User talk:Tm/Archive 5

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

Renaming Trams

O teu nome foi referido aqui. A próxima vez é no ANU (poderá até ser desta vez mesmo, já q o Marcus é um traste e é bem capaz de ignorar a minha queixa). -- Tuválkin 05:11, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Como tinha referido anteriormente, não o conheço de lado algum nem o senhor andou na escola comigo nem faz parte do meu círculo de amizades pelo que agradeço que faça a fineza de não me tratar por tu. Não vejo as razões de queixa. Os "nomes" que propõem são confusos, crípticos e pouco inteligíveis com @ e sem espaçamento(?), cheio de abreviaturas ininteligíveis, portanto quem faz nomes confusos é o senhor. Ainda como uploader tenho a benesse de poder pedir a alteração de nomes que entenda estar confusos~, pelo acima explicado. Tm (talk) 05:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Senhores, pá, é no serviço. E em qualquer serviço que não fosse uma treta, um tipo como tu já estava no olho da rua. Brinca lá aos uploads, fazendo o que um bot faria 1000 vezes mais rápido, e nem vale a pena agradeceres a quem anda atrás de ti a corrigir os disparates que os utilizadores do Flickr metem e tu nem vês (tipo Palácio da Pena em Category:Lisboa, já para não falar de geolocalizações genéricas e desviadas por quilómetros). Mas não queiras guerrinhas, a sério, muito menos com questões técnicas metidas ao barulho. Se queres renomear meaningless names tens muitos para emendar, dos milhares que tu próprio trouxeste para o Commons. Não são necessárias benesses, aliás — altera os nomes antes de os carregares para aqui, como fazemos todos. (Já agora: Por que não pedes file mover rights? Assim podias renomear o que quisesses, ser ter de chatear o outro.) -- Tuválkin 05:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Tendo em vista que continua em tratar-me como seu compincha, não me dirija mais a palavra enquanto insistir nessa forma de tratamento. Fique a saber que com a sua forma de tratar as pessoas, com falta de respeito e educação, seria o senhor que já estaria despedido em qualquer local de trabalho sério. Não tenho que lhe "agradecer", visto a geolocalização é importada directamente e que também comete erros clamorosos e "disparates" em categorizações (eu também ainda não vi um seu agradecimento pelas imagens que importei sobre Lisboa em especial dos seus eléctricos ou como diria outro "Quid pro quo"). Tm (talk) 05:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
(Deixemos essas tretas de lado, aqui toda a gente se trata por tu, era o que faltava.)
Quanto às geolocalizações, pois é: Se estás a importar 2000 fotos de uma fez, ou vêm todas (incl. as erradas), ou nenhuma (e perdem-se as boas). Já deves ter reparado que tenho eliminado bastantes (um tipo punha tudo em Monsanto, outro no Xafariz de Dentro, outros é no Marquês — assim não dá!), algumas com o Visual File Change. Mas o problema é que toda a informação que cada um de nós aqui cria ou para aqui importa fica cá e é mau serviço se erros não forem corrigidos ou apagados. Os erros de localização dos gajos do Flickr aqui no Commons passam a ser erros do Tm…
Se não viste agradecimentos por teres importado aqueles elétricos todos, é por que um de nos se esqueceu: Supondo que fui eu (e é bem provável!), epá, obrigado! E agradeço-te com tanta alma e sinceridade como a que ponho em insultar-te quando descubro uma asneira tua. Não me incomodo se fizeres o mesmo, aliás.
-- Tuválkin 06:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

move SL Benfica to S.L. Benfica

The category should not be named "SL Benfica" it should be named "S.L. Benfica" just like the Wikipedia article. I was fixing it until you added the redirection. How can I fix it? 85.246.162.157 22:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

What about the other sub categories starting with "SL"? 85.246.162.157

Viva Tm, tomei a liberdade de fazer uma imagem derivada. Foi feita à pressa e com uma ferramenta que nunca tinha usado, sem muitos preciosismos, só como exemplo. Se solicitar ajuda em Commons:Graphic Lab com certeza farão muito melhor. . cc: User:Tuvalkin. Abraço --JotaCartas (talk) 07:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


COM:AN/U

Deutsch  English  español  français  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  português  sicilianu  slovenščina  svenska  Tagalog  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  македонски  русский  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  العربية  +/−


Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Attacking and changes without comunity consensus. Edits of yours have been raised by me at AN/U.

