User talk:Alan/Archivos/2015 10

Hi, you consired that files has to be created before 1983 to make this license valid an this one was created 2005? What was your reason to restore it? --JuTa 09:05, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@JuTa: Hi!

First design has minimum 48 years (appears in Lei municipal 525/1967), in public domain under:

It is a work published or commissioned by a Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal) prior to 1983.(Law 3071/1916, art. 662; Law 5988/1973, art. 46; Law 9610/1998, art. 115)

and per COM:DW. (Replica).

It is very likely that the flag has more than 1 century old, I'm looking for references prior to 1967.

Cheers, Alan ^(talk) 12:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

You have recently deleted File:Сходня Т-34-76.JPG. Please, re-store this file so that it can be transferred to Russian Wikivoyage, where it is used in the list of cultural heritage monuments. Thank you! --Alexander (talk) 17:20, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Closure was change to kept per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images for transfer from WLM-2015 in Russia seven minutes after deletion. Alan ^(talk) 17:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --Alexander (talk) 17:35, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hola, podrías echarle un vistazo a estos archivos, sospecho que se está violando el copyright de ellos File:Dolmen en 1970.jpg y File:Dolmen desde el corredor en 1970.jpg (puede que haya alguno más) fueron subidos por el usuario SalAloMar (Salvador Alonso de Martín) pero atibuye su autoría a Ana Cuñado Alonso lo que me hace suponer que los subió violando el copyright de las mismas. Si la autora concedió el permiso para subirlas a commons no constan que se haya enviado solicitud a OTRS. Un saludo y gracias --Jcfidy (talk) 19:08, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Jcfidy: Hola.

No encuentro nada igual en otra fuente.

Aplicando lo que comentas las he marcado con {{No permission since}} para que se envíe el correspondiente permiso a OTRS.

Un saludo. Alan ^(talk) 19:13, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Por eso mismo no los marqué con spidydelete|copiright, pero lo que me estraño fue que otrors archivos subidos por el mismo usuario (por ejemplo este se lo atribuye a sí mismo mientras que esos otras los atibuye a otra persona pero lo enlaca a su PU. Gracias --Jcfidy (talk) 19:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Jcfidy:

Si te fijas las 2 fotos esas se ven más antiguas. Es probable que escaneadas desde un formato analógico/papel.

El tema es que voy a hacer un repaso de sus contribuciones.

Si te encuentras casos así que son muy dudosos no dudes en marcar con {{No permission since}} o incluso abrir una consulta de borrado. Commons se basa en el principio de precaución y eso exige que nada esté dudoso.

Un saludo. Alan ^(talk) 19:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

He encontrado este otro que ya marqué pero no sé si marcar también este otro --Jcfidy (talk) 19:46, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Jcfidy: Mira esto. Habría que saber si el origen es otro a Commons y si es anterior. Alan ^(talk) 20:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

En wordpress fue subida en el año 2011, o eso parece. Y el blog ese es de un tal Juan Carlos Isla no es el nombre del usuario que lo subió a commons. Aunque el del blog lo pudo haber cogido de algúin otro sitio. --Jcfidy (talk) 20:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Jcfidy: Si la de wordpress es de 2011 y la de Commons 2014, pinta a violación de copyright si la página de wordpress no tiene licencia libre. Yo le metería un {{Copyvio}} indicando la útil de wordpress y lo de las fechas. Saludos. Alan ^(talk) 21:00, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Done la he marcado por infringir el copyright. Le he dejado un mensaje es la discusión del usuario en esWiki para que se pase por su discusión de Commons, no es un usuario muy activo y solo edita en un único artículo. --Jcfidy (talk) 21:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Jcfidy: Borrada. Muy buen trabajo :-). Alan ^(talk) 21:12, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Las otras imágenes a las que atribuye la autoria a otras personas creo que será mejor esperar a ver si le dieron permiso a usarlas o no aunque me temo que sea lo que tú dices (por lo menos las de 1970), que hayan sido escaneadas desde algún libro. No creo que el usuario haya actuado de mala fe sino más bien por desconocimiento. pd.- Quitar sangría en español jajaja, yo pensé que sería algo en inglés.. Gracias por todo. --Jcfidy (talk) 21:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Es {{Outdent}} pero como nunca me acuerdo hace tiempo cree la redirección en español. Alan ^(talk) 21:29, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

