User talk:Tm/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

File:100Years 6371 (8435664221).jpg

File:100Years 6371 (8435664221).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!

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

Ww2censor (talk) 12:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Highly Suspect

Hello Tm, how are you? First of all, thank you for the images of Highly Suspect you have uploaded, they are great. I wanted to use one of those images but I couldn't. I am a user of Spanish Wikipedia (sorry for my poor English) and I just created the article of this band, but I couldn't use your files, I don't know why. Could you help me? --Santi Cba (talk) 22:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Julio da Luz (4916705607).jpg

File:Julio da Luz (4916705607).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!

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

Rodrigolopes (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

nombres de categorías

Hola, bom dia: Según la política de nombres de categorías en Wikimedia Commons, las categorías deben ser nombradas en inglés y no en el idioma del lugar de las fotos. Disculpa que te escriba en español. Puedes contestarme en portugués --DPC (talk) 08:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Não é bem assim. Veja "Particular individual object (a specific person, building, monument, artwork, organization, event etc.) uses a singular form usually (but not always). Proper nouns which have not an established English variant are not translated ad hoc and use the original form" em Commons:Categories#Category_names e esta prática também é ussda nas categorias de países francófonos e germânicos. E também é impossível dividir os monumentos portugueses por feguesias, pois se existem 308 concelhos portugueses e a categorização já é difícil para oncerca de 4/5 utilizadores que os mantém regularmente (e que chegaram a esta categorização pela prática e discussão), com as freguesias a serem 3092, seria seja um pesadelo de categorização, pois se juntarem a estas categorias temos as por distrito, por grau e as por género. Tm (talk) 10:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Entiendo y comparto lo que me dices sobre la imposibilidad de asignar cada foto a una freguesia. Sin embargo, no comparto tu interpretación sobre el nombre de las categorías. Por ejemplo, «Necrópole medieval do Vascoveiro» o «Cruzeiro em Lamegal» no son nombres específicos, sino genéricos, completamente traducible al inglés, como podría ser «Cathedral of Palencia» o mejor «Cologne Cathedral», pero las creas en portugués. Yo creo que no se debe hacer así, aunque franceses y alemanes (y españoles) lo hagan. No voy a discutir ni cambiarlas.

Gracias por mantener y crear nuevas categorías, sé que es un trabajo duro. Cuando termine de subir fotos de esa zona (Pinhel, Figueira de Castelo Rodrigo, Vila Nova de Foz Côa y Mêda) te aviso por si quisieras crear algunas más. --DPC (talk) 15:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Tm and @David Perez: I got a ping from @Hedwig in Washington: Could you explain me what the problem is in English or Spanish? I don't understand Portuguese. Thanks. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 04:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

@Hedwig in Washington: and @Cookie: there were two questions: one is already solved, and it is whtat I said to Hedwig in Washington about deleting a Category I created. I created the "Category:Classified monuments in parish of Pinhel" which was deleted as duplicated of "Category:Classified monuments in Pinhel". Pinhel is a municipality but a parish too, so I thought it could be a good idea to make it. TM showed me that it's impossible to create a category for every parish in Portugal. I do agree.
The other question is about naming categories in portuguese. I created some categories of places and monuments in Portugal with English titles that were changed into Portuguese by TM. I told him to name them in English but he argued " 'Particular individual object uses a singular form usually' and 'Proper nouns which have not an established English variant are not translated ad hoc and use the original form' as they do in French and German languages too". Then I answer that neither "Necrópole medieval do Vascoveiro" (medieval necropolis of Vascoveiro) nor "Cruzeiro em Lamegal" (wayside cross in Lamegal) are specific names but general names and they also are names perfectly translatable into English. These are two examples, but there are more: "Category:Church of Our Lady of Annunciation, Leomil" changed to "Category:Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Anunciação (Leomil)", "Category:Metellos Manor House in Pinhel" to "Category:Solar dos Metelos", "Category:Church of Our Lady of Annunciation, Leomil" to "Category:Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Anunciação (Leomil)", etc.
Finally, I thanked TM for creating and making maintenance of portuguese categories and I told him that when I finished uploading some photos of Pinhel and surroundings, I'll ask him to create new categories if necessary. And, with different words, I said to both, TM and Hedwig in Washington, that I do prefer to use my time on uploading photos to Wikimedia Commons than arguing about categories, so that's why I said "I don't mind the —in this case, IMO, and not only— portuguese categories mess". But, obviously, I do prefer a well ordered and standardized system of categories ;) --DPC (talk) 08:20, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

The problem here seems to be the interpretation of the policy. One of the exceptions to naming a category in English is when it's referred to a particular individual object, such a specific building, monument, etc. With this premise on sight, if we tried to translate Category:Casa dos Bicos into English it'd be a mistake, since it is indeed an exclusive building. But a "igreja" is not, no matter if the church is devoted to a certain saint, or a certain advocation, it's just one among many others and the same happens to "necrópole", "cruzeiro", "aqueduto" or any other common names. There's a real mess in Portuguese categories, but the issue isn't new. It was treated here some years ago. In my opinion all these categories should be renamed. That there are German, French or Spanish categories named in their own language is not a reason to replicate the error as a rule. I'd like to read @Hedwig in Washington: opinion on this and see if something can be done. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 03:48, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Esta categoría que acabas de crear «Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Assunção (Pinhel)» ¿no sería mejor llamarla «Igreja de Nossa Senhora da Assunção em Lamegal (Pinhel)»? Está claro que Lamegal se encuentra en Pinhel, también en Guarda, y creo que ese nombre dará lugar a confusiones. Por supuesto yo creo que el nombre correcto sería «Church of Our Lady of the Assumption, Lamegal» --DPC (talk) 08:48, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Nâo. Veja forma como as outras categorias de igrejas poruguesas estão criadas e verá que não é assim. E o nome é sempre em português, não inglês Tm (talk) 13:30, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Sí, veo que muchas otras categorías de iglesias portuguesas están creadas así, es decir, no siguen las políticas de Wikimedia Commons, están también mal creadas. Imagínese que rusos, chinos, ucranianos... creen categorías en su idioma y grafía, sería imposible encontrar nada. Por eso las directrices de Commons piden que se escriban en el idioma franco: inglés. Otra cosa son las páginas, esas pueden ir en cualquier idioma y grafía. Debería reconsiderarlo. --DPC (talk) 13:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Seguem as regras como disse acima, ou acha que franceses, alemães, belgas, holwndeses ou suecos estão errados? Curioso como ninguém se preocupa com os nomes das categorias dessas línguas, inclusive nativos dessas línguas, mas já com os nomes portugueses e espanhóis muita gente se preocupa. Porque será?

¡Porque portugueses y españoles somos más serios! ;) de todas formas, preguntaba por incluir Lamegal en la categoría, pues hay al menos tres iglesias más de Nossa Senhora da Assunção en Pinhel: Alverca da Beira/Bouça Cova, União das freguesias de Atalaia e Safurdão, Lamegal y Valbom/Bogalhal. --DPC (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the two of you should agree to disagree. We probably won't be able to do any serious improvement in the Portuguese categories anytime soon. In general, I agree with Cookie that the Cathedral categories should be renamed. But I won't start a world war about some silly categories. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 00:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Silly categories? world war? IMO, this is not a good sysop answer. --DPC (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, these categories might be as silly as the French, Spanish, German or Chinese ones. The discussion here is about naming categories according to policies so, as we have more civic ways to solve something than starting a war I've put them into discussion. Let's read some other opinions on this issue. Anna (Cookie) (talk) 01:42, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Obey (6405257643).jpg

File:Obey (6405257643).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!

