User talk:Yann/archives 16

IMO 6125398

Hi Yann,

The category was empty as Windroff removed it from Category:Libertad (ship, 1956). If re-add it there (as suggested in the discussion), can it be recreated? Your closure doesn't address this. --  Docu  at 06:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Ali Baba et les 40 Voleurs (1905 film)

Merci de la suppression. Pourrais-tu aussi supprimer la PDD stp ? Cordialement, — Racconish ^Tk 16:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Quelle vitesse ! Merci. Cordialement, — Racconish ^Tk 16:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

RdL ...

Bonjour, Yann (ça me fait bizarre de dire bonjour à mon prénom ...).

ces tranches de livres d'une même collection

Je ne suis pas assez "doué" en Commons pour faire les DR que tu as engagées. Je supposais bien que ça partirait comme ça. Il y a peu, j'ai demandé à ce que quelqu'un se penche sur les imports d'un User et quelqu'un m'a dit qu'il n'y avait pas de photos "interdites" dans les contrib' de cet utilisateur. Ceci dit en passant, il a nombre de photos de mauvaise qualité que je me proposais de remplacer par des meilleures, mais voulais savoir si elles étaient valables avant de les faire (c'est dans mon coin) et de les télécharger. Pourtant, il en a trois ou quatre dans la liste de celles concernées par tes dernières DR. Non que je veuille du mal à cette personne (ni à celui qui m'a dit que), mais dans mon envie de comprendre les règles, je soumets des exemples que je croise au hasard. Un exemple au hasard : >>>

Je sais que je pose fréquemment beaucoup de questions mais, comme je l'ai dit, c'est pour comprendre. A ce propos, n'est-il pas possible de conserver (en vignettes très très basse résolution donc non exploitables mais lisibles) certaines photos représentatives (avec catégorisation(s) ad'hoc) de ce qu'il ne faut pas légalement mettre en Commons, pour que les nouveaux aient des exemples concrets ? Ex : photo de la Tour Eiffel, de nuit, éclairée banalement : ça c'est OK, et, la même, avec l'éclairage de la société qui produit des illuminations originales : ça ce n'est pas OK ? A qui puis-je m'adresser pour soumettre ce genre d'idée ? Une sorte de "bêtisier" des fichiers ... ou ce serait quand même illégal ?

Bon weekend à venir et merci encore pour le temps que tu as pris (et que peut-être tu prendras pour moi). --Llann .\m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 05:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour,

D'abord, il y a un gadget qui permet de faire des demandes de suppression en un clic. Regarde dans tes préférences.

Pour les photos de bâtiments en France, c'est vraiment compliqué. En principe, elles sont interdites, sauf si le bâtiment est ancien, sauf si le bâtiment est ordinaire, sauf si le bâtiment est secondaire dans l'ensemble de la photo, etc., etc.

Pour Les désastreuses aventures des orphelins de Baudelaire, je pense que le texte est trop simple pour faire l'objet d'un droit d'auteur, et les images trop petites. Donc ça devrait être OK. Enfin, différents admins ont des interprétations légèrement différentes. Personnellement, je me fis aux avis de Carl Lindberg, qui est un expert en la matière, et dont les avis sont équilibrés et judicieux.

Comme page d'exemples, il y a Commons:Threshold of originality. S'il faut inclure des photos interdites ici, il faudrait faire la page sur Wikipedia, où il est possible d'avoir des images sous le principe du fair use. Yann (talk) 08:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Merci pour ta réponse. Le "speed delete" (ou une chose dans le genre) ? Pour faire ça, il faut être sûr de soi, ce qui n'est pas mon cas, côté réglementation ... J'apprends, donc je me renseigne. Je ne ferai des DR que quand je serai certain de ne pas les faire pour rien. Pour l'instant, je me contente de soumettre, sur ce bistrot, celles pour lesquelles j'ai un doute. Quant au FairUse, je croyais que ce n'était spécifique qu'aux U.S.A., non ?

Sans grand rapport, connais-tu, ici ou sur fr:wiki, quelqu'un de parfaitement bilingue anglais/français ? J'ai besoin de me faire traduire des termes techniques (automobile) qui m'échappent.

Bonne fin de semaine et merci.

--Llann .\m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 18:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Look2See1

Your threatened block appears to be needed — Look2See1 has resumed editing and is again mangling categories and descriptions as if you'd said nothing. Nyttend (talk) 15:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

He still doesn't get it; see the history of Category:Wayne County Building. Nyttend (talk) 15:58, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much

Thanks very much for your wise closure at Commons:Deletion requests/File:2011 November 13 Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo.jpg, much appreciated, -- Cirt (talk) 22:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Celje

"Keep as above. I also believe than renominating the images a few hours after the DR was closed without any new valid reason is abusive. Yann (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)"

We have UnDR so that people can disagree with a deleted close immediately after the close, so why is it abusive to dispute a kept close by reopening the discussion? Or are keeps always good, so we never look at them again? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I think that a good reason is necessary for reopening a DR, and that Eleassar is actually trolling here. Yann (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Windsor of PL.jpg

Did you see original file on Facebook? It's copyvio. Link was in speedydelete. Jakubtr (talk) 21:53, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Ardsley Wellcome Sign, PA.JPG

Hi, as you can see the name has orfo - I want to resubmitt the image under correct name - what is problem with speedydeletion? I ask that as an author - why did you remove my request? Shuvaev (talk) 23:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Museum figures in Slovenia

Hi. I find your closure here strange. Who has mentioned clothing in any case? It's clearly written that the clothing is not copyrightable. The problem are the faces. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 08:38, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