Liamdavies (talk) 15:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

?????????? Your editions were motive to the start of this discussion and you warn me??????????????. Tm (talk) 17:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Miss Potter Premiere (12).jpg

Why did you cancel my editing? My version of the file is after all better. Halicki (talk) 18:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, if a speedy nomination gets declined, your next option is a regular DR ('nominator for deletion' from the tools menu) - Jcb (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

  • No i will not make this DR. Your stubbornly refusing to delete a file, as already told you, that is not own work of the flickr user, as he himself says, so this file is eligible to be speedy deleted. Tm (talk) 22:13, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
  • You have blocked me????? Your clearly abusing your administrative powers, and so if you dont unblock me imediatly i will report your abusive and wastefull behavior. Tm (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
    • It was you that should, if you disagreed, that should had transformed this speedy deletion in a regular DR as is clearly stated in Commons:Deletion_guidelines#Speedy_deletion that "If anyone disagrees with the speedy deletion of a particular file, please convert to a regular deletion request, but it seems like that you are above Commons policies. Tm (talk) 22:28, 15 January 2014 (UTC)


Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "Per stated above and in history of File:Trains Stresa-Mottarone (Italie) (5028432487).jpg i tryed to get this file speedy deleted but administrator Jcb declined and said that i should open a regular DR instead, but, if he disagreed with the rationale, it should had been him that should had opened a regular DR per "If anyone disagrees with the speedy deletion of a particular file, please convert to a regular deletion request as stated in Commons:Deletion_guidelines#Speedy_deletion. Instead he constantly reverted my addiction of the speedy deletion tag and blocked that page and me, to the contrary of Commons policy, abusing his administrative powers. Tm (talk) 22:34, 15 January 2014 (UTC)"
Unblock reason: "No longer needed, issue resolved. Jcb (talk) 23:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)"
This template should be archived normally.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  hrvatski  magyar  Plattdüütsch  português  suomi  हिन्दी  македонски  русский  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  中文(臺灣)  +/−

Hi, if a speedy nomination gets declined, your next option is a DR, you know that. With you history of edit warring (and being blocked for edit warring), it's clear that you are well aware that we do not accept this. If you promise to stop your actions at this file, I am willing to unblock you. If not, your block is only for one day. Jcb (talk) 22:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
1- No, i dont have a history in 8 years of Commons of edit warring, see better what were the motives for the 3 blocks.
2- Did you read what i wrote???? No it is not the way you say. The official policy that Commons has it is not what you state that if a speedy gets declined it should be the speedy deletion requester that should send the file to DR. It is the other way around, it should be the decliner that should send the file to DR as it is clearly stated in Commons:Deletion_guidelines#Speedy_deletion in "If anyone disagrees with the speedy deletion of a particular file, please convert to a regular deletion request. So what you should do is to unblock me and the file and send it to DR as per official policies of Commons that you as an administrator should uphold higher than us the regular users, instead of inventing a policy of your own. Tm (talk) 22:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
An administrator can decline a speedy deletion, which is not just disagree as per what you are quoting. This is not an obvious copyvio. E.g. the Flickr user may turn out to be the legal heir. Jcb (talk) 22:56, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
There was an edition conflity. so this wjat i wrote before of your edition. "Well i have to admit, it that i misread, months or years ago the phrase that i quote, and you are right all along. It should be the speedy deletion requester that should, in case someone oposses, that should send to regular DR said file. I apologize for the mess, confusion and waste of time and ask to be unblocked as i will send this, if unblocked, to DR between 00:00 GMT and 02:00 GMT, as will have to leave my pc for some hours now. Tm (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)" Tm (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for your understanding. I have unblocked you. Jcb (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jcb, putting aside any rights or wrongs of Tm's behaviour, could you confirm that you were not in dispute with Tm before creating this block? -- (talk) 23:06, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I don't remember to have had any recent or less recent history with Tm. Jcb (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt reply. -- (talk) 23:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)just
Just to confirm that, as far as i can tell, I and Jcb dont have or had ever any dispute. Tm (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Good to hear. Both you and Jcb have long histories here, and you are a great contributor to this project. I thought I'd just check as I would hope old hands could resolve these things with a few words and nods without leaving block logs. -- (talk) 23:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
File:Straw Fox (5821609181).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!