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

Found5dollar (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Ellen Rosenblum.jpg

Per Commons:File renaming, criterion #2 states "To change from a meaningless or ambiguous name to a name that describes what the image displays." Flickr ID isn't necessary for image identification. MB298 (talk) 01:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

This criteria of "meaningless or ambiguous nameas" as nothing to do with flickr id as this is clearly labeled as ambiguous names as "building in my city" or meaningless as "photo" not the flickr id. Tm (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Changing "Ellen Rosenblum.jpg" to this mess goes against COM:FR in more ways than one. Of course there’s many admins that do and/or allow this kind of renamings, and indeed COM:FR is one of those guidelines that’s safe to forget or ignore, but that could change. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 05:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

categorías para fotos

Como te dije más arriba, he subido fotos de Pinhel, Figueira de Castelo Rodrigo, Vila Nova de Foz Coa y Mêda, por si quieres pasarte por aquí para crear nuevas categorías (aunque no estemos de acuerdo en cómo nombrarlas). --DPC (talk) 07:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

u reverted my edit of pic

Hi... i had cropped this pic and also increased its brightness. U reverted my edit. Actuly id removed the African American lady from the pic as she was not exactly in a squatting position, which is what the pic wanted to show. So plz dont put her back by reverting my edit. As for changing its brightness, u can do so if u wish.

Please see Commons:Overwriting_existing_files#Substantial_crop_or_un-crop as this crop is substancial, overexposed. So if you want upload your version under a new filename. Tm (talk) 23:13, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24535862682).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24535862682).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24644205935).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24644205935).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24016046994).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24016046994).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:39, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24562123021).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24562123021).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24348752260).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24348752260).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24348786120).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24348786120).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24348806390).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24348806390).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork and Ann (24017572433).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork and Ann (24017572433).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24017476553).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24017476553).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Madeira - Hotel Calheta Beach, Calheta - the parrot show (24013558744).jpg

File:Madeira - Hotel Calheta Beach, Calheta - the parrot show (24013558744).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24535938172).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artwork (24535938172).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artworks (24618145376).jpg

File:Calheta - Casa das Mudas Art Centre - artworks (24618145376).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!

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

Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Avro Tutor, The Shuttleworth Collection. (12075193575) (2).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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Avro Tutor, The Shuttleworth Collection. (12075193575) (2).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) 09:26, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Some of the content of your talk page was archived

Hello Tm, I archived some of the content of your talk page (from 1 January 2015 to 29 December 2015) to User talk:Tm/Archive 6, because the template include size has exceeded. When the template include size exceeds, new templates added on a page will not work. So I advise you to watch your talk page's parser profiling data. Thanks! ★ Poké⁹⁵ 11:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Avro Tutor, The Shuttleworth Collection. (12075193575) (2).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 ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Avro Tutor, The Shuttleworth Collection. (12075193575) (2).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!

★ Poké⁹⁵ 11:10, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Nudie photos

Hey, what's with the knee-jerk response. Sure I made a couple of dodgy additions but you even undid one where I added "without any clothes on". What exactly did you find unacceptable about that? The woman is naked ie without clothes on. On another photo, you restored the words "Adeea nude perfection". What the holy crap does that mean? Can you find it in yourself to check what someone has written before your digital knee kicks out? 188.29.164.129 18:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

It means your a vandal trying to pass as a good editor. So probably because she doesn't have a day job to go to, pendulous tits, Free high quality porn, no shit, don't forget glasses are good descriptions? Give me a beak. Tm (talk) 18:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I accept the bit about vandalism and I'm sorry I did that (it certainly wasn't maliciously intended). That still doesn't explain why you feel it is ok to change back good descriptions? 188.29.164.129 18:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I just don't get it. Is this a power trip for you? What part of those descriptions is pornographic? How do you justify descriptions that aren't descriptive? I admit that I made those sexist remarks because I didn't know whether to take your descriptions seriously. Do you get a prize for doing this? I'm at a loss to understand why you are in charge of this website. 188.29.164.129 18:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

As you said you vandalized the descriptions and then made sexists remarks. If you still dont understand why you got reverted and who is really being childish and knee jerking reacting by opening 3 different discussions, i cant help you, so dont edit this discussion anymore, as i dont have the time or patiente to stand your antics. Tm (talk) 19:26, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

File:130601 Blasmusikfest 12 (8914909441).jpg‎

The next one Tm, because these arms are the originally FN - I worked with there - these are not the reproduced Sturmgewehr --K@rl (talk) 20:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Revert in Category:Transport in Spain

Dear Tm, please do not repeatedly revert edits, which are not clear vandalism (see w:Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary). If you have any questions regarding certain edits, you can always ask the respective user on his/her discussion page. In this case, the Category:Transport in Europe is not applicable to all of Spain, since the Canary Islands, Ceuta and Melilla are clearly not in Europe. Hence, the categories concerning the autonomous communites, which are in Europe, are sorted accordingly.

Thanks --MB-one (talk) 14:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Spain is an european contry, so this is the correct category. Tm (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

You are both partly right and wrong. Spain is clearly a bi-continental country. Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands might be European in culture but all three are geographically in Africa. Why not just put Cat:Transport_in_Spain into both Cat:Transport_in_Africa and Cat:Transport_in_Europe? There is no strict rule that says we can't use more than one continental category, otherwise what would we do for Russia, Turkey, Egypt etc? FredWalsh (talk) 09:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Renaming of File:Map of the portuguese and spanish railways.jpg

Thanks for having reviewed and explained the reason for the decline. I'd request to do the renaming anyway, because:

the content of the file is in German
it is part of a German encyclopedic work dating 1912, you can e.g. review the source of the image in question to convince yourself
you may keep the English filename as a redirect to the renamed German filename, no need to remove it

the work the file has been taken out of has it's own category, and the category name uses German language as well - see Category:Enzyklopädie des Eisenbahnwesens - in a distant future the cat's name may be pulled from the category's wikidata object to deliver native translations for category names, but this is not of today..

I'd strongly submit to rename filenames to English, if the content is in English or language neutral (because it's the main language used on commons), but this is not the case here. If English descriptions in the File: pages do not suffice, then there can be file redirects with a derived English name for any of the files. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 06:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Reverting image rename

Can I ask why you reverted this image move without explanation, putting File:Women in sunglasses with US flag.jpg back at its apparently unclear title of File:America the beautiful (6079822929).jpg? --McGeddon (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Nude_portrayals_of_YouTube_logos

Category:Nude_portrayals_of_YouTube_logos 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 ∙ +/−

Damiens.rf 20:45, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

File:26 Prêmio da Música Brasileira (18710819271).jpg

File:26 Prêmio da Música Brasileira (18710819271).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!

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

Revent (talk) 21:06, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Bryan Ferry (6891697798).jpg

File:Bryan Ferry (6891697798).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 ∙ +/−

And also:

Yours sincerely, FredWalsh (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2016 (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!

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

Affected:

File:Bryan Ferry (6891697798).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, FredWalsh (talk) 10:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements

Hello,

Could you please discuss your (unexplained) rationale for this revert Mohsinpathania (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2016 (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!

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

Affected:

File:EPP Summit October 2011 (6270222340).jpg

Yours sincerely, –Totie (talk) 02:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Imagem

Olá, como vai? Você indicou corretamente a fonte dessa imagem? É que ela está marcada para eliminação e eu acho que seria uma pena apagar. Érico (talk) 03:15, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Files

Hi Tm, I've removed the "Unidentified buses in X" category because most of the files are unidentifiable and some have been incorrectly placed under that category (IE: You've reverted me here yet it's impossible to identify the bus just by the side railings!),
Some files are so small that's it's not even worth bothering with and those that are bigger and are of good quality are either blurry or fuzzy .... so thus either way all are unidentifiable,
Plus it doesn't help when they've sat unidentified for the past 7 years .... IMHO if they're not gonna be identified now then they never will be....,
Thanks & Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 15:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Holsatiae tabula generalis in qua sunt Ducatus Holsatiae, Dithmarsiae, Stormariae et Wagriae (8343681384).jpg

File:Holsatiae tabula generalis in qua sunt Ducatus Holsatiae, Dithmarsiae, Stormariae et Wagriae (8343681384).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!