You closed this DR on grounds of COM:PS+COM:PRP, while the discussion suggested COM:COPY+COM:PRP instead. While finer points of COM:PS can be debated, how come is out of scope a portrait of a notable actor, one of the only two hosted in Commons? And why the reported sighting elsewhere is not a copyvio? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Oh! I put COM:PS instead of COM:COPY. Fixed, it's a clear copyvio. Thanks. Alan ^(talk) 23:38, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

There were two files in the request. Please decide something for the other file also. Taivo (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Taivo: Done. I need glasses :-P Alan ^(talk) 13:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Why were all of the pictures on this article removed? I took them myself and the artist is my brother. I thought I had them properly licensed to my satisfaction. Thanks. --♥Golf (talk) 21:12, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. After 3 weeks (1 week per local policies) waiting an email with permission and deletion request open on hold, all images was deleted.

Read COM:OTRS and follow instructions. Alan ^(talk) 21:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I nominated the file to be deleted because the original creator notified me that he did not authorize the file to be released under GFDL, and you now close it with Keep. Is that a right thing to keep a license-violated file on WikiCommons? My VK in the discussion is to another file, not for File:台北市聖誕夜景.jpg. --H.T. Chien (Discuss|Contributions) 00:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Htchien: Better now?

For future cases use please "list" system, please.

Example:

• File:gkgfincyibgffyilnhf 1.jpg   Keep
• File:gkgfincyibgffyilnhf 2.jpg   Delete
• File:gkgfincyibgffyilnhf 3.jpg   Keep

Regards, Alan ^(talk) 01:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I will keep that in mind. ;) --H.T. Chien (Discuss|Contributions) 01:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Alan... you closed this as "Deleted", but kept the file... in keeping with the other very similar files, I believe you meant to close this as Keep. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Storkk: DelReqHandler Script error :-(. Done, using historical method... My hand. Alan ^(talk) 08:21, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I think you missed one: File:Personified dog sculpture - The Cowman.JPG. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 07:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Hedwig in Washington: Sure  ! Deleted, thanks. Alan ^(talk) 08:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I think, this deletion is accidental. Could you restore it, please? Ankry (talk) 14:54, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Done Thanks. Alan ^(talk) 14:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Alan. What about the second page contained in this DR? --Leyo 15:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Leyo: . User:Hansmuller/BioHist is in user namespace. I think we shouldn't remove the page without the Hansmuller's request. (Test page? ...?)

Feel free to remove if you like. Alan ^(talk) 15:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

This orphaned page is contained in several non-user-specific categories. The reason for nominating it for deletion is to keep them clean. If you think you shouldn't delete that page as part of that DR, I may nominate it in a separate DR. --Leyo 21:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Leyo: IMHO we should not act in user space if it doesn't violate the policies. But I will remain neutral if you decide to speedydelete or open a DR. Cheers, Alan ^(talk) 21:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

→ Commons:Deletion requests/User:Hansmuller/BioHist --Leyo 21:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

More DRs to close             Alan ^(talk) 21:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Alan, can you please also delete the nominated file? Thank you. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 20:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Eleassar:   Done Alan ^(talk) 20:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Totally unbelievable your action.

First it was one in favour of deletion and two against, and was previously kept.

Besides some very weak arguments in favour of claiming the presence of a minor, i showed FACTS showing that this file is legal.

Did you see the references i made as showing clearly that this is ain scope and legal file.

It was published in the collection "w:en:The Good Old Naughty Days", that was its own Wikipedia article, so it is in scope.

Preserved and was restaured by the Archives du Centre National de la Cinématographie, one of the french national film archives

Covered in the press:

Covered by L'Humanité.