--ghouston (talk) 02:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Straw Fox 2 (5822182298).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!

--ghouston (talk) 02:38, 20 January 2014 (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!

O arquivo/ficheiro File:Archeologia christã.djvu substitui as imagens individuais. É possível até mesmo lincar uma página desse livro em um verbete da Wikipedia usando, por exemplo, [[File:Archeologia christã.djvu|page=9|250px]]. Aliás, se ainda não conhece, a Wikimedia também possui o Wikisource. Sou administrador no wiki lusófono. Qualquer coisa, só me procurar =) Lugusto 20:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Alanna Kolette back.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!

Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 19:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Gemma (8448682888).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!

Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Watermarks are strongly discuraged, besides that it showed a explicit copyright symbol and moreover photos from that user are licenced with a non commercial Creative Commons which is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons licenses policy. Be careful with your uploads. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 23:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

  • I´am carefull with my uploads, so much that i´am a image reviewer and as you can see it was flickreview in 20 September 2012 by File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske) and having a copyright symbol doenst mean that it is all rights reserved and that Creative Commons licenses are irrevocable. I resquested its undeletion. Tm (talk) 07:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

You are right (Jameslwoodward) I made a mistake, my apologies to both of you. But anyway I think that watermark should be removed, it may confuse people. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 03:23, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

As a side note to this COM:DEL, you've missed to extract pages from Category:Guimarães- Apontamentos para a sua história - vol. II. Or it was only you with double standards? Lugusto 19:37, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

User problems report

Hi. Please pay attention to a new report: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Liamdavies and trams in Prague. --ŠJů (talk) 19:23, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:People of Basra

this category means eveyone in Basra,even us navy soldiers.--Sonia Sevilla (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Manifestação em Lisboa 15 de Setembro.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Steinsplitter (talk) 15:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Solved, there was a transfer problem. --Jcornelius (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Manifestação em Lisboa 15 de Setembro - 7991782847.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Steinsplitter (talk) 15:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Solved, there was a transfer problem. --Jcornelius (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Manifestação em Lisboa 15 de Setembro - 7991783083.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Steinsplitter (talk) 15:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Solved, there was a transfer problem. --Jcornelius (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
File:Tom Hiddleston @ Toronto International Film Festival 2011.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!

Lady Lotus (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Computer monitors in B&W.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!

Leyo 10:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Moving "A Trip to the Moon" category

Hello Tm. A few days ago I hand-moved a few dozen files so that the category "Le voyage dans la lune (film)" could be renamed "A Trip to the Moon." The rename, unlike the original category title, follows the proposed Commons guidelines for naming categories: "Proper names … should in general use the name most frequently used in English-language literature." It is also more concise, is easier for English-speakers to spell and remember, and makes the category consistent with the title of the Wikipedia article on the subject.

I see that, the day after my file-moving, you moved everything back using a gadget, but didn't leave a note on any talk page to explain why. Let's talk about it. Thanks.--Lemuellio (talk) 19:09, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Pay attention to copyright
File:Dali Clocks (5836924514).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

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

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

Lobo (howl?) 17:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Rail transport in Portugal

Olá Tm,
desculpa lá, mas não percebo porque copiaste de volta as fotos à categoría Rail transport in Portugal. Que sentido tem isso? --Jcornelius (talk) 15:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Duomo di Milano, dettaglio di un portale 2.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

User:G.dallorto (talk) 16:09, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Duomo di Milano, dettaglio di un portale 1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please 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!

User:G.dallorto (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Problemes amb la carrega