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

Kopiersperre (talk) 18:36, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

IP's vandalism...

Hello there !

I guess that IP (86.168.219.170) is the same person hidden behind two other IPs (86.156.81.219 and 90.217.244.189) wich have been blocked because doing the SAME deletions of ~~cats~~ categories...

--LW² \m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 21:58, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Except if there is a one in a million change, per the Duck test, the same person is behind the IP as they have the same kind of edits on the same exact images, or in other words. Also they seem to be uncommunicative. Tm (talk) 05:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Llann Wé², cats? Did you mean cars? 92.40.249.128 19:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@92.40.249.128: no, I meant categories (of automobiles in this case) because, on Commons, no one uses cars in cats (categories), only automobiles or vehicles (or trucks for some).

One more... 86.156.80.193. Always on the same kind of vehicles. Pffffffff... Thanks a lot for undoing their changes

. --LW² \m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 20:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Boeing 727-233 FedEx N265FE Dan Cooper View SNF Setup FLAirMuse 15March2014 (14606412313).jpg

File:Boeing 727-233 FedEx N265FE Dan Cooper View SNF Setup FLAirMuse 15March2014 (14606412313).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!

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

PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Attractive asian model on a boat. (6772356299).jpg

File:Attractive asian model on a boat. (6772356299).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!

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

Triplecaña (talk) 09:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Drop dead gorgeous model on a boat. (6772365697).jpg

File:Drop dead gorgeous model on a boat. (6772365697).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!

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

Triplecaña (talk) 09:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Tasty Chinese model on a boat at the beach. (6772360467).jpg

File:Tasty Chinese model on a boat at the beach. (6772360467).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!

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

Triplecaña (talk) 09:20, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Voluptuous model on a boat. (6772371695).jpg

File:Voluptuous model on a boat. (6772371695).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!

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

Triplecaña (talk) 09:20, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Tm, it's Scott here, thank you for your comments on COM:AN. 46.47.77.38 21:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but i commented the attitudes of JCB, not your attitudes. You, before the banning did a lot of very important and crucial work (administrative or not), possibly more than anyone in Commons (except perhaps Fae), but since your "misterious" banning by our new overlords, some of your attitudes are, in my opinion, very disputable or even indefensible, even taking into account the "misterious" reasons for your banning (not in this particular case, but some previous cases). Tm (talk) 22:07, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

User talk:86.164.129.50

Hi TM, something has to be done about this vandal, I don't know how to do it. Would you mind making the necessary arrangements? Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 23:16, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:Lisboa

Look: it is a redirection only. It should be empty... Wieralee (talk) 22:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

And that is what i´am doing by placing them in proper categories, before you intervined,. But if a redirect is full, there are bots for that kind of work, not user editions. Tm (talk) 22:57, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Classic cameras graflex speedgraphic medium format, 1 (3393629814).jpg

File:Classic cameras graflex speedgraphic medium format, 1 (3393629814).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!

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

NotaBene 15:29, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Prostitution laws

Now, paying for sex is illegal in France ([1] [2]). Can you edit this image (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prostitution_laws_of_the_world.PNG)113.190.46.130 01:58, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Country specific consent requirements

@Tm: If my edit summaries for my reverts are unclear please discuss, there is a sufficient body of Indian superior court case law on the subject should you wish to research it. Thanks. Unfitlouie (talk) 08:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Did you even read the case? It has nothing to do with photographing in public space. Also this IP is a troll as there weee and are several IPs and accounts that nominated this and other images to DR under false arguments and false profiles, arguing being someone they are not, mismatching laws, etc. Tm (talk) 08:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Please clarify : Which case and IPs are you referring to, and what false profiles / accounts / arguments do these correspond to ? I am in the dark about all of this. Unfitlouie (talk) 09:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

So there was no case, no IPs, trolls, false profiles etc.? just swell. Unfitlouie (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

So you were trolling ? Unfitlouie (talk) 06:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

You really mus "be in the dark" and completly blind. So here are the trolls and SP accounts and IP, all that seem to "miraculously" know how to sign theyr names in their first post.

117.240.209.48, The IP that "miraculously" has two images of his\her son in a school and them has a photo of itself 1500 km away. Funny isnt it?

User:Tttrrrwww, a sockpuppet

182.156.90.58

117.240.187.35. Tm (talk) 21:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Discuss specifics

From the citation you repeatedly reinserted link, kindly point out where it says

Taking a picture of a person in a public space: Does not require consent
Publishing pictures of a person in a public space: Does not require consent (with exceptions)
thanks Unfitlouie (talk) 09:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

You could read a little more. Tm (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

This kind of tendentious behaviour is uncivil and unacceptable on a collaborative project. You ignored my clear edit summaries and made unexplained reverts. You repeatedly reverted to insert a reference which does not support in any way the claims I have given you opportunity to locate therein . You deleted an impeccable reference of the Supreme Court of India's landmark judgment which declares privacy of citizens is a fundamental right under Art. 21 of the Constitution. This judgment is also cited as reference no.6 in the old link for this, and now you have the gall to proffer some tattered and confused newspaper article instead of the law itself laid down ? I am reverting your edits. Unfitlouie (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Right of privacy in a private setting, in a jail. This case doesnt make nay mention of photography in public place, yet i found a source that says that the rules of photography in public places in India are not fixed in your position, but are "According to police, in matters of public photography, the law is silent and there are no definitions. Although an implied consent exists in case of persistent or aggressive photography of an individual, it comes under the legal definition of harassment. "To put it simply , as long as the subject of the photograph doesn't have a problem, law doesn't step in.Cases are booked, based on the nature of the photograph,". So if you, as you claim, know that " there is a sufficient body of Indian superior court case law on the subject ", point to specific cases, with links to case docks, were the photographing of anonymous persons in public places in India are against Indian law. Tm (talk) 18:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Your "intermediate knowledge of English" badge buttresses your evident incompetence to distinguish the legal terms and phrases employed. If you do not understand the constitutional role of the Indian Supreme Court and the weight of their judicial pronouncements then please refrain from editing on this topic. The Supreme Court has laid down that there is a general presumption of an individual's privacy under Art.21 of the Constitution and which is now settled case law throughout India binding on all lower authorities. Since it is so important and its scope is not confined to persons who are in jail, I am reproducing this law for your understanding:

The right to privacy is implicit in the right to life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens of this country by Article 21. It is a "right to be let alone". A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child-bearing and education among other matters. None can publish anything concerning the above matters without his consent whether truthful or otherwise and whether laudatory or critical. If he does so, he would be violating the right to privacy of the person concerned and would be liable in an action for damages. Position may, however, be different, if a person voluntarily thrusts himself into controversy or voluntarily invites or raises a controversy."

The article linked by you actually shows that in India whereas one is not automatically barred from taking photographs in public places, taking photographs of identifiable people in public places is fraught with liability, and whenever the subject complains to the police the criminal law is invoked under appropriate penal sections. The term "law" as used in the article context describes the invocation of criminal law which is in addition to the right to sue for damages. In fact the recent judgments of high courts in India take the view that photographs of non-celebrity/non-newsworthy individuals can be published only if there is specific legal provisions to allow it - and even if there was previous contractual consent from the individual. judgment text.
Here is another news article for you to read. Unfitlouie (talk) 06:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes i understand perfectly well the legal terms and phrases, instead of throwing unrelated and\or irrelevant legislation. The role of a Supreme Court (and\Constitutional Court for that matter). You on other hand prefere to argument the persont that arguments instead of the arguments pf the person so again and for the last time "point to specific cases, with links to case docks, were the photographing of anonymous persons in public places in India are against Indian law.", instead of argumentum ad hominem. Tm (talk) 21:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

You say i have a bad command of English, but it seems it is you that has difficulties in understanding a simple piece of text. This last news has nothing to do to what we are discussing. Quoting "were arrested today on charges of misbehaving with the crew and passengers of a Chennai-bound flight before take-off from here last night. (...) A wordy quarrel reportedly broke out, as the pilot also intervened and asked the trio to behave properly, police said. The three passengers deleted the pictures following the crew’s “request” but when IndiGo security manager “debriefed the passengers” to maintain decorum on board in local language, “these passengers got verbally profane and threatened the airline staff,” according to the airline. (...)". So the drunken three were expelled of the flight for being a nuissance, not maintaining decorum and quarreling with the air staff and passangers, after being asked to stop taking photos by a air hostess. In basic, arrested for breaking the peace and public order, sexual harassment, not for taking a picture in a public space. What basically this article is saying is the same as the one i quoted. Tm (talk) 21:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Your quote "A citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child-bearing and education among other matters. None can publish anything concerning the above matters without his consent whether truthful or otherwise and whether laudatory or critical.", making that facts of states "family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child-bearing and education " is simply what most countries, even those that have very liberal laws about photography in public places, call the reserve of private life and have NOTHING about photography in public places. To put it in layman´s terms what photos in public places have that do with "matters (...) [his] privacy , of family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child-bearing and education", as there cannot, in 99,99% of photos, be anything derived of photos of anonymous persons in a public and unpersonal place.