The Guardian covers this movie saying One of the films, The Musketeer's Dinner, features a French infantryman who has a meal in an outdoor restaurant before two waitresses decide to make his lunch a highly memorable one. It was made during the filming of a 1920 film, The Three Musketeers, in the Paris suburb of Redon, and its happy star would have been a jobbing electrician or a cameraman taking advantage of his boss's day off.

Exhibited in three countries at least:

Festival de Cannes en 2002, à la Quinzaine des Réalisateurs in France.

The Uk, the first R18 film to be rated for display in cinemas in the United Kingdom for over ten years, despite its contents, partly due to its 'classic' style and age and as "historical footage

Exhibited in the USA in New York's Quad Cinema.

So why your out of process deletion (and even not justifying it) if this file is in scope and legal. To restore your error, restore this file or else i will ask for public imput your action in this DR. Tm (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

The file is online. Alan ^(talk) 21:24, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your reconsideration. Tm (talk) 02:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

In this discussion it was assumed the previous version of the file would be expunged. I suppose you want to do it. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 01:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Old version deleted. Alan ^(talk) 02:01, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I have a somewhat irregular move request; I’m only asking you first because you happened to close this DR; if you‘d prefer I can post at the AN (which was my original intention). I‘m asking for admin assistance, rather than using the usual Move form, because it doesn‘t obviously fall under any of the numbered criteria, requiring extra discretion, and includes a mop action. That DR was based on privacy concerns, specifically search engines returning the picture from a name search (with AGF that the requester was acting for the named subject), and for the week it remained open after I suggested renaming nobody opposed.

Would you please consider renaming the file in question to Cutting a cake for the US Air Force's 66th birthday 130920-F-BD9983-020.jpg without leaving a redirect (or deleting same afterward) or at least remove the person's name as in the edited description? If Google can find the DR itself, would it be possible to add a no-index directive to that page? Thanks for your attention (and for the closing).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi

1. NOINDEX added to DR
2. File renamed
3. Hidden various reviews and descriptions
4. Changed names in file description with initials

Regards. Alan ^(talk) 11:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Since when is deleting "per cmts" appropriate? Shouldn't we be deleting based on actual evidence, of which none was supplied? --AussieLegend (✉) 05:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi.

What is the difference between "per cmts", "per nom", empty closure, "per Username"? Typical closures since years.

But don't worry, I've changed closure adding more than obvious reason: COM:PRP.

Regards, Alan ^(talk) 11:06, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

COM:PRP doesn't apply. To quote: "The precautionary principle is that where there is significant doubt" - Note that significant is emphasised and there was no significant doubt, just baseless speculation, without any form of evidence being provided at all. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Doubts exist and I am not alone, so the policy of caution is applicable. Show us your authorship with evidences. Alan ^(talk) 05:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

You wrote deleted in the summary, but kept the file, why? --A.Savin 13:50, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@A.Savin: Sometimes I have problems with the script. During the preview appears deleted and then does nothing.   Deleted. I'm trying to find the logic to report error. (iOS 9????). Cheers, Alan ^(talk) 14:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

regarding this, Commons:LP is about content generated. File names, creator names, description fields and templates. It doesn't menton anywhere that discussion on a common page can be in any language whatsoever. Deletion requests require discussion, which will not work if the nominator uses a language a few can understand. I don't speak German, neither do I wish to learn German for the sake of talking about a validity of a file. English should be the common language of discussion, or those who don't speak English should request translation from someone else. I can write you in Hungarian or Korean or Chinese even, I don't think you will be happy with deletion requests started in Chinese. Who else will be able to contribute? There should be common sense in people using a multinational project like this. Teemeah (talk) 14:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Teemeah:

I understand and am in favor of what you say, BUT

Many users only knows their native language, and only enter to Commons to upload photos for their local wiki.

Do we ignore them? I think no.

I'm from Spain and for me Arabic, Cyrillic, Chinese, ... are symbols!!!. I don't know any German, I trying to speak English (terrible level), my languages are Spanish and Basque.

One issue are the policies and other the "day to day", we must understand that this project covers all the rest projects and all languages.