Hola sóc la Edithsme i col•laboro amb vosaltres traient les marques d'aigua. Tinc un problema amb un dels teus fitxers, El fitxer File:Pararge xiphioides (7051500987).jpg. L’he descarregat correctament i li he tret les marques d'aigua però no sé per quina raó no em deixa carregar-lo de nou. Potser tu em podries dir alguna manera de carregar-lo bé. De fet mai he tingut cap problema amb els teus fitxers però aquest se'm resisteix i és una pena perquè és bellíssim. Agraïda--Edithsme (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for catching this one! I assume this is a standard arabic font, nothing like the Coca Cola font. I meant to keep this one, guess I missed it. Thanks again! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, even if dont agree with the massive speedy deletions that your asking. However even this logo is pre 1923 logo and so PD (see File:Coca-Cola logo.svg) Tm (talk) 22:27, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh crap! I assumed it's still (renewed) under copyright. Isn't the font itself (c)? Thanks for info! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 19:54, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, for answering only now, but it seems i forgot this conversation. So, to simplify, fonts in the US are not copyrightable (see, for more details Commons:Licensing#Fonts, or {{PD-font}} or Intellectual property protection of typefaces for nuances in specific cases). Tm (talk) 23:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
No problem, we all have a life without Commons. At least I wish to believe so. So as a worst case scenario, in the UK 25 years after publication. I always assumed (wrongly) that especially the Coca Cola slogan and the font are both trademark and copyright protected. I have to revisited the category. Thanks for your information, that's really helpful!! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:18, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
File:Billy Williams (5274108430).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!

Ies (talk) 15:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

File:EPP Congress 5724 (8099356094).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!

   FDMS  4    13:13, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

edit war

about this: [1] please do not persevere in the edit war, because i do not fill the subject field and it seems to me that it is clear (because specified) the reason why that image is categorized in that way. Remember: wikimedia commons (as all projects) are collaborative, going against the guidelines of the commons( and turn against users) is against the rules. If you persevere in the edit war i will have to report the discussion to an administrator. I trust in your help, thanks you. --Pava (talk) 13:17, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Dont worry, an administrator has intervened and has reverted the vandalism. Tm (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Rename requests: your four reverts today

Hi. Why have you cancelled today my four rename requests concerning files:

Thanks.--Cjp24 (talk) 14:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Please don't revert without any explanation. Not all british, spanish and portuguese airports are in Europe. --MB-one (talk) 09:35, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Dont you start by deleting them from said category, as you first started, as when people think of the UK they of Great Britain and not some lost islands in other parts of the, Madeira is culturally as much european as central europe and spanish canarias are the same and Ceu te a e Melilla are irrelavant. Tm (talk) 09:43, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Revertions

Why have you reverted my uploads? I uploaded the first version of File:Mapa lingüístic de la Península Ibèrica.svg as a vectoritzation of File:Iberian-languages.png, I changed the colours and I made the borders more precise. Now I have decided to add more precision and change the actual colours to the originals of File:Iberian-languages.png. I don't understand why should I upload them with a different name. --Joan301009 (talk) 16:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

About [[:File:Mapa lingüístic de la Península Ibèrica.svg] didnt notice that it was your work, but File:Iberian-languages.png is others people work with stark differences on the languages boundaries, so if you want upload your version under a new filename. Tm (talk) 20:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Pay attention to copyright
File:Trams de Coimbra (Portugal) (4605971954).jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

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

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

-- Tuválkin 23:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

File:17.4.14 3 Guimaraes Easter Thursday Parade 425 (13909851982).jpg

Olá, Não vejo razão para continuar a categorizar esta imagem como um local desconhecido em Guimarães, quando se consegue ver claramente a fachada da Igreja de São Francisco.

  • O que se vê nesta foto é a fachada da antiga Capela dos Terceiros, actual Capela Mortuária da VOT de São Francisco. Esta capela é adossada ao convento e a igreja fica à esquerda, já fora da imagem. Tm (talk) 13:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Julguei que seriam dependências da igreja de São Francisco (que se vê ao lado esquerdo). Então não será um local não identificado, correto?

Categorise template

Hello Tm

I see that you have been reverting my removals of the {{Categorise}} template on some categories. I don't think they are necessary on categories that are watched or don't attract a lot of miscategorised files. Regards. Alan Liefting (talk) 05:42, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Perros Jugando (3751744007).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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 04:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Gijon - Ann and Mike (13540200044).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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 04:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Barragem de Monte Novo - Ann with most unusual geocache item! (13541282914).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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 04:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Vidigueira - a friendly face in the square (13541530104).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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 04:27, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Ameixial - in the bar - am I meant to be drinking? (13532474554).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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 04:37, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Carrapateira - Ann and Mike (13463482305).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!