Once more you try to put a smoke screen, as in the case you cite it says in their conclusions that "33) For the reasons aforesaid, the petitioners' challenge restricted to the threat of publication of their photographs is upheld. Publication of photographs in newspapers, magazines etc. neither being permissible in terms of the SARFAESI Act or the rules framed thereunder nor under any other rule/notification/guideline having binding effect, I further hold that the threat to publish photographs borders on extra-legal means to recover the dues. The secured creditors are, accordingly, restrained by a prohibitory order from taking such recourse". What is the SARFAESI act, but the The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, a law related with financial matters?

And per said law, the threats of publishing photos of debtors to recover debt is forbidden, as it border lines on extra-legal means but the use of photos in a debt colletion and photos taken in public places, but with so this has nothing to do, once more, with the taking and publishing images of people in PUBLIC PLACES. Tm (talk) 21:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Image

Hi, Not everything in a photo needs identifying - The tram is the main subject of the image .... we don't need to be identifying cars, trees, tarmac etc etc,
You're also edit warring and should probably stop unless you want to be blocked,
Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

No, your the one that is edit warring, making two mistakes and not wanting to admit your errors, first by saying that the trams was in service was in service, when, to anyone that can read portuguese, it is clear that it was out of service, and second by claiming that the tram was the main subject of the image, when it is in a corner, and when the cars and church occupy have the same prominence. Tm (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Not true - The not in service part was my mistake and one I admit was a bad one, I disagree the tram is IMHO the main subject of that image .... –Davey2010^Talk 21:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

But the cars and church occupy have the same prominence. If you see the focus and, specially, the composition, you will notice that, being the tram a main subject, the cars are also main subjects, in the same level as the tram, and so meritous enough to be categorized. Tm (talk) 21:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

I disagree - To me the main subject despite composition is the tram but anywho us edit warring over it is pointless so I've self reverted. –Davey2010^Talk 21:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

So let us both agree in disagreeing and stop this reversion vs reversion and carry on with other pressing matters and editions. Tm (talk) 21:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Haha if we can agree on something it's that we both disagree with each other .... That is genius!

, Exactly there's more important things to do than to edit war over essentially 2 categories!, Anyways thanks for discussing it, Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 22:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Review before using Croptool

Hi Tm/Archive 7, I just reviewed one of your recent uploads. It choked the regular review bot because it was a crop of a larger image. Next time, I recommend importing the full sized image, letting the bot verify its license, and then using the toollabs:croptool to create a derivative image. Thanks for your contributions, czar 16:15, 3 May 2016 (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!

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

Affected:

File:San Siro (15817752319).jpg

Yours sincerely, Green Giant (talk) 10:51, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

There is no need to categorize image with super-category, when sub-category already mentioned

Hello. You made follow edit - Revision #196407794. It looks not correct one. Please pay attention that file File:P3079529 (6251169523).jpg already in the category Category:Arco Triunfal da Rua Augusta, so there is no need to add super-category Category:Rua Augusta, because sub-category Category:Arco Triunfal da Rua Augusta already in the Category:Rua Augusta. --Movses (talk) 04:04, 18 May 2016 (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!

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

Affected:

File:Amy Winehouse Eurockeennes 2007.jpg

Yours sincerely, FredWalsh (talk) 13:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Categories in English, articles in native language

Hi there,

just to point out that categories are normally kept in English to help most users navigate. Articles can however be kept in native language. See Category:Palace of Versailles for example. Thanks. Gryffindor (talk) 20:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

No, the policy is clear Ad-hoc translations of proper names are undesireble. See Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/02/Category:Churches in Portugal and several other discussions related to proper names in the native languages. German countries, portuguese countries, french countries, netherlands have the majority of categories in their native language(s), and spanish countries and italian countries have a big part of their categories in their native language(s). Tm (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

No, if it's a smaller category then it could be in the native language as an exemption to the rule. However for categories of higher importance it should be in English because not everyone understands Portuguese. See categories Category:Saint Peter's Basilica and Category:Winter Palace for example. Or would you like to have Chinese categories in Chinese? Gryffindor (talk) 09:41, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

No, the policy, discussions and pratice contradicts your statements. Read them again if you must, but dont try to twist them to your convenience. Tm (talk) 11:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Reporting?

So you think you are a fighter againt censorship right? I know people like you, you are the boss behind the keyboards. At least show some respect to other people's work. I am the reason you see it, your beloved picture. - Avatar9n (talk) 09:05, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you joking? Using sandbox? Oh you are a professional commons user! I've been using this site for years (i won't use it anymore). Do you think i am vandalizing my own picture? - Avatar9n (talk) 09:11, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

You think that, besides having the copyright of File:Mosin-nagant ecomare.JPG and the right to stop distributing this file under a free license, have the right to longer want it to be shared by others that, like Wikimedia Commons, received it under a free license as others have said Creative Commons licences are irrevocable delete your image CC-licence is irrevocable. Even so you insist in removing valid categories from this image even if other three users reverted your editions, that could be seen as vandalism and to the edit protection of the image and\or your account being blocked. Continue on this path and you will be reported in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. Tm (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

You can report it anywhere. Are you trying to prove you are professional at protecting the free licence? You are nothing but a geek professional at jerking off. - Avatar9n (talk) 09:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Your edit war. You did it deliberately. Then its your edit war. Avatar9n (talk) 09:33, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Call me what you want as it doesnt affect me, being that by your actions you prove that lacking valid arguments you resort to insult and immature writings. Tm (talk) 09:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) Pictures

The images in Category:Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) and in Category:Flickr images taken by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) should not be in both categories according to Commons:Overcat. I am going to take them back out of Category:Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) now. Elisfkc (talk) 20:41, 29 May 2016 (UTC) No, one is a categorie to organize images taken by MTA, other to organize and subcategorize images related to MTA. One is hidden, other is not. There are not overcategorized. Your acts are uncategorizeing images, not improving them. Tm (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Media without a license as of 31 May 2016

Hi, are you aware that several thousands of your recent uploads are tagged for deletion? Jcb (talk) 23:39, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, i am completly aware. But, alas, they are all in public domain as they were taken by the astraunauts of the Apollo program during the Apollo 7 to Apollo 16 and so should be marked and reviewed as {{PD-Nasa}} instead of being deleted. Tm (talk) 23:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Please make sure you do so within 4 days from now, to prevent deletion. Jcb (talk) 00:03, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Women's suit.jpeg

Hello.What is the benefit ofBackground Return?I think it is unnecessary --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 06.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 06.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 13:56, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 05.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 05.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:02, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 07.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 07.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:03, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Gilda Roberts @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 02.jpg

File:Gilda Roberts @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 02.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 02.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 02.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Gilda Roberts @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 01.jpg

File:Gilda Roberts @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 01.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 04.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 04.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 03.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 03.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:11, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 02.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 02.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 01.jpg

File:Vivian Schmitt & Jenna Jane @ Salon Mutzenbacher 2010 01.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!