Cheers, Alan ^(talk) 19:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I would like to know WHY someone thinks relevant to destroy my portrait of Martin H.M. SCHREIBER even in WIKIMEDIA COMMONS!!!! Thanks for the respect of someone else's work!!! I have chosen a licence and have already made an article about Eric Porter in 2005 whose portraits are since then in Wikimedia Commons (anyway, I am not sure of nothing now!!. It is uncredibly insulting. Please do get it back!!THANK YOU!! Marie-Christine GALLICHER (talk) 20:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)Marie-Christine GALLICHER (talk) 20:14, 22 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Link to mentioned file? Alan ^(talk) 14:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Gracias. Obedeceré a la prohibición, y supongo que también incluye comentar en sus consultas de borrado, ¿no? ¿Cómo procedemos si continúa? ¿Sería demasiado extremo el prohibirle el etiquetar archivos para borrado (excepto en casos de clara violación de Copyright)?

De todos modos, es importante resolver la raíz del problema y llegar a un Consenso sobre las dichosas capturas de pantalla, la que (aún) está siendo discutida en el Village Pump. Por lo que te invito cordialmente a comentar al respecto; si puedes, por favor pide a más administradores que hagan sus comentarios, te lo agradeceré mucho. --Amitie 10g (talk) 06:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Question: Está bien que el usuario haya blanqueado su Página de discusión sin archivar? --Amitie 10g (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hola @Amitie 10g:

Las prohibiciones de interacción incluyen todo en lo que el otro intervenga. En enwiki lo tienen explicado: w:en:WP:IBAN.

¿Qué ocurre si se incumple? Que llegan los bloqueos de verdad... No es difícil cumplir con un iban y os puedo asegurar a ambos que va a mejorar mucho la experiencia diaria de cada uno en Commons.

En relación al blanqueo de página, no existe ninguna norma que obligue al archivado, es algo de cortesía Incluyendo en eswiki, donde existe esa creencia pero que no pasa de recomendación. En este caso yo le he dejado un mensaje y él ha confirmado su lectura, todo correcto.

Un saludo. Alan ^(talk) 12:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Mira esto... Teniendo en cuenta que el agregado de esa captura por mi parte fue, a mi juicio, legítimo y de buena fe:

• ¿El IBAN se extiende sólo a Commons? (considera que revertí su edición tras el bloqueo y prohibición en Commons)
• ¿Es esa edición en Wikipedia (incluyendo la amenaza de reporte al Tablón), crees que se pueda considerar como Vandalismo, o cuanto menos, de mala fe? ¿Crees que corresponde reportarlo?
• Y Como Global Sysop, ¿Es de tu competencia tomar acciones también en Wikipedia, si procede?

--Amitie 10g (talk) 15:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Amitie 10g: te respondo por puntos.

• Se extiende a Commons exclusivamente, cada proyecto es independiente. Para Wikipedia deberá ser un bibliotecario quien lo aplique.
• Prefiero no entrar en asuntos administrativos de otro proyecto, mejor pregunta a un bibliotecario o en el TAB. Pero mi consejo es que no entréis en guerras, dejad el tema correr, no es nada productivo y más bien diría que es destructivo.
• Ya no soy Global Sysop, renuncié por falta de tiempo hace un par de meses. Y mientras no tenga claro que mi tiempo libre va a ser suficiente para ejercer esa función, no planteo volver a serlo, me mantengo como Global rollbacker por ayudar en un momento dado. No obstante, teniendo en cuenta que no se debe interferir en los proyectos locales, creo que la única figura que podría aplicar un IBAN global sería un Steward. Y no recuerdo ningún caso que se haya aplicado.
• Indicarte que voy a desbloquear desde hoy a Diego por decisión propia, sois 2 buenos usuarios y mientras no entréis en guerra espero que ambos suméis en este maravilloso proyecto. Decir que el IBAN se mantiene. No soy una persona que le guste bloquear o borrar, y esta situación desde luego no me es agradable. Mi recomendación a ambos es que os mantengáis lejos uno del otro el cualquier proyecto, esto es muy grande, no luchéis.