Magnolia677 (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Regarding your recent reverts to Mongol Empire-based images

Please do not revert these images back to their historically-inaccurate versions, justifying it as "reverting vandalism." If you read up a bit on Korea's status in relation to the Mongol Empire, you will inevitably find out that the Goryeo Dynasty was at best a vassal state and that it was never a part of the Mongol Empire itself. Flamarial (talk) 05:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Joelle Maryn Photo.JPG

asturianu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  euskara  français  galego  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  українська  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Joelle Maryn Photo.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!

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 21:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Didnt you see the otrs ticket n○ 2012031910006412? Tm (talk) 00:42, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Flamarial (talk · contribs) complained on you in administrator's noticeboard and I answered [here]. You can something to say there. Taivo (talk) 21:29, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Answered to you on the noticeboard. Tm (talk) 01:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Colorful wall painted with stars (14590306278).jpg

asturianu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  euskara  français  galego  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  українська  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Colorful wall painted with stars (14590306278).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 03:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

WWIII

Viva Tm, já deu uma olhadela na página de discussão do User:Parabolooidal? Cá para mim, vai arranjar discussão, mas também já percebi que "se pela por uma boa guerrinha" ... hehehe. Boa sorte, eu por mim fico assistir, mas darei a minha ajuda se for preciso (o que não me parece venha a ser necessário). Abraço --JotaCartas (talk) 05:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Viva de novo, como era de esperar os problemas veem aí. Agora mais a sério, a minha opinião é que "deixe para lá" ... não vale a pena; tanto mais que o visado tem claramente uma "agenda politica" e qualquer tentativa de consenso esta votada ao fracasso. Eu por mim se me fazem guerras nos "Sunsets", vou tratar de "Aircraft" e se corre mal vou tratar do "Porto" e por aí fora. Mas é só a minha opinião, claro que cada um tem de seguir a sua cabeça e maneira de ser. Um abraço & "keep Calm" --JotaCartas (talk) 21:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

re

Hi,

I see that you are adding this category to forts in Iran and to forts in other countries. The confusing thing for me is that putting buildings in other countries into Category:Portuguese forts is that category is in Category:Military buildings in Portugal. Is your position that forts in other countries, even ones that were first build in 400 BCE such as one in Iran, are ultimately "Military buildings in Portugal"? Thanks, Parabolooidal (talk) 17:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

There are a lot of Portuguese forts (and other buildings) outside Portugal, nothing to be surprised about it. If the nesting of parent categories leads to conundrums, untagle that, but dont undo correct categorization. -- Tuválkin 20:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I understand that there were many forts built by the Portuguese and other colonial powers. But that doesn't mean those forts are actually in the colonizing country now (or even then). My understanding is that we must be sure that the categories we stick topics in do not ultimately end up in a wrong or misleading place. And those nested categories that many of the forts are in are very repetitive, with unnecessary nesting, and end up giving the wrong impression. Category:Portuguese forts is vague, the text on it is misleading. Maybe something Category:Colonial Portuguese forts in the 17th century or something. Also, if you read up on them, many are not even Category:Portuguese colonial architecture. e.g. Nakhal Fort "has a history which dates back to the pre-Islamic period. Over the centuries, it underwent many renovations and improvements. It was re-built by Omani architects in the 17th century." Also, "In 1990, it was fully renovated. Imams of Wadi Bani Kharous and the Ya'arubah dynasty resided here in the past." So putting complex issues and the cultural identities of other countries under "Portuguese" is wrong, in my opinion. Parabolooidal (talk) 22:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Also, File:Bukha Fort.jpg clearly does not belong in Category:Portuguese forts as it is not Category:Portuguese colonial architecture and not a Category:Military buildings in Portugal. Please insure that the building in these categories actually belong. Thanks, Parabolooidal (talk) 18:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I do not intend to meddle in the foreseen war, but as I see there is here a "political/cultural agenda" and there is no place for that in Wikipedia and much less in Commons. Never the less there are issues with the correctness of the former categorization that should be corrected, but in this context will be difficult to reach a consensus. Its just my opinion. I hope everybody "Keep Calm". Best regards. --JotaCartas (talk) 22:12, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I hope so too. I forgot to say that no matter who's edit warring get's blocked. Thought I should add this comment to be fair. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Good to know, User:Hedwig in Washington since you are reverting my edits in in User:Tm's favor. So do your edits supporting the person you're giving a warming to count as being "uninvolved"? Parabolooidal (talk) 00:42, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, since you don't take advice and revert my edits AFTER I gave you a full page of tips, hints, and explanations your account has been blocked for three months. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • For the starts it was Prabolooil that started dismantling this category and this wrong even if he is totally right in removing this category from "Military buildings in Portugal" as, to simplify the complex history of the portuguese colonial empire, since many of this territories arent portuguese "territory" since 1825 (Brazil), 1961 (India and the Fort of São João Baptista de Ajudá), 1974 (Guiné-Bissau), 1975 (Angola, Mozambique, Cape Verde, São Tomé e Príncipe), 1999 (Macau) and 1975 or 2001 (East-Timor), and many forts territories of other countries in Africa and Asia that had a persistent portuguese presence for decades or even centuries, where lost to other colonial empires or local states. However this portuguese presence left several forts built from scratch or greatly expanded by the Portuguese. So this categories of this forts should be added to the "Portuguese forts" category. Tm (talk) 01:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I know he did. We just have to figure out how to get the cat tree going so it is making sense all the way. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:16, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Caramulação