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

Fixpol (talk) 14:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Photographs by Pedro Caetano (duplicate)

@Tm: , atenção que o flikr2commons está a duplicar as imagens de Pedro Caetano. Ver Category:Photographs by Pedro Caetano (duplicate) --JotaCartas (talk) 02:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

File:9G4A3637 (27532216062).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Stefan2 (talk) 22:10, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I wish that COM:VFC would allow you to specify why there are concerns with the files, instead of simply notifying the uploader that there are some unspecified concerns with the files. The problem is that the listed files have inadequate file names. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Eastern Europe 1990 (4523835289).jpg

File:Eastern Europe 1990 (4523835289).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!

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

Hiddenhauser (talk) 11:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Eastern Europe 1990 (4524587600).jpg

File:Eastern Europe 1990 (4524587600).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!

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

Hiddenhauser (talk) 11:02, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Caterpillar Laurentians.jpg

Why did you remove the category Category:Lepidoptera from File:Caterpillar Laurentians.jpg? It was correct, and I was hoping that an expert could eventually replace it with a more precise category. Nigel David Allen (talk) 07:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Was cleaning the categories of some of my uploads and by mistake i deleted the Category:Lepidoptera from your file. I readded said category and sorry for the inconvenience. Tm (talk) 14:03, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Agnieszka Radwanska (19027292262).jpg

Hi. Why do you canceled my amendment of photos? My version is better than the original picture. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:35, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Are you blind or stupid? --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

You stealthy overwrote a image perfectly good and in usein several with your version, claiming to be better, you got reverted (per policy) and instead of uploading your version under a new filename you stubbornly reupload your version. To end i reverted to the original version and uploaded yours under a new filename. But you, unhappy, fired this insult, showing that your probably looking at the mirror when you call others blind or stupid. Tm (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Ariana_Fox

Ariana Fox 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 ∙ +/−

FredWalsh (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Category change DR

Dear TM,

Do you want to wait to adjust the Dominican Republic, I'm busy with (re) organizing. If I can not use my newly created category, I can not continue working. --Jos1950 (talk) 01:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

No, as you are desorganizing other people work by deleting categories of images that should be in there, like removing categories of locations, dates of photos and type of photos (like B&W). Also the US never occupied the Dominican Republic between 1961 and 1965, as the Dominican Republic occurred only in in 1965 as you implied in Category:United States occupation of the Dominican Republic (1961-65) Tm (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

You can also discuss first before you block everything, everyone can make a mistake.--Jos1950 (talk) 01:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

When you desorganizing other people work by removing categories of locations (Category:Santo Domingo de Guzman), dates of photos (Category:1965 in the Dominican Republic) and type of photos (Category:Black and white photographs of the Dominican Republic=, there isnt a lot to discuss. Tm (talk) 02:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

If you upload images, you agree to the license used on Commons. This means that nothing is your property and anyone can use everything and / or modify.

If you give me the opportunity to make a few things findable all will be well because that is the premise "discoverable". Not everyone knows that in "Operation Power Pack" should be sought as the 1965 fight is wanted. Needless to place all images in various categories, a reference to the category with a pair of images is enough and the whole clutter.

You can make your wishes known, but you can not enforce. If you do not accept the Commons rules, you must understand the consequences. --Jos1950 (talk) 17:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

As someone that has way more experience in time and editions in Commons, and so understands much better working in colaboration, its rules and pratices, contrary to what you claim your editions by removing categories of locations and type of photos make this images less discoverable, not more. Tm (talk)

File:Bad daddy 01 (13896555425).jpg

Hi, Tm, I was wondering if, in your opinion, the name of this file could be changed. "Bad daddy" is somewhat misleading to me. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Good point yours. Done myself as i have filemover privileges. Tm (talk) 16:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Entering the world of Gotic age (7136829147) (3).jpg

File:Entering the world of Gotic age (7136829147) (3).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Entering the world of Gotic age (7136829147).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 03:09, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:The king rises (7079554935) (3).jpg

File:The king rises (7079554935) (3).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:The king rises (7079554935).jpg.

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Revent^talk 19:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Lisboa I (6225598681).jpg

File:Lisboa I (6225598681).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!

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

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 04:05, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:I

Hi, Tm I was wondering why this file is categorized I. In the meantim, I added some more categories I think might be useful too. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:52, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

File:LIS - 201606 S1 - 32 (28514279781).jpg

File:LIS - 201606 S1 - 32 (28514279781).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!

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

Elisfkc (talk) 17:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Felipe Kitadai

Hey, I'm trying to partly clean up your mass uploads, but don't want to edit war. What is your problem with changing generic flickr names to reasonable ones? Materialscientist (talk) 05:22, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

First you are the one that moves perfectly good, clear and identifiable names in portuguese to cryptic ones, second because of your indiscriminate moves of files and categories i just lost 5 hours cleaning my uploads related to Rio 2016, as your edits made me lost on what files were of what as you with your moves from the uncreated Rio 206 only categorize said files by athlete, forgeting to categorize files by event, day and country. Thanksnto you instead of taking 20 minutes it took me 4 hours with your actions qnd now you want to continue with this disruption? Tm (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Rio 2016 - Boxe-Boxing. (28486298614).jpg

File:Rio 2016 - Boxe-Boxing. (28486298614).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!

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

Elisfkc (talk) 17:32, 23 August 2016 (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!

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

Affected:

File:Rio 2016. Polo aquatico. sx50 74 (28328799703).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Rio 2016 Summer Olympics (29099371121).jpg

File:Rio 2016 Summer Olympics (29099371121).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!

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

Elisfkc (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Plenário do Senado (28978056861).jpg

File:Plenário do Senado (28978056861).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!

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

Elisfkc (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2016 (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!

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

Affected:

File:Rio 2016. Rugby 302 (28818598132).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Elisfkc (talk) 17:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

uploads from Flickr

Hey Tm. First of all thanks for all the work you done during the Olympics in uploading photos from Flickr. Anyway I have 2 suggestions for you. Firstly please try to remember to add photographer categories like Category:Photographs by Jonas de Carvalho or Category:Files from Agência Brasil Fotografias Flickr stream. Secondly don't upload personal images or bad quality images. Thanks again, Tm Dudek1337 (talk) 18:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Rio 2016, Olimpiadas no Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (28657316772).jpg

File:Rio 2016, Olimpiadas no Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (28657316772).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!

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

Mz7 (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Categorization

Hello. Notice, please, that categories in files should not be random or redundant. Photo of a frog Heleioporus does not need categories Unidentified insects, Myobatrachidae and Anura. Category:Heleioporus is enough. As far as I see, it concerns all your biological uploads. Stas (talk) 22:19, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Rio 2016. a33 51 (28897571145).jpg

File:Rio 2016. a33 51 (28897571145).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!

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

Taivo (talk) 07:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

File:REPUBBLICA DOMINICANA (8423110813).jpg

File:REPUBBLICA DOMINICANA (8423110813).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!

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

Jos1950 (talk) 10:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Final da maratona masculina dos Jogos Rio 2016 1039317-21082016- dsc2567.jpg

Template:Autotranslate Materialscientist (talk) 11:13, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Judo at the 2016 Summer Olympics

The whole one event, like Category: Judo at the 2016 Summer Olympics – Women's 63 kg‎, happened within one day. If you wish to categorize by date, add the whole parent category, not individual subcats or individual files. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 22:46, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:AIRPOWER16 - Air to Air SK35C Draken (29366239356).jpg Revent^talk 11:21, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

re-directing Bars and restaurants in Silves

By re-directing Bars and restaurants in Silves to just to Restaurants you have narrowed the scope of this category. I don't think this is a good way to go as not all bars can be described as restaurants.Kolforn (talk) 17:06, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

You create categories that mix completly diferent establishments (bares and restaurants are completly diferent, not speaking in mixing cafés up in the middle), do not connect with upper categories (except the location), create a paralel tree to already established category trees, so i downt understand to what are you complaining. Tm (talk) 17:08, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

If you create a different category for each establishment like Category:Bars, Category: Café and Category: Restaurant you will create lot of work in re-organising many of the cities and towns in Portugal. What is wrong with grouping them together. On English Wikipedia the Category:Bars and restaurants is used a great deal. I am not complaining I am just enquiring as I see that you have set about change this category in other places. Good luck with that.Kolforn (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

No, what already exists in portuguese (and spanish, french, german, etc) is the segregation of categories in Category:Bars, Category: Café and Category: Restaurant. What you were making, anew is the way of creating duplicate categories, paralel category trees and duplicate work for other users. Tm (talk) 17:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I think this is the end of conversation with you!Kolforn (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

[[:Category::Transport in Spain]]

Hi Tm, please be advised, that not all parts of Spain are in Europe. Cheers --MB-one (talk) 13:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Please be advised that Spain is a european country, so your constant attempts to remove [[:Category::Transport in Spain]] of [[:Category::Transport in Europe]] is unwarrated, as every category "in\of Spain" is under the correspondant category "in\of Europe". Cheers. Tm (talk) 13:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, Ceuta, Melilla and the Canaries are parts of Spain but not in Europe. So categories "xxx in Europe" don't apply to those parts of Spain. Cheers --MB-one (talk) 14:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

But all categories "in\of Spain" should be categorized under correspondant category "in\of Europe". Said territories of Ceuta, Melilla and the Canaries are\should be categorized under its correspondent territories (such as "in\of Africa", as are others such as "in\of France" "in\of Netherlands\Kingdom of Netherlands", "in\of United Kingdom". Tm (talk) 14:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

File:DSC 0106 (5151354125).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Kintetsubuffalo ([[User talk:Kintetsubuffalo|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:PRESS

I've reverted your edits to File:North Adams, MA - Press 07 (9372906523).jpg and File:North Adams, MA - Press 08 (9372904789).jpg. Both are photos of PRESS Gallery (in North Adams, MA), which is precisely what Category:PRESS is about. - Jmabel ! talk 23:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the latest changes and additional comments on Cat:Army. That was exactly what I was looking for, are they Army's, Amed Forces or Military. I can now with confidence "Cat:Ejército Nacional .." convert to "Cat:Army". --Jos1950 ([[User talk:Jos1950|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 18:54, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

File:MINISTRO VALAKIVI PARTICIPÓ EN CEREMONIA POR EL 135 ANIVERSARIO DE LA BATALLA DE ARICA (17951737043).jpg

Template:Autotranslate MPD (t - c - u) 20:55, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

File:Austrian Airlines Smile Maker 18.08.2011 08-22-48 (6054832621).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Herzi Pinki ([[User talk:Herzi Pinki|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Category:2014 in Centro (Portugal)

Hello Tm. Why have you deleted the Category:2014 in Centro (Portugal) and changed it to the more general Category:2014 in Portugal. There is already an established category tree of Category:Centro (Portugal). I do not see why you find it necessary to interfere in this.Kolforn ([[User talk:Kolforn|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 08:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

You cant even be bothard to answer me then Kolforn ([[User talk:Kolforn|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 19:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

File:Austrian Airlines Smile Maker 01.09.2011 00-14-26 (6101500674).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Herzi Pinki ([[User talk:Herzi Pinki|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:15, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ping Please choose carefully what you upload. Should I see similar mass uploads of thousands of dubious pictures by yourself at any timepoint in future, I'll block you for repeated submitting of out-of-scope content after warnings. Thanks --A.Savin 16:29, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

These were not a clear scope violation, it was an interesting project. Had I more time I would have highlighted many to be kept as expressive and usefully illustrative. Threatening to block Tm for these uploads is unhelpful aggressive drama, lay off please. Thanks --Fæ ([[User talk:Fæ|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:26, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ping In case you dont known i have almost 1000k editions and around 230k images uploaded, so to complain of around 1,5k images (or less then 0,5%) is unecessary and threatning to block me is ludicrous, even more if you had realized that are around more 3000 of the same subject that i didnt upload, in a total of 4,879. So you should ask why didnt upload the rest!

What you dont realize is that i constantly monitor my uploads before, during and after the upload process, but in this case a chain of events led to this files being uploaded: 1 - I checked the flickr albuns and some of the pages of the Austrian Airlines flickr page but this files didnt showed up in my research; 2 - I feel asleep during the upload process i didnt notice until all those files were uploaded, and when i realized i stopped the upload to perceive if those files were in scope or not, yet i hadnt the time to do the research, to see if myself would open a DR, before this deletion request being opened (because, you know, i´am a volunteer using some of my free time on this site and i´am not on a contract to deliver results on a timetable). So i dont realize your attitude of waving the block hammer yet you dont flintch in a clear policy violation in the DR above, as despite the fact that Commons:Deletion policy says that this kind of deletion requests should be open for 7 days, it was closed in mere 2 days. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 06:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

So to terminate, explain in what policies you base your threat of block as Commons:Project scope doesnt mention any block reason and Commons:Blocking policy doesnt mention out of scope uploads as a reason to block. If you dont come with anything your block threat will be nothing more than empty threats.

I recommend that, if you fill overcome and dragged to the drama feast that Commons has become in the last months, that you step away from the pc or administrator tolls for the time you fill nece or, at least, think twice before making again this kind of statements, so as to not repeat this threat or the previous one and restart with reinvigorated aim and editions. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 06:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ping Thanks for your support, but dont worry as i´am not abbated by empty threats not based on policy and i dont get along nor will i be dragged to the drama that some administrators and users are keen to in the last month, as no users and administrators are above rules and policies, despite what some of them might think or try to do with their pratices. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 06:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

"Uploading out of scope files after warnings" IS a blockable offence. You are refering to COM:BP, but the reasons explicitly mentioned there are only "the more common of [a number of reasons]". I really don't know why you linked to my block log. Should I show you yours? :) --A.Savin 13:16, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ping::Yet again you failed, again to show in what policy your empty threats are based, instead poining to a generic statement about "other reasons" that you cant detailed out as they are not part of policy. Whats is more worrying is that you seem to not know or ignore, that users uploading only out of scope files are blocked after several warning, yet you threat someone that has uploaded 929 771 editions and more than 230.000 files before (with a few dozen of files being deleted as out of scope, usually after myself nominate them for deletion or speedy deletion as uploader request during the first 7 days of upload), in is first "mistake" of this kind (and i still dont have an opinion as if they are in scope or not). So as you can see as my profile doesnt fit, by a very long shot, on a blockable offense for out of scope uploads, as we are talking about less than 0.5% of my uploads, that happened for the reasons that i stated above, that you prefered to ignore and continue with your threats, after only seven days of you being blocked for "Intimidation/harassment".

And how about the out of process closure of this deletion request after only two days when policy dictates that deletion requests are to be opened for at least 7 days so that more users can discuss it? You havent threated anyone of being blocked. For last if you continue with this kind of threat of blocking not based in policy and if this is an attempt at drama, that seems to becoming very common in Commons, let me say that i will not be dragged to this muudy business and will ignore you and your statements, leaving them unaswered. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Affected:

File:Austrian Airlines Smile Maker 01.09.2011 00-14-26 (6101500674).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely EugeneZelenko ([[User talk:EugeneZelenko|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Competição de triatlo masculino enche ruas de Copacabana 1038782-18.08.2016tng-2080.jpg

Template:Autotranslate KA^{Pour les intimes} 06:52, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Competição de triatlo masculino enche ruas de Copacabana 1038768-18.08.2016tng-1548.jpg

Template:Autotranslate KA^{Pour les intimes} 06:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Competição de triatlo masculino enche ruas de Copacabana 1038765-18.08.2016tng-1515.jpg

Template:Autotranslate KA^{Pour les intimes} 11:48, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Competição de triatlo masculino enche ruas de Copacabana 1038766-18.08.2016tng-1518.jpg

Template:Autotranslate KA^{Pour les intimes} 11:49, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Competição de triatlo masculino enche ruas de Copacabana 1038767-18.08.2016tng-1546.jpg

Template:Autotranslate KA^{Pour les intimes} 11:50, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Unidentified insects

Hi Tm,

may you please NOT import more unidentified Lepidoptera? Me have more than enough of them, work for hundreds of entomologists, which will never come and help us.--Kopiersperre ([[User talk:Kopiersperre|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 10:34, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Mosteiro dos Jerónimos, Portugal. (30373246856).jpg

Template:Autotranslate -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:52, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Uploaded with UploadWizard

Hi Tm, the category Uploaded with UploadWizard is there for maintenance reasons. Please, don't remove it. Jan Arkesteijn ([[User talk:Jan Arkesteijn|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/08/Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tm, further to that point, I'd like to ask you to do those removals more slowly and/or with a bot account. The closing admin on the discussion you linked actually said not to edit pages only to remove them at all, and the consensus on its talk page is also that non-bots shouldn't do these kinds of edits. The problem is that you're flooding watchlists and possibly causing people not to notice other edits. darkweasel94 23:31, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Please, please, please, use a bot for that. My watchlist is totally fled Poc o² 23:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Consensus was to delete so therefore it makes sense to remove the category and then to request deletion, Thank you Tm - Carry on. –Davey2010^Talk 23:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok, but please remove the category insertion from the proc. Jan Arkesteijn ([[User talk:Jan Arkesteijn|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:16, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Apparently, it already was... Jan Arkesteijn ([[User talk:Jan Arkesteijn|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thickness or vandalism?

The file File:Édouard Raul, Autoportrait.jpg was uploaded using Upload Wizard, so what exactly is the game you are playing at here? Regards, --Edelseider ([[User talk:Edelseider|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:04, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ping Why don't you read the section above this one? darkweasel94 15:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I see. Well, Template:Ping, that's what happens when one uses "start a new topic" instead of going straight to the bottom of the page. Sorry!--Edelseider ([[User talk:Edelseider|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 15:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

File:1601MBeek6849 (24305823140).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Revent^talk 22:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Πραγματοποιηθείσα συνάντηση Υπουργού Εξωτερικών Ν. Κοτζιά με Υπουργό Εξωτερικών της Βενεζουέλας D. Rodrίguez (16526384880).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Revent^talk 18:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Correct use?

Hi Tm,

This is the first time I use Wikimedia professionally. I used your picture (Atlantic_Ocean_(22463667157)[1])in an advertisement as a back ground. I added "Wikimedia Commons, by Tm". I hope that is correct. /Adeleide Template:Unsigned2

cropping aircrafts

Hello, as you saw I cropped some aircraft pictures, but I haven't provided an explanation every time, sorry. I cropped them per COM:CROP : when there is only uniform sky behind an airplane and cropping it lets better appreciate the craft itself, it benefits the viewer as the example in COM:CROP. --Marc Lacoste ([[User talk:Marc Lacoste|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:31, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Notifie of discussion

Hello, I notifie you this discussion Commons talk:Categories for discussion/2016/08/Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard. --Havang(nl) ([[User talk:Havang(nl)|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:40, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate Dear Tm. You have been blocked for today as you appear to remove Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard from files using cat-a-lot. As there are more than 8 million files in that category, this has to be done by an approved bot for not flooding watchlists and the recent changes list. If you stop your cat-a-lot job you can of course be unblocked immediately.

If you did this task in good faith I'd appreciate you to advise at which part you have been mistaken, in order to close any potential trap for other users. Thank you! --Krd 14:56, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:PingI see. If a normal user, in good faith, removes Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard he is blocked, but a super user a.k.a administrator does exactly the same as a normal user he is not blocked??? Case in point if i made around 1800 edits from 12H54 to 13H20 (26 minutes) i get blocked but if an administrator like Template:Ping* makes around 3000 edits from 10H37 until 10H49 (12 minutes) he is not blocked? Why the duality of criteria in the exact same case as he also removed Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard? Why didnt an administrator got blocked for doing the the double of editions in half the time as an normal user? And in what policy to you base your block "unapproved bot running too fast" as i´am not a bot, its only me removing manually said category or in what policy is it stated that making "too many editions" is a blockable offense?

* Whom i have nothing against, on the contrary in this and other matters, just pointing Krd dual criteria, as i think no one should be blocked for doing "too many editions". Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 16:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Dear Tm. Although information is my business, I don't have all information, and if I was aware that INeverCry is doing the same I likely would have blocked him, too, like I blocked another user for this thing. The category existed for nearly 6 years, and there is no need to drop all good sense now just to get it done today. Please let the bots do their work. Thank you. --Krd 17:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

tps - Tm, I think there is an issue here with the expectations of cat-a-lot users, and perhaps users of similar fast acting tools. If the rules for user-assisting bots are not good enough to ensure that good faith use will never get a user's principal account blocked, then current guidelines on bots look weak.

If cat-a-lot use is effectively capped to some upper limit (10,000? 100,000? edits) then that should become a default constraint on the bot itself, rather than remaining the 'fault' of the user.

Anyway have a think, I'm too busy over the coming weekend to pick this up as a proposal, but it makes sense that something should be improved here. Thanks --Fæ ([[User talk:Fæ|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:49, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Tm, I've mention you and this block at Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard#Inappropriate behavior by bureaucrat User:Krd. lNeverCry 21:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

It's a good faith action by Krd. I don't think a report at COM:BN is necessary this time. I would hope that we can all see the underlying issue is the speed and volume of edits it is possible to request with user managed tools and scripts, like Cat-a-lot and VFC, and the appropriate route to take in reviewing this incident is agreeing how to deal with high speed semi-automated editing tools. Nick ([[User talk:Nick|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 21:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ping Template:Ping No it's not a good faith action. The block rationale is false. Tm was not using any unapproved bot. He was using cat-a-lot, and not even doing that many edits (1800 in a half hour). How can a block done with a false rationale be good faith? Why wasn't a talkpage message or warning given? lNeverCry 22:55, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Od I'm highly sceptical about this admin action. This block is not compliant with the possible reasons set forth in the Commons:Blocking policy. A user account making edits too fast is not an unauthorized bot, but merly a speedy working user. Blocks should also only be preventive. A message telling the user to hold off editing, or an hours block tops (if at all) would have been plenty of time for the user to stop doing this. (t) Josve05a (c) 23:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Goodness, such a fuss. And partly it's over the distinction between a "normal user" running a bot and a "super user" running one. From my own humble or normal PoV, all bot runners are super, doing more good things, and occasionally more bad things, than normal unbotted editors like me. As for speedy work flooding watchlists, that certainly is a problem for me and presumably for many other lowly manual editors, and I wish that work to slow down. As for whether a day block or some other method is a good tool for that purpose, is a question I shall leave to the supers. Meanwhile in the past several hours, both ‎User:SteinsplitterBot and User:AkBot have been busily implementing the same deletion task. I wish only one bot would do that, preferably at a slower rate and combined with other large, low-priority bot work. I lack an opinion on the question of which super user should be chosen to do it. Jim.henderson ([[User talk:Jim.henderson|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 14:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Jogadores do Guimaraes

Viva, Não percebo a ideia dos jogadores do Guimaraes serem todos pessoas de Guimaraes, mas não vou insistir. --JotaCartas ([[User talk:JotaCartas|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Pessoas de Guimarães= Que nasceram e\ou cresce(ra)m e\ou trabalh(ar)am e\ou. Não necessariamente nascidos em Guimarães. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 03:02, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Canais de Aveiro (29678438121).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 10:43, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Canais de Aveiro (29677732001).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 10:57, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Be polite please

The way you commented here is not really suitable and constructive. Please avoid using phrases such as "bullshit and hypocrisy of users". Thank you. --Mhhossein ^talk 15:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

File:07 2010 przystanek Woodstock.jpg

Are you claiming it doesn't need an explanation? ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:07, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

No it doesnt need, specially when it was previously kept, even more with a template made with a crusader agenda. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

If you think the template can be re-worded to sound less harsh, then I would welcome your feedback. If anything it's a pragmatic response to the people who say practically anything is in scope. The template is asking them to explain WHY. ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:21, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

No, what your trying to do is to delete images you do not like for morality\wahtever reasons. For nominate images to deletions related with educational or scope issues we have other templates that you know very well as your making use of them. This template and its language is not based in none of our policies as is POV all the way about an very particular subject with an particular agenda. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:25, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. It seems we have a difference of opinion. ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:29, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

No what i have is an opinion, you on the other hand have an morality agenda to censor perfectly in scope, legal and consensual female nudity images, disguised as an attempt to improve scope and educational use. Like you i have seem many and i´am not easily fooledTm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:32, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

If they are in scope, legal and consenual, then I can't see why you have a problem in providing a use rationale explaining this. ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

And they show, your the one that doesnt want to see. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:36, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll ask again, Why do you take issue with providing an explanation? ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:39, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

See my previous aswer (and not ironically you seem to really not see). Also your trying to demand of this images explanations about scope and educational use that is not demanded for other kind of imagery. So your attempting to change Commons policies in a stealth way. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:42, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Ah. Well if that was the concern, the template has been put up for immediate speedy delete, . We can take the issue of scope/context in respect of particular content types somewhere more appropriate.ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:58, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you providing the explanations in the two other DR's where you commented. ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:58, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

And about this image is particular see Commons:Deletion requests/File:07 2010 przystanek Woodstock.jpg as you seem no not manage or want to see. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:44, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Od Template:Re Let's face it: There are several images involving nudity on Commons that could probably be cleared out without too much complaint because of their lack of educational value (scope). I feel like ShakespeareFan is articulating himself poorly here. Personally, I think the better targets would be images like File:Akt-fisch-rr.jpg. I have a hard time seeing the EV in that image, or in File:Time For A Bath.jpg. Basically, nomination for deletion of images containing nudity shouldn't be done willy nilly, but nor should we be blind to the fact that some of the ones currently on Commons probably are out of scope. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a #if:[[:#switch:{{{incl}}}]][[:ns:10:#if:Talkback|#if:]][[:#switch:{{{incl}}}]]#if: message on my talk page. 02:47, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

You should see is contributions in commons of ShakespeareFan to understand that he has an agenda and not a concern about scope or educational use (as he almost only opens deletions related with this images). Also i´ve already nominated some nude images (do to being revenge porn, out of scope or copyright violations) so i know that some nude images are out of scope (but very few. copyright and personality rights are other subject). What no one manage to explaim is why are nude images automatically more out of scope than images of trains, cats, and when i ask no one manage to articulate a rationale explanation. Not starting with some users on a morality crusade. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 03:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think they are, which is why I've been explaining to ShakespeareFan on IRC that the better way to go about the cleanup that they want to do is to nominate images that appear to lack EV/be out of scope independently of the fact that they contain nudity. This is why I say that the two I mentioned above could go (I don't see the potential EV in those images), but the ones like the tree nudity ones he nominated should probably stay (they could conceivably be used to illustrate public nudity). Or at least that's how my thinking is going. So basically I feel like he has a legitimate concern, but is applying it rather in a rather poor way. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a #if:[[:#switch:{{{incl}}}]][[:ns:10:#if:Talkback|#if:]][[:#switch:{{{incl}}}]]#if: message on my talk page. 03:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

I've withdrawn the DR's on the basis of the explanation provided by Tm (including some he'd not yet commented on.), I seriously mis-judged this (partly as moral panic given some news coverage of the UK porn ban), and would welcome an opportunity to discuss the issues you've raised when in a position to make a more rational articulation. ShakespeareFan00 ([[User talk:ShakespeareFan00|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 03:23, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Feiras. Exposições. Mostras (30342872204).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 06:29, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Fotos produzidas pelo Senado (31213998015).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 06:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Fotos produzidas pelo Senado (31213997875).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 06:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Fotos produzidas pelo Senado (31200902425).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 06:38, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Plenário do Senado (30392953223).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 06:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Verplaatsen, verplaatst

Beste TM,

De indeling van Santo Domingo is aangepast aan de situatie zoals die door de Dominicaanse regering enkele jaren geleden is ingesteld. Het oude Santo Domingo de Guzman bestaat niet meer, maar op Commons wilde de admin deze categorie niet meteen verwijderen. Hierdoor is er nu een probleem met de herkenning van de nieuwe situatie. Santo Domingo de Guzmán is nu een stad in de municipio van het Distrito National, waardoor ook de navy haven in Santo Domingo Este is komen te liggen en het airport in Boca Chica. Het is in het begin best lastig om de afbeeldingen in de juiste categorie te plaatsen, maar niet onmogelijk. De afbeeldingen die jij nu hebt verplaatst hebben geen plaatsaanduiding en had ik daarom in de provincie Santo Domingo laten staan. Dit is gelijk aan de categorie locatie van de oude situatie en dus niet verplaatst.

De categorie Santo Domingo en het oude SD de Guzman moeten leeg blijven. want die worden eerdaags toch verwijderd als men inziet dat de situatie is gewijzigd.

Ik ben nog bezig om categorieen en afbeeldingen naar de nieuwe indeling te schakelen. Er zijn dus wat locaties bij gekomen, ook om het ongeveer op de oude manier vindbaar te maken. Wil je zo vriendelijk zijn om de files terug te zetten? --Jos1950 ([[User talk:Jos1950|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 00:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Presidência do Senado (30914907432).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 11:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Feiras. Exposições. Mostras (30342871224).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 11:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Presidência do Senado (31021446826).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:00, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Feiras. Exposições. Mostras (31128154646).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:00, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Presidência do Senado (31057218795).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:00, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Feiras. Exposições. Mostras (31128153906).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:01, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Feiras. Exposições. Mostras (30342862474).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:01, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Presidência do Senado (30914921492).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:02, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Feiras. Exposições. Mostras (30342874074).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 12:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Portugal e Espanha DSC05912 (25469464684).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Arnaud Palastowicz ([[User talk:Arnaud Palastowicz|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 23:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Marina de Albufeira

Hello Tm you have changed the category tree for Marina de Albufeira. The Marina is an environment rather than Transport! There are property developments, Bars, shops, restaurants, entertainment venues ect. If you want to create a category from this I suggest that you create "Category boats in Albufeira Marina" and place that in the transport category Kolforn ([[User talk:Kolforn|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Lisbon Portugal (3016881027).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Mhhossein ^talk 13:04, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Portugal e Espanha DSC05895 (25469549024).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Arnaud Palastowicz ([[User talk:Arnaud Palastowicz|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 17:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Porto L1190022 (25119872741).jpg

Template:Autotranslate JotaCartas ([[User talk:JotaCartas|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Autotranslate

Template:Autotranslate . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Did you even read the changed file descriptions of the files before deleting them again?. For your information the graffiti were researched and attributed "whenever possible" as you demanded, but it appears that even that is not enough. Tm ([[User talk:Tm|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 02:57, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Roma2010 (5048220802).jpg

Template:Autotranslate Zello ([[User talk:Zello|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 20:01, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Former train stations...

See Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/11/Category:Former train stations in Portugal please. --Ruthven (msg) 22:57, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

See Category:Former train stations. 40 countries with categories. Tm ([[User talk:Tm#top|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 22:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Reversiones

¿Por qué ha revertido algunas de mis ediciones sin explicación?. Alonso de Mendoza ([[User talk:Alonso de Mendoza|int:Talkpagelinktext]]) 12:17, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Acceleration. (5382670090).jpg

Template:Autotranslate –Davey2010^Talk 14:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)