Un saludo. Alan ^(talk) 16:49, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

De acuerdo, mejor dejo todo como está... pero, ¿cómo podremos resolver el asunto raíz sin volver a los mismos DRs de siempre? --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Amitie 10g: Yo veo problemas por todos lados, pero nada grave, por lo que no hay que liarse la manta a la cabeza y montar una guerra. De todas las DR; a ojo la mitad han tenido que ser "tocadas" con nuevas capturas y borrando historial y la otra mitad cerradas son acción necesaria.

Ponme aquí los links a las imágenes afectadas y las vamos viendo caso a caso, sin prisas y dejando todo claro.

El asunto es que encontremos una solución entre todos de la forma más cívica posible. Somos voluntarios, no nos pagan por discutir.

Un saludo. Alan ^(talk) 17:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I just noticed your deletion of File:RichardWhite.jpg. I think it's probably wrong. The rationale seems to be the visibility of artwork (part of a totem pole), but this photo is in the U.S. from before the time work was copyrighted by default. I've literally never heard of a totem pole in that era being copyrighted.

Sorry I didn't weigh in before this was deleted; I hadn't noticed the deletion request. - Jmabel ! talk 14:34, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jmabel. I copied this case in COM:UDEL to take a consensus decision. Alan ^(talk) 15:27, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, commented there. - Jmabel ! talk 21:40, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to bother you again, but following up on this matter I notice the redirect created by the move is still there, and the original requester has tried to ‘scrub’ it (first attempt reverted) and to nominate it for deletion (on the original DR page). I guess the personal name in question is still being found there by Google. Thanks again for your help.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 08:51, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Odysseus1479: Deleted and protected. DR closed. Alan ^(talk) 14:47, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Somehow two files were not deleted. Please take a look. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@EugeneZelenko: Thanks. More problems with DelReq script under iOS 9.   Done and listed error to report. Alan ^(talk) 14:41, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Alan. A while back you were the admin who took care of Commons:Deletion requests/Files of Cubaexpert. Four of the images which were deleted seem to have been re-uploaded by Cpbaker100. Just wondering if you could take a look at File:Christopher P Baker and 2015 Indian Roadmaster above Winelands, South Africa, May 2015.png, File:Christopher P Baker with his BMW R100GS in Vinales, Cuba, 1996.jpg, File:Christopher P Baker receiving the Marcia Vickery Award as 'Travel Journalist of the Year,' Jamaica 1998.jpg and File:Travel journalist Christopher P Baker speaking at the Colombian Embassy, Washington, DC, September 2014.jpg and see if they are OK for Commons. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:40, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Marchjuly: thanks

  Done: Nuked (Mass deletion) and blocked 3 days. Alan ^(talk) 15:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for checking Alan. I'm assuming they were the exact same images, right? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi again Alan. Same uploader has just uploaded File:Christopher P Baker, Havana, Cuba, 2013.jpg, File:Christopher P Baker checking out a B-26 bomber at the Bay of Pigs, Cuba, 1996.jpg, File:Christopher P Baker riding a BMW F800 at the Bay of Pigs, Cuba, 2013.jpg and File:Christopher P Baker at Pulpito de Diablo glacier, Colombia, 2011.jpg to Commons as "own work". Maybe these are OK, but I think they might be misinterpreting "own work" to mean "photo of me" because every photo they upload seems to be of en:Christopher Paul Baker. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Done and reported to Checkusers. --Alan ^(talk) 09:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Just wanted to pop by to say thanks for deleting these - I know there was hell of alot so just wanted to say thanks! :) Beers are on me! :) Cheers, –Davey2010Talk 17:41, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

• I've just realized you've forgot to delete this one ... Have you been on the beers already ?  , Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:43, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

• @Davey2010:   My favourite license is {{Beerware}}  .   Deleted. Alan ^(talk) 18:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, The immages called "File:Schio Nuovo Quartiere Operaio.jpg" and "File:Schio Quartiere Operaio.jpg" are created by myself. When i saw the advisment I try to added the correct lycence template. What cai I do to added the immages in right think?--Belllissimo (talk) 07:58, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply