because it could well have been deleted for lack of a licence except that I reviewed the history and found the problem. Please review my readding licence and make sure it complies with the ticket you added. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 21:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing this. This seems to be a bug in the tool. I normally check the page after adding the permission. Somehow I must have overlooked this. Jcb (talk) 21:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:1497818 10202748383218893 430695912 o.jpg

Hi you are deleted this file 1497818 10202748383218893 430695912 o.jpg,but this file is a free file (therefore don't viole the violation of copyright) and the author's own work,he has sent the permittion fr@wikimedia.org or permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org you can verify please the other file are also permittion of author and have been sent to fr@wikimedia.org or permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org. sorry for my english. Iffrit51 (talk) 07:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the permission sent to OTRS turns out to be valid, we will undelete the file. I see the filename is mentioned today in ticket number 2013122910006901. We will propably process it within a few days. Jcb (talk) 11:12, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

you applied a headband for the files until they verify ? Iffrit51 (talk) 12:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is an ongoing mail conversation with OTRS. If this leads to verification, we can undelete the files. Nothing to gain here on-wiki. Jcb (talk) 12:48, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks Iffrit51 (talk) 12:58, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

peter groot kormelink

Hallo Jcb u heeft mijn foto peter groot kormelink.jpg verwijderd, nou vraag ik me af hoe ik hem dan wel zou moeten uploaden, want ik ben wel gewoon in het bezit van alle rechten enzo.

De verwijderreden is dat er geen licentie was aangegeven. Het is niet de bedoeling dat je hem opnieuw uploadt. Neem even contact op met OTRS (mag in het Nederlands). Als wij concluderen dat de auteursrechten in orde zijn, dan kunnen we de afbeelding terugplaatsen. Jcb (talk) 14:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Euro coins

With respect, I've reverted your removal of the copyright violations tags on the three images I tagged earlier today. These are clear and blatant copyright violations. I don't claim to be an expert, but reviewing User:Hammersoft/coins shows a DR is pointless. Euro coin images, minus Finland, never survive DR. This user has uploaded multiple other copyright violations as well. I've tagged an enormous number of Euro coins for copyright violation deletion before. You can see my deleted edits for evidence of that if you'd like. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:50, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless whether a DR gives an almost 100% chance for deletion, copyvio is the wrong procedure for these cases, unless the file itself is copied from somewhere. Your request for speedy deletion was declined by an administrator. Reverting such a decision is not an option. Start a regular DR instead. Jcb (talk) 00:54, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be doing so. You are quite out of line and are allowing a copyright violation to sustain. DR after DR after DR has failed to support any of these images remaining on the project. In light of that, thousands of these images have been speedy deleted (or tagged for it) before by myself and others. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Euro coins (commemorative) for one of many, and note the presence of coins of Greece and Luxemburg on that DR. Yet, we must go through yet another DR to get these deleted? --Hammersoft (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want it deleted? Yes, you will have to start a DR. Jcb (talk) 01:09, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or, you could do the right thing and avoid the bureaucracy. There's ample reason to delete under Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#File #1, and Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#General_reasons #4, since there has already been community consensus on Euro coins of Greece and Luxemburg. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent NPD deletion

Can you please provide some context to the NPD deletion of File:McPherson Ridge Gettysburg Hist Marker.jpg? Your edit summary was marked with "weird license." That image was recently !kept in ~~Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Pennsylvania state historical markers~~ correction: Commons:Deletion requests/PAHMC, and I'm curious about what was weird about that license. Thanks.--GrapedApe (talk) 13:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It had a combination of conflicting templates. But the reason to delete is that it comes from an external website, without evidense of permission. Jcb (talk) 13:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- It's possible that the conflicting templates came out of Commons:Deletion requests/PAHMC, since the historical marker had separate copyright issues from the image itself. Though, if the photo itself was improperly sourced, then that's enough.--GrapedApe (talk) 21:17, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Himno Nacional Mexicano, versión instrumental completa.ogg

Si eliminaste ese archivo, por que no eliminas este, si de ahi copié las licencias del que me borraste?, hay que ser parejos!. --Urbanuntil (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Posiblemente es verdad. He nominado el archivo para ser borrado también: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Marcha Real.ogg. Jcb (talk) 22:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Jcb/archive/5

Your question.

OTRS ticket 2013050810010397

Message

Message

OTRS Ticket #2013051810001682

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

Mentioning personal relationship

OTRS ticket #2013050210011398

Category:Silver Oak Cellars and Category:Twomey Cellars

A barnstar for you!

italian otrs tkt

Otrs

Banderas.

User:Paulbrugman = Ries Mulder ?

Screenshot (2013053110004654)

OTRS Ticket 2013070110008346

Logo

Copyright status: File:Nl-Bakspatel-article.ogg

Bono as The Fly

OTRS ticket 2010111810000293

A barnstar for you!

Why did you delete the photo of me with my dogs? I sent wikimedia commons persmissions forms twice

Regarding Wikimedia File Ticket#2013081510006043

Dutch OTRS

File:Klaus Basdorf.jpg

Hello! Follow up

Natasha Falle images

About ORTS ticket 2013092510006701

Please can you review this undeletion

Request for clarification regarding the deletion of File:Alice Ann Munro.jpg

Taartschep

I initiated WP:OTRSN about OTRS # 2013072010003761

Image

File Urs Wäfler

OTRS ticket number 2013092210000266 - Permission for photo sent

Re:OTRS

Removing file

You admins

Verlust an Prestige für die niederländische Architektur

Hi

Editor @ ar.wiki

Bericht Fotoherman

You've got mail

File:IBEI Logo.jpg

Aure Atika

Thanks

Verlust an Prestige II

Happy Holidays

Blokada

Mass DR Request?

Copyright tag removal

File:1497818 10202748383218893 430695912 o.jpg

peter groot kormelink

Euro coins

Recent NPD deletion

Navigation menu

Search