When will you stop inventing your own bullshit copyright rules? Yann (talk) 11:44, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

When will you learn how to behave as well as that rules have to be respected? I have had to post a request for a review of your actions here and here. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 12:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Eleassar -- I think that all of the figures, except perhaps the two whiteface dummies in uniform, clearly qualify as sculpture. Where is it written that sculpture has to be naked? The faces and hands of these are clearly creative. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

See Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Yann .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh really? I don't know which copyright rules you use, or which world you live on, but I can't see anything to get a copyright here: File:Strežaj1.JPG, File:Vezilja1.JPG, File:Kolovrat1.JPG, File:Hojca1.JPG, File:Graščak1.JPG. The face is too blurry and too small part of the picture anyway. I am not even talking about the hands... Yann (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Taneshima Popura Dakimakura.jpg

What's the copyright violation? The file was released under CC-BY-SA. Cckerberos (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

This image is a derivative work of the drawing which is copyrighted, therefore not allowed on Commons, unless we get a permission from the author of the drawing. Yann (talk) 14:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

RdL ...

Bonjour, Yann (ça me fait bizarre de dire bonjour à mon prénom ...).

ces tranches de livres d'une même collection

Je ne suis pas assez "doué" en Commons pour faire les DR que tu as engagées. Je supposais bien que ça partirait comme ça. Il y a peu, j'ai demandé à ce que quelqu'un se penche sur les imports d'un User et quelqu'un m'a dit qu'il n'y avait pas de photos "interdites" dans les contrib' de cet utilisateur. Ceci dit en passant, il a nombre de photos de mauvaise qualité que je me proposais de remplacer par des meilleures, mais voulais savoir si elles étaient valables avant de les faire (c'est dans mon coin) et de les télécharger. Pourtant, il en a trois ou quatre dans la liste de celles concernées par tes dernières DR. Non que je veuille du mal à cette personne (ni à celui qui m'a dit que), mais dans mon envie de comprendre les règles, je soumets des exemples que je croise au hasard. Un exemple au hasard : >>>

Je sais que je pose fréquemment beaucoup de questions mais, comme je l'ai dit, c'est pour comprendre. A ce propos, n'est-il pas possible de conserver (en vignettes très très basse résolution donc non exploitables mais lisibles) certaines photos représentatives (avec catégorisation(s) ad'hoc) de ce qu'il ne faut pas légalement mettre en Commons, pour que les nouveaux aient des exemples concrets ? Ex : photo de la Tour Eiffel, de nuit, éclairée banalement : ça c'est OK, et, la même, avec l'éclairage de la société qui produit des illuminations originales : ça ce n'est pas OK ? A qui puis-je m'adresser pour soumettre ce genre d'idée ? Une sorte de "bêtisier" des fichiers ... ou ce serait quand même illégal ?

Bon weekend à venir et merci encore pour le temps que tu as pris (et que peut-être tu prendras pour moi). --Llann .\m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 05:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour,

D'abord, il y a un gadget qui permet de faire des demandes de suppression en un clic. Regarde dans tes préférences.

Pour les photos de bâtiments en France, c'est vraiment compliqué. En principe, elles sont interdites, sauf si le bâtiment est ancien, sauf si le bâtiment est ordinaire, sauf si le bâtiment est secondaire dans l'ensemble de la photo, etc., etc.

Pour Les désastreuses aventures des orphelins de Baudelaire, je pense que le texte est trop simple pour faire l'objet d'un droit d'auteur, et les images trop petites. Donc ça devrait être OK. Enfin, différents admins ont des interprétations légèrement différentes. Personnellement, je me fis aux avis de Carl Lindberg, qui est un expert en la matière, et dont les avis sont équilibrés et judicieux.

Comme page d'exemples, il y a Commons:Threshold of originality. S'il faut inclure des photos interdites ici, il faudrait faire la page sur Wikipedia, où il est possible d'avoir des images sous le principe du fair use. Yann (talk) 08:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Merci pour ta réponse. Le "speed delete" (ou une chose dans le genre) ? Pour faire ça, il faut être sûr de soi, ce qui n'est pas mon cas, côté réglementation ... J'apprends, donc je me renseigne. Je ne ferai des DR que quand je serai certain de ne pas les faire pour rien. Pour l'instant, je me contente de soumettre, sur ce bistrot, celles pour lesquelles j'ai un doute. Quant au FairUse, je croyais que ce n'était spécifique qu'aux U.S.A., non ?

Sans grand rapport, connais-tu, ici ou sur fr:wiki, quelqu'un de parfaitement bilingue anglais/français ? J'ai besoin de me faire traduire des termes techniques (automobile) qui m'échappent.

Bonne fin de semaine et merci.

--Llann .\m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 18:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipédia en français a adopté des règles spéciales qui permettent de garder les photos des bâtiments en France, même si elles ne dont pas acceptées sur Commons. En je suis quasiment bilingue français-anglais, si nécessaire. Yann (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

MP envoyé . --Llann .\m/ ^{(Lie 2 me ...)} 18:35, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Carta d'Identità elettronica italiana (verso).png

That image is an official image of government. It is public by definition.--Dejudicibus (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, it does not work that way. Works of most governments are copyrighted. See Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Italy. Even if it is in the public domain, it needs a template. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

PP symbol

hi. can you move File:Official symbol of the People's Party of Panama.jpg again, perhaps to File:Official symbol of the People's Party (Panama).jpg? The en:People's Party of Panama is a communist party, the en:People's Party (Panama) is a conservative party. --Soman (talk) 05:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 06:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:DudchenkoVS.jpg

Hello, Yann. You've recently deleted this photo File:DudchenkoVS.jpg because for lack of permission from its author. The author sent his permission to OTRS on January, 22 and now we got a "thank you for the letter" request from them. Would you now, please, do the undeletion of the photo?

 Done Yann (talk) 08:34, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Philippe-Joseph Salazar.jpeg

Ceci est un abus de pouvoir car la photo est sur le Commons en anglais et j'ai eu le soin de referer au site original qui indique sans aucun anmibuité que la reproduction de cette photographe est libre. Please remettre la photo ou expliquez comment une photo sur Commons anglais n'est pas admissible sur commons français quand toutes les indications d'usage libre sont donnés. Sorry for typos in pervious msg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ostera65 (talk • contribs)

The picture on the English WP is a copyright violation. There is no permission on the source site to publish it under a free license. On the contrary, it says [it] may in no case be sold or distributed for profit of any kind. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

You are quite right, narrative is incomplete. Here is the full permission narrative given by the site:Droits concédés aux utilisateurs L’ensemble des contenus publiés sur www.transeuropeennes.eu peuvent être librement cités pour autant que soient clairement indiqués la source (www.transeuropeennes.eu), le nom de l’auteur, le cas échéant le nom du traducteur, la date de publication et l’URL de l’article ou du site, en clair ou sous forme de lien hypertexte. If I understand correctly, it is enough to mention the site where the pic is taken from (the pic itself has no known author). Am I talking nonsense or will it do?

You deleted a photo I included in the images, but the picture was authorized for whoever sent me was the owner of the page. he asked me to administer the page of your profile, and that's what I'm doing ... please do not delete more. DANIEL GOTARDO 82

Ok I've talked to Canildo who seems to be your counterpart on en wiki and now I've got it right. Will try later. Thanks for help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ostera65 (talk • contribs)

tanroh ishida photo

Hi

how is it possible to remove a file which I have EVERY PERMISSION to use?!

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jagodens (talk • contribs)

Hello,

This image was published elsewhere before being uploaded to Commons, therefore it needs a formal written permission. See COM:OTRS for details. In addition, it seems that you are not the photographer. Best regards, Yann (talk) 15:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Letoya123

Thanks for the quick delete of File:Schaffer1hjbnbnbnmnm.jpg The user who uploaded that image (Letoya123) was warned over a year ago, on 30 January 2012, to stop uploading copyright violations. Might need a block to get the point across. Thanks! --auburnpilot talk 16:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for adding some contrast to the portrait of Sir Richard Levett. Much appreciated. MarmadukePercy (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Ju gatsu mikka

Bonjour,

Pouvez-vous expliquer pourquoi vous supprimer les contributions d'un autre utilisateur sur le Bistro ? Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:28, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Peut-être parce que les discussions sont directement dans les sous-pages d'archives maintenant, je ne l'ai donc pas supprimée mais déplacée. Ju gatsu mikka (^o^) appelez moi Ju (^o^) 18:05, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Industrial buildings

In Italy the absence of Freedom of Panorama brings every work of architecture in copyright. Also industrial buildings are included in the Italian copyright. According to the Italian law, a building can not be protected by Italian copyright if its architecture does not exceed the threshold of originality. Therefore, in the Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Trieste incinerator the reason to keeping the images is not "Industrial buildings, therefore no copyright" but "The building doesn't exceed the threshold of originality, therefore no copyright". Thanks Raoli ✉ (talk) 21:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

OK fine. I mean there is no originality because it is an industrial building. It is purely a functional design. Yann (talk) 07:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

OK --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing descriptions

There was written a hell about the photographer and the copyright. Why willy ou have it to write in the description, are the licens not enough? --Gajolen (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Template:Pd-ItalyGov. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

--Raoli ✉ (talk) 00:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

A thanks

Hey, I just wanted to thank you for the quick delete on that file of Yawkey Way. I really appreciate how on-the-ball all of you admins are; as a non-admin who nominates a fair number of files of speedy deletion, I'm incredibly grateful. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Help for noob

Why, in this page, don't remove screencapture like in mine ? File:IngressBucuresti.jpg de Yann cu motivul: „Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:IngressBucuresti.jpg”.) --Marius.hasMarius.has (talk) 20:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Sabatina James.jpg

Why did you delete the file Sabatina James? I got a message, that I have 7 days to licencing file. Now I got the licence, but the file is gone. -- Paul Peplow (talk) 21:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

The problem is not only the license, but the permission. You cannot publish images from others without their permission. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Nell Shipman

You took it upon yourself to delete a photo of Nell Shipman, nellshipmanportrait.jpg that is actually in the public domain. This designation is so according to the University of Toronto and Collections Canada, Library and Archives Canada.

I strongly suggest you undo what you have done and return this photo to its proper spot on the Nell Shipman page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nell_Shipman

I suggest you do this as quickly as you possibly can or I will report you for vandalism. I will check back soon. Time is a-wasting.

Yann,

On second thought - just forget it.

It is users like yourself who re-edit without knowledge of facts or delete public domain material without doing any checking whatsoever are those who make contributing to Wikipedia seem like a less than worthwhile endeavour on every level. As stated, the Nell Shipman photo is in the public domain according to the University of Toronto and Collections Canada, Library and Archives Canada. Apparently to you, though, this information does not matter. Carry on.

Dheffernen (talk) 22:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

You need to provide a license and a permission to publish a file here. None of your files have a license. And File:Nellshipmanportrait.jpg has no permission. The other two are probably OK, as being old, that's why I didn't delete them. Please send a permission, so that your file can be undeleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Clarification regarding open license

Hi Yann,

I apologize for a potential copyright vio with the uploaded images. The images, however, are viewed freely at pubmed; i.e. there is no fee to have access to the article as it is open. Since the a article and image itself is open, does that not mean it is able to be uploaded? There is only a few pictures that are of specific interest, which is a model of spinal dysfunction which is critical to help describes theories regarding spinal pain syndromes. The other was an image that was generic that was regarding low back pain. If you could help me figure out the ins/outs of this it would be greatly appreciated. I do not want to cause a disturbance nor violate the spirit of WikiCommons. I'm just very new at this particular part of WP and would appreciate guidance. Thanks for writing. DVMt (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, it does not work that way. Any image has a copyright by default. You may not copy it without a permission from the author. Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Gandhi and Mountbatten drink tea.jpg

File:Gandhi and Mountbatten drink tea.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Stefan4 (talk) 21:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

user:Dbromage and en:WP:Courtesy vanishing

I've restored the deletion tags on the images, so that readers can see the still-open DRs. I've also listed them all (all?) at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cutaway English Electric 12SVT.jpg to try and go through the discussion just the once. There's no U1 deletion right at Commons, but there could be (and has been in the past) some other reason to delete, if they're more forthcoming about reasons.

Could I also request an unblock for them, so that they can contribute to this discussion? So long as they agree to stop blanking, there's little risk to doing so. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

HMS Hood

There is need to delete these ones: I have already uploaded the good copy under a different filename; The ones I tagged are no good; and it's maybe a 25% chance I can get something suitable to upload over them ever. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Sommerdag ved Roskilde Fjord.jpg

Hello. You deleted this file because it had no license. Can you put it back and I will add license PD-70 to it. Thanks. Badkaeft (talk) 16:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 18:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion File:MAVEN in construction.jpg‎

Bonjour, C'est la personne qui a fait le chargement qui demande la suppression à ma demande pour simplifier la procédure. Le crédit de la photo est détenu par Lockheed donc pas libre comme précisé dans la description sous Commons et dans la page source [1]. Pline (talk) 17:07, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

About the picture File:RaziPerser.jpg

I found this picture here http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%B2%DA%A9%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%A7%DB%8C_%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B2%DB%8C — Preceding unsigned comment added by HistoryofIran (talk • contribs)

Hello,

I adde the license and the source. I can't read Farsi, so are you sure that the uploader on the Farsi WP is the photographer? Regards, Yann (talk) 05:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I think he is, i can't speak Farsi either, i am Iranian but i was raised in Europe.

Jose Calderon

Sorry, I find this photo on Creative Commons license, and I have a question: Can I add this? [2] Dr. Dunkenstein (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

No this image has a restriction against commercial use. For Commons, it should have no restriction. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Justyna Steczkowska autoryzowane 2.jpg

Hi,

Can you undelete this file? There is a proper permission for this file sent by authorized agent of the artist. Ticket: 2013021310010909.

Cheers,

Polimerek (talk) 21:33, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I added OTRS template and proper licence tag.

There is another file deleted recently by you: File:Seweryn Krajewski.jpg. Again - the author of the picture just sent us a proper written permission.

By the way - according to deletion warning template which is put in such a cases on user discussion pages (at least according to its Polish, Czechs, Italian, French, Russian and several other translations), there is 7 days to send a permission to OTRS before the file is deleted - but you deleted the files much faster. In case of Justyna Steczkowska picture - it was deleted after 5 days - in case of Seweryn Krajewski picture - it was deleted just 3 hours after notifying the user. Was the procedure been changed, and now such kind of files are about to be immediately deleted ? If so, we should probably change all language warning templates as they are now misleading users. If the regulations are not changed - and there is 7 days of waiting before deleting such kind of files - can I ask you to follow this regulation? Polimerek (talk) 08:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for undeleting the file. Actually the files are not mine, and I did not uploaded them. I am just an OTRS volunteer helping newebie users to cope with sometimes strange Wikimedia Commons habits. Newbie users usually do not know that they have to send permission first and then upload file. By the way - can you point me to the relevant page on Commons stating this rule? As I already explained warning templates in several languages which are put to the discussion pages of users says that there is 7 days they can send a permission after they upload the file. They usually get to know that they have to do it by reading this template. This is obviously misleading them if indeed, there is a rule on Commons that they have to send permission first. I would suggest not to delete files so fast - as it produce some extra work - for me and for you, and also creates some frustration for newbies. But well.. if they are such regulations (which I cannot find in fact) - then I change the warning templates, as they are misleading now. Polimerek (talk) 22:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Album covers

Hello, I've just seen that covers of the internationally-known albums Kimse Yok Mu? and Posle mene has been deleted from Commons due to so-called copyright violation; however, I believe they are considered to be non-free media information and use rationale since they were non-free album covers which were to identify the product, placing in the main infobox section. Both (300x300) was of lower resolution than the originals and labels as well as graphic artists to whom the cover art copyright belongs, were clearly stated. Therefore, what is the exact reason that these two have been deleted whereas numerous non-free album covers still exist in Commons. Thanks in advanced. Have a nice day, 78.167.28.17 19:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

All these album covers are copyright violation. Fair use is not accepted here. If you find any other such image, please nominate it for deletion. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, really? I will, thank you. I was about to mention the fact that there is almost no Lady Gaga album nor cover that does not have its cover. Now I see fair use is not accepted here on Wikimedia Commons. So it's something special in this place but there is no such regulation on Wikipedia. Is there any way to send them to Wikipedia, automatically or manually? I want to contribute to the articles but really don't know how all these media-related things work. If possible, would you please help me? 78.167.28.17 19:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Deleted Image Files Questions

Hello Yann, you sent me a warning about uploading copyrighted image files. I do not think this can be correct. Every one of them was from the same source, and that source clearly states that the images are not copyrighted. The site is http://gade.psy.ku.dk/portrait/portrait.htm At the top of the page named "Portrait Gallery . Neuro-people." it states "Photographs by Anders Gade These phtographs are not copyrighted. As father as I am optaget, har may be used frit with reference." The translation from Danish is a bit lacking, but the last bit means "they may be used with reference". I actually had an image of Gitte Moos Knudsen in her article from this SAME site, already uploaded and there were no hassles with it. After looking some more I decided the other one was better. All of those pictures uploaded as a group to Commons were from the same place, so how can some be in violation and some not?? I looked long and hard for a site that actually had an explicit statement saying that the images on it were NOT copyrighted, and I was very pleased to find that one, as I want to do some more articles on Danish neurologists. Can you please explain why some of these are copyright and some not?? I am really confused by this and getting a bit disheartened by Wiki's constant nagging about images. I would not upload them if I didn't think they were fair use, and now I find that even those from a page saying they are NOT copyright is somehow not enough for Wiki? How is this so? You didn't delete all of them, only some, then warn me, when surely it should be obvious that they came from the same place. Can you please restore the images if they are found to be ok? And can you please explain what more I have to do to show that a photographer clearly means the images to be free use. Ybidzian (talk) 19:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

There is one problem, and may be another. 1. You need to add a license for each file. 2. I am a bit suspicous about the permission on the site. The images are very small, and the permission is vague. Only the photographer can give a permission. Are you sure that the website got a permission from the photographer? I restored the images from that site. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello Yann, and thank you for replying. I uploaded them as one big upload, and on the page it said something like "if all the images are from the same source, you can put information that covers all of them here." So I put the information in there, and assumed it would apply to all of these photos. Anders Gade is a well known photographer and psychologist in Denmark, and that page is the one where he maintains his "free" photos. I got a better English translation for you which states : "Portrait Gallery. Neuro-people. Photographs by Anders Gade These phtographs are not copyrighted. As far as I am concerned, they may be used freely with reference." He does a lot of copyrighted work, such as Copenhagen Neuropsychology Database: Brain150: Database of more than 150.000 references maintained by Anders Gade. http://gade.psy.ku.dk/ As far as I can see those things ARE subject to copyright, and I would not try and use anything from there. The same applies when he attends and photographs people at Conferences, he does NOT make statements about copyright or free use on any of them (eg. http://gade.psy.ku.dk/2010Aalborg/Aalborg1.htm) That is why the Portrait page was such an amazing find. Which License should I place on these images? I will go through manually and do it, but I really want to get the correct one. If you could advise me on what is exactly the right license that won't get me into trouble I would really appreciate it. Thanking you Ybidzian (talk) 21:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

File_talk:Valmy Battle painting.jpg

Yann, please not just critisice me when I simply asked to do a correct job. Meanwhile all informations are available to correct the file description you asked for. It is finally not up to me, I only detected a serious mistake! Why is it now no longer interesting for you and the uploader? -- Хрюша ^?? 11:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Gare du nord chapelle passage paris.jpg

Hi Yann, would this wall/layout be considered as being above the threshold of originality and copyrighted by French courts? --Túrelio (talk) 14:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Quite borderline. The design of the tunnel is certainly not copyrighted, but the painting/mosaic probably is. I suggest a crop. Yann (talk) 08:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Done. --Túrelio (talk) 10:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Permission fixes on recent images

Hello Yann, I searched through the licences, and found one that seems good. I tagged all the images in the permission part as follows:

|permission={{Anders Gade to be used with reference to the author - Portrait Gallery. Neuro-people. Photographs by Anders Gade These phtographs are not copyrighted. As far as I am concerned, they may be used freely with reference.}}

The license was called PD-author|author.

Lets hope it works :) Cheers Ybidzian (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

This could be OK, but you also added a {{Cc-by-1.0}} license tag. It is either one of the other, not both. I suggest that you contact Anders Gade, just to be sure. Yann (talk) 08:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Daniel Paillé Bloc.jpg

Bonjour Yann, j'ai envoyé le formulaire d'autorisation à l'auteur, en attendant j'ai placé l'image en pending pour attendre la confirmation de son aprobation. Faites-moi signe lorsque tout sera en règle! --Samounet (talk) 00:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Yann

File:A cup of black coffee vibrating in normal modes.jpg	For Being the Image Magician
	Thanks for all your help Yann, much appreciated. Will try and contact Anders Gade asap. Ybidzian (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your message. ;o) Yann (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Help needed

Hi! You have reported many of my images as copy vio! I couldn't log into wikipedia in the last few days as I was a bit busy in real life, so couldn't contest those deletions. Besides, I couldn't understand how they are copyvios as no prove was provided! As they are my own work, I'm requesting to revert the deletion of those files. If not, can I upload the files again? Also, as I believe these are not copyvios, I'm requesting you to revert the warning that you left in my talkpage. Thanks --Kmzayeem (talk) 17:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

All images have a copyright by default. You are not allowed to upload images from others unless you have a permission. In case of doubt, you have to prove that the image is free. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:05, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Then how can I prove that these images are my own work? --Kmzayeem (talk) 17:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Are you there? A quick reply would be highly appreciated. Also, I couldn't understand why you tagged this file as unsourced as both the source and license are added there. Thanks. --Kmzayeem (talk) 17:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

First, we are all volunteers, so please be patient.

1. For File:Chittagong landmarks.jpg, you need a source for each of the images. If the images are not yours, you need a permission.
2. File:Warfaze.jpg comes from [3], so it needs a permission.
3. File:Feedback (Bangladesh).jpg comes from [4], so it needs a permission.
4. File:Container handling at Ctg port.jpg, File:Shah Amanat Bridge.jpg and File:City skyline.jpg: Very small resolution, no EXIF data. Are you really the photographer?

More generally, I would advise to upload the original images with the EXIF data. That's the best proof that the images are yours. Yann (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Tastic Film Logo.png

You recently closed the deletion request on this file as keep. At the time this was a decision one could not quarrel with except perhaps on trivial grounds. Today I believe the file is out of scope. There is no use made of the file, and it was uploaded as a part of a promotion campaign on enWikipedia for a non notable organisation whose article has now been deleted. It is also not realistically useful for education purposes. The rules suggest I need to talk to you prior to my making a decision on renomination for deletion. Please reply ether here or on my own talk page, but let me know you have replied since I visit Commons rarely. You can find me at this user ID on en Wikipedia. My signature there is different, however. Timtrent (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I have no personal opinion about the scope. But some people are fighting to keep this logo. Yann (talk) 15:32, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I suspect the only people fighting to keep it are the one man from the organisation for whom it is the logo. I believe it to be out of scope, but I am unfamiliar with custom and practice at commons, and have no reason to insist. All I know is that it is no longer used on en Wikipedia, and I believe it falls outside Commons scope (0.8 probability). Timtrent (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

File:2013 Russian meteor event (Magnitogorsk).webm

What about this file? There was CC license on YouTube or am I mistaken? --sasha (krassotkin) 17:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Restored. I asked the nominator why he nominated it. Yann (talk) 17:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks! --sasha (krassotkin) 18:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

There was, but it seems like author changed license. CC-BY is an irrevocable license, so that is not a problem. --Tsuruya (talk) 18:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

• Yesterday, I checked it myself. I sent him personal message. If he doesn't respond, we will remove. --sasha (krassotkin) 18:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Google cached version of youtube page with CC-BY, just another proof. --Tsuruya (talk) 18:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Yann, do you can to review this video using the information from Goolge cache? --sasha (krassotkin) 07:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

---

We reached an agreement with the author. He returned CC license. Video needing human review :). --sasha (krassotkin) 06:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Help needed to put photos to Shahbag Protest page

Hello Yann, I am new to Wikipedia, I got your license violation notice. I want to put some photos from all over the world linking to this page:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Shahbag_Protest These pictures are sent to me by email/messages. How and what is the easiest way to do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumanareaz (talk • contribs)

Answer of your talk page. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Hult copyvio

Hi - thanks for deleting File:Hult Dubai Campus - Official Photo.jpg. Could you also look at File:Hult Shanghai campus.jpg by the same uploader - I strongly suspect it's another copyvio from [5], but I can't find the exact source at the moment as my browser's being very slow. Thanks.  An optimist on the run! 13:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Now found the source, and tagged image for speedy.  An optimist on the run! 17:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Copyright India

Hallo Yann, I need your help. I had uploaded some images from India of the period of 1910 to 1945. (Images of an associate of Gandhi - this brought me to your name and to you). I believed I had tagged them with a perfectly justified licensing tag: PD-India (to which, I believe, you made the contribution that images dating from before 1946 are today free as they were in PD in India before the URAA date). However, my images were deleted. They were deleted after a discussion with the deletion nominator who, to my feeling, did not produce any valid arguments. He stated that The copyright term in the United States is 120 years since creation for all unpublished photos, regardless of their copyright status in the source country on 1 January 1996. I am not a copyright lawyer, but I have the impression that the nominator does not understand the meaning of the URAA nor other aspects of the copyright matter on hand.

Therefore I would like to ask you, as a neutral, yet knowledgable person: 1. The image has been deleted. Is there any authority within Wikipedia or Commons that I could turn to to protest against this measure and against the nominator involved? (I just quoted one of the arguments the nominator put forward in the discussion - there are several more which alltogether indicate a strong insecurity in the legal matter). 2. What is the copyright question really in this case? Are images of earlier than 1946 free or not?

Thanks for your consideration. – Thanjavoor (talk) 08:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

Yes, I saw these DRs. I don't agree with the deletion of File:V A Sundaram, late 1930s.jpg and File:V. A. Sundaram around 1914.jpg, but other admins think otherwise. For File:V. A. Sundaram with C. Rajagopalachari in Benares 1948.jpg, the copyright is restored as per URAA. I would not personaly delete this file, but it is not allowed as per today Commons rules. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks indeed. I know you are an experienced Wikipedian. You will agree that I cannot accept my contributions to Wikipedia be decided upon by arbitrary, personal views of administrators. There can only be one thruth.

So I would be grateful to you for an advice who to turn to in the upper Wikipedian ranks. I am rather convinced that my position on the two images of before 1946 or even 1936 is correct and justified. This means that the deletion must be revoked.

I will not have to quote to you these lines from the Wikipedia main page on "Public Domain". It states: In the U.S., any work published before January 1, 1923 anywhere in the world is in the public domain. This leaves no doubt as to the legal update of my picture of 1914. The other statement is If the work was in the public domain in the country of origin as of January 1, 1996, it is in the public domain in the U.S. (Both statements are printed in bold letters).

To my view, these statements leave no doubt. The nominator must be wrong. If you can advise how to further proceed, I would appreciate. – Thanjavoor (talk) 10:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The issue is quite complicated as anything which involved copyright accross international borders. As a French writer put it, There is no better way of exercising the imagination than the study of law. No poet ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer interprets the truth. There is no question that these images are in the public domain in India. The issue comes because we don't know when or whether they were published. We can ask undeletion at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests‎. I would support it for the first two images. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

He's shopping for opinions. He left similar messages with Stefan4 and me. I (obviously) disagree with you about the two that I closed -- an image that has sat in an album for eighty years and is first published on WMF in the USA is under copyright for 120 years in the USA. Since the first publication was in the USA, Indian law has nothing to say about it. You may want to comment at User talk:Jameslwoodward#Copyright India or just wait for the UnDR. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Technically, you are right. However, I feel unconfortable not to accept Indian images which are in the public domain for dozens of years because of weird US copyright requirement. Remember that all Indian images taken before 1957 are in the public domain in India, whether there are published or not. Yann (talk) 19:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I understand that and sympathize, but we have similar regrets all the time -- we just deleted images of a beautiful mosque in Morocco -- no FOP there. And, of course, no FOP in France. But your argument relies on a peculiarity of India law -- that photographs are PD if created before 1957 -- nowhere else would they be PD unless it could be shown that the photographer had died before 1943. Why is it OK to accept the peculiar Indian law but reject the peculiar US law?

BTW, thanks again for handling our French ranter. I barely get along in French, usually with a little help from Google -- other than a couple of months in French Polynesia, I haven't spoken it since college, in 1964. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Bernard WERBER par Michel Restany.jpg

Salut, je t'explique : Michel Restany m'a contactée pour offrir sous licence libre une photo de Bernard Werber. Je lui explique la procédure par email, et lui indiquant lui file le lien pour téléverser, etc. Il crée un compte (FOVEA (talk · contribs)), téléverse l'image, qui se retrouve supprimée pour copyvio. Maintenant il me demande ce qui se passe, et comme je n'ai pas accès à la page supprimée vu que je ne suis pas admin ici, je ne sais pas à quel moment de la procédure il n'a pas indiqué ce qu'il fallait (lui me dit qu'il a fait tout ce que commons demandait, qu'il avait bien mis "own works" et une licence, etc.). Qu'est-ce qu'on fait maintenant ? L'image n'est pas copyvio, c'est Michel Restany lui-même qui l'a téléversée, et qui avait indiqué une licence compatible. Je saurais gérer un cas comme ça sur wikipédia, mais pas sur commons, et le bandeau d'avertissement copyvio n'indique que la page de discussion de l'image (sérieusement, combien de personnes suivent les pdd des images supprimées ?).

J'ai négocié avec Bernard Werber et Michel Restany pour obtenir cette image, j'ai fait un guide pas à pas de commons, qu'il m'assure avoir suivi, et la seule explication que j'aie c'est "suspicion de copyvio" (sans même que soit indiqué copyvio de quoi). Ce n'est pas une critique, j'ai fait ma part de suppressions immédiates pas toujours extrêmement détaillées sur WP, mais si je ne veux pas perdre ma collaboration avec ce photographe, j'aurais besoin de savoir précisément ce qui a posé problème, avant qu'il ne se décourage. Je viens juste de rentrer du boulot, je n'ai pas eu le temps de voir l'image avant qu'elle ne soit supprimée, et je n'ai pas la moindre idée du problème. Merci d'avance de l'aide apportée. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Bonsoir Yann, j’ai sans doute dégainé un peu vite en demandant la suppression. Désolé, mais il y a tellement de cas positifs de copyvio. Merci de faire le maximum pour rectifier cela. Cordialement, --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

J'ai restauré le fichier. Il faudrait envoyer une permission d'ici une semaine. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

V

Thanks for the good job with the deletions, Orrlingtalk 04:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Mostar Sevdah Reunion photo

Hi Jan- I uploaded many times my photo of the band Mostar Sevdah Reunion - you removed few days ago. Honestly I have no idea how to fill the data of the photo. it is mine and I am giving for free -so I don't need the copyrights protection.I tried to read how to do all of that-but it seem they have so many informations, details- really no idea ! I hope you can put back that photo and make it work ? I can send to you in the original format via the regular mail! Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.37.210.210 (talk • contribs)

Could you please sign in and indicate which photo you are talking about? Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:57, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Copyright Violation?

I find it surprising that you've been deleting my recent test uploads with the reason "Copyright violation" when all of them have been pd-shape, images from Commons, or files I created myself. Please exercise greater care when selecting a deletion reason, thanks. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 10:39, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I find it surprising that you uploaded so many useless images, and then requested them to be deleted. You know how much pending work there is here... Yann (talk) 10:43, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

That is no excuse for your sloppy deletion work. If you had taken a few seconds to skim over User:FSIV, you would have realized that these files were uploaded as a part of testing for the next version of Commons:Up!. I suggest you apologize so we can move past this. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 10:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Really you are looking for a dispute? OK, there are not copyvios, what difference does make? It is just that it is faster to delete them that way. Yann (talk) 10:53, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Nope, but it sure sounds like you are. I'm still waiting for that apology. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 10:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Both of you, please cool it. Use your energy for the good of the project, not in petty bickering. Perhaps Yann was working a little too fast -- we all do, as Fastily certainly knows. Perhaps Fastily could have used an obvious test image and made it clear in the file description that they were just tests. And, if they were to be deleted anyway, why shouldn't Yann just hit the first line in the drop-down? Not perfect, but fast. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Jim. I use Instant Delete, which is much faster, especially because of my slow connection. I won't delete any of Fastily's uploads in the future, but he should either delete them himself, or find another way. Yann (talk) 12:35, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ahh. Now I understand. I tried instant delete and stopped using it because it was too inflexible -- but I have a 10 megabyte per second cable connection. I can easily see how it would be useful with a slow connection.