Hi Tm, I noticed that you restored "Caramulo" as a category to four pictures recently. Since the photos are already located in Category:Caramulo Motorfestival, this is not needed. Duplicate categories only obscure photos, so please stop reverting this change. Thanks, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 04:01, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Comedy outfit - Lagos Harbour - The Algarve, Portugal (1469565539).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!

Ajpvalente (talk) 09:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I've started a category discussion request for the category Category:Guarda (district), this time using the link in the toolbox & creating the discussion page correctly. I have added a note to say that you removed my initial template with your edit summary - if you have anything else to add to the conversation, please do. Thanks. -- Deadstar (msg) 14:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Old US ads

Hi,

I think that these 3 pictures are OK:

The ads are most probably OK for {{PD-US no notice}}. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

I suppose that you asked the deletion because of copyright concerns. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:1970s Advertising for Vintage Electronic LED Watches with Red Dials, From Genesis Products Division, Genesis Magazine (10537307225).jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

darkweasel94 08:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Perros Jugando (3751744007).jpg

Hi there. You asked why I doubt the identification of this photo. I guess because its a random beach someplace. It's probably from the location the Flickr uploaded says it's from, but so what? It's like the hundreds of "airplane in the sky" photos people add from Flickr, each claiming the airplane was taking off from this or that airport. I just feel it's more responsible editing to leave the location as "unidentifiable" when it's impossible to tell with any certainty where the photo was taken. My "good faith" doesn't extend to Flickr. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Madeira em Abril de 2011 IMG 1563 (5661922744).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!

Darwin Ahoy! 21:55, 16 September 2014 (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:

And also:

Yours sincerely Darwin Ahoy! 22:12, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Filemover

Considering your high level of experience and activity, I've added the filemover right to your account. INeverCry 19:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Reverted edits

I have already dealt with all of my edits being reverted by User:Geagea. He ended up not disputing my edits removing the social media links from the descriptions of IDF photos (you can find that discussion here), so I reverted his edits. As for the edits that made the descriptions more neutral, Geagea deferred to User:Russavia, who never commented on the issue (see: User_talk:Russavia/Archive_19#IDF_photos). I am curious as to why you too reverted every single one of my edits without a stated reason. I'm not here to edit war; I only want to try and ensure that this admittedly valuable IDF content on Commons is not promotional and that it has neutral descriptions. Can you please explain your reason for reverting my edits to these descriptions?

Whoops, I forgot to sign my post. Sorry about that. 130.132.173.138 01:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

File:IMG 2801.JPG (8059848704).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!

Yann (talk) 18:47, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

File:ARC Gloria DSC02968 (14400629550).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!

Stefan4 (talk) 22:10, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I closed this. Actually, you are wasting everyone time by not providing a description and a useful name. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Nairobi

Hi Tm. Regarding the Nairobi file, please note that the description indicates that she is not from Nairobi but only moved there recently from elsewhere. The in versus of categories are distinct from each other. For example, Category:Ships of Germany is reserved for ships that are actually from Germany, while Category:Ships in Germany are reserved for ships in Germany itself. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2014 (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:

And also:

I'm very sorry, but these pictures are copyright infringement : The Gare des Guillemins is under copyright. Yours sincerely, -- M0tty (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2014 (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:

And also:

Stop undoing my work

YOu are removing categories without any explanation and undoing all my work. Please stop, or I will revert you. Fry1989 eh? 23:51, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

See Category:Road signs in Singapore and the concerns of me and other 3 other users. You are the one that is stubbornelly overcategorizing. Tm (talk) 23:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I am NOT overcategorising!!! All these categories belong, you and the others are the ones so stubbornly believing you know everything and that OPVERCAT is some loftly golden rule which is most certainly is not! Fry1989 eh? 23:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I will not stop adding these categories until you properly explain why they are wrong. Your removals are a waste of time. Fry1989 eh? 00:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Did you read "always place an image in the most specific categories, and not in the levels above those", well at the top of that page it says "This page is considered an official policy on Wikimedia Commons. (See the list: Policies and guidelines). It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. Maybe you should look yourself in the mirror and maybe you will see who is wrong. Tm (talk) 00:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Until you convince me otherwise, you are wasting your time. Fry1989 eh? 00:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
What part of This page is considered an official policy that this stated on the top of Commons:Categories didnt you understood? Tm (talk) 00:19, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Why did you decide to restore incorrect bot-generated information in the Information template for this file after I put some effort into correcting it? --jnkyrdsprkl (talk) 17:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Aerocar International Aerocar I N102D Plaque KAM 09Feb2011 (14797266900).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!

Yann (talk) 21:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Escort Fury Litho Stallion51 19Jan2012 (14797335217).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!

Yann (talk) 22:13, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Deleted as copyvio [2]

Groetjes --Neozoon (talk) 22:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Focke-Wulf Fw-190-F8 White1 parts boxed KAM 11Aug2010 (14797258629).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!

Yann (talk) 22:14, 24 October 2014 (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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, russavia (talk) 02:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Carnaval de Podence 2008 8.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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!

FunkMonk (talk) 10:33, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Leiobunum flavum, U, Side, MD, PG County 2013-08-05-17.39.03 ZS PMax (9541012451).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!

Animalparty (talk) 08:14, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Gigantic upload

Please use the scientific name of the species for the category, NOT just dumping the whole lot in Category:Birds and leaving others to sort out the mess. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 20:32, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I give up. In the time I've managed to categorise about 50 correctly, you've uploaded another 500 without thought for good categorisation or for other Commons users. You can sort the rest out yourself. Bye. MPF (talk) 21:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Please answer to my comments

Hi, please answer to my comments in this discussion page and PLEASE stop reverting my edits without consulting. --Narek75 (talk) 07:59, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01142 (15090140314).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 05:55, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01331 (15096724604).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 05:57, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01132 (15524786628).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 05:58, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01040 (15525387669).jpg

asturianu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  euskara  français  galego  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  українська  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01040 (15525387669).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 06:06, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01343 (15531730710).jpg

asturianu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  euskara  français  galego  italiano  magyar  Nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  українська  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01343 (15531730710).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:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01343 (15531730710).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 06:12, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Rio Douro em Portugal DSC01039 (15712829072).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!

Leoboudv (talk) 06:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Dawn FP (3413075569).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!

MPF (talk) 22:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Zafram Restaurant, Lisbon (3577781883).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!

Stegop (talk) 18:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Watching the river (1445015566).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!

Stegop (talk) 03:28, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Hallmark Keepsake Ornament - A Christmas Broadcast, Dated 2006 (14542059030).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

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

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Largo do Carmo (14216832138).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!

Stegop (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Largo do Carmo (14216831428).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!

Stegop (talk) 01:10, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Calçada do Duque (14216825008).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!

Stegop (talk) 05:06, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Calçada do Carmo (14216850970).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!

Stegop (talk) 00:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Calçada do Carmo (14402337674).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!

Stegop (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Light 1 (3330909027).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!

Adam37 (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Light 3 (3330858623).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!

Adam37 (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Template:Idw/layout Adam37 (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Could you please update the description and rename the file. It is useless now. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:40, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Herzi Pinki ([[User talk:Herzi Pinki|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate Herzi Pinki ([[User talk:Herzi Pinki|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:29, 31 December 2014 (UTC)