Fastily resigned his Admin bit a while ago. Perhaps he should ask for it back for this kind of stuff? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Certainly. I don't see why he wouldn't get it back if he is a frequent contributor. Yann (talk) 12:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

BSicon_uexLSTRr3.svg

Considering that here you reverted my edit without any explanation, as per the reversal guidelines my edit must have been vandalism. So, for how long will I be blocked? -- Tuválkin ✉ 13:45, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

First, you should never remove a description. Second, you requested deletion of this file because it was a duplicate of a non-existent file. So your request was obviously wrong. The file is now deleted. Yann (talk) 06:10, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for replying. First, you surely understand that this set of icons dwell on the edge of what is the bulk of the media in Commons and therefore some rules don’t apply as strictly — indeed most BSicons have as description a featureless «Rail icon» or, worse, a description inherited from a derivative’s original and no longer fitting the current icon (incidentally, you’d find out that many sensible and meaningful descriptions in BSicons were made by me). Second, both  (uexLSTR3) and   (uexLSTRr3) were created by the same user in the same day, I don’t understand what you mean by a non-existent file — did I misspell the filename, maybe? -- Tuválkin ✉ 07:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Deleting requests and suspicious users

Here i made everything clear with my photos : 1, 2.

I see user Psychonaut has only 5-6 edits on Commons. Seeing he made mistake now want to delete because of "Educational reason". Not admitting mistake could be problematic. I thik user should be take under supervision with deleting requests. --Mile (talk) 15:09, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but Psychonaut is an experienced editor with 1000s of edits. He is right, and you are wrong. Regards. Yann (talk) 06:29, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Friesian_(2693597363).jpg

Hi, I noticed you deleted this file with the rationale being the DR Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Uploads by Princess Mérida (with watermarks needing attention). Unfortunately this DR has yet to close, and most opinions given seem to support keeping these files until such as time as the watermark is fixed. Unless you intended to use a different rationale, could you undelete the file? Pre-empting the result of a DR while it is in flight, seems poor form. Thanks Fæ (talk) 08:11, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I think that files with such a instrusive watermark are out of scope. Now that there is a version without the watermark (partially) removed, do we need to keep the old file? Yann (talk) 08:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I hadn't realize that was the rationale, it would be better to point to the new file as the rationale. I would expect the un-watermarked file to be uploaded over the original, this gives much better provenance and avoids future accidental uploads; we might want to give that advice to anyone working on fixing these images. Thanks Fæ (talk) 08:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I moved the new file over the old name, and restored the old one. Yann (talk) 08:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I think this is a good set of examples to discuss in order to test the boundaries of acceptable scope for watermarked images, as they are not particularly contentious and I don't have any personal interest in these images per se. I don't believe there is much wrong with having a backlog of images that need processing, but I know others find having such things hanging about a source of irritation. :-) Cheers Fæ (talk) 08:41, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I see that Penyulap is sorting out the file list. We can close this according once it is done. Please add your opinion there. Yann (talk) 10:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Early closes

I notice you have closed some DRs in Commons:Deletion requests/2013/02/16, which is one day early and I see the same thing on previous days. I think you should wait the full 7 days unless there is a particular reason. As you are one of the most experienced admins, you know it very well. Regards--Morning ☼ (talk) 14:48, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I think what I deleted is either complete junk (out of scope) or blatant copyvios. Yann (talk) 15:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

About deleted files

Hello, Yann! I was sure that anyone's rights are not violated. A portion of the deleted files were allowed OTRS in Russian Wikipedia, the others - my own works. What to do to recover deleted files? Thank you! --Lightfairy (talk) 11:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

It seems that several admins think the opposite. If you think a file should be undeleted, please fill up a request here: Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests‎. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

• Ok! --Lightfairy (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Question about Categories

Hi Yann- I'm hoping you can direct me to the right person. I am somewhat of an expert in numismatics (specifically U.S. Banknotes). I would like to reorganize the relevant categories related to U.S. Banknotes. I thought I would test this out as user categories hidden from view with copies of the image files. However I don't want to go through all the work involved if it's not my place to do this. I have also personally scanned the U.S. Treasury Department's collection housed at the Smithsonian Institution and have their blessing (permission is not required) to add these images over time. Thanks- Godot13 (talk) 23:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Favor, please

Would please you hide this rev http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=91313831

I saved it without realizing that my login had expired, so it shows my IP address. Thanks, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 15:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Merci. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Chantal Baroin

Bonjour ! J'ai ajouté récemment 2 photos de la comédienne Chantal Baroin, je les ai mises sur Wikipedia, suite a ça la comédienne m'a contacté et elle ne souhaite pas de photos d'elles sur Wikipedia ni commons, elle veut qu'elles soient supprimées. Merci --Doubleur (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Le mieux est que vous donniez votre avis sur la page de la demande de suppression. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

J'ai mis mon avis mais je ne sais pas très bien comment cela marche. J'espère que vous allez la supprimer car la comédienne ne veut vraiment pas y être.

C'est bien. Habituellement, les images de personnalités prises durant un évènement public ne sont pas supprimées. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Logotip de la Fira del Trasto de Llinars del Vallès.png

The Spanish copyright law is very restrictive. Not even contemplated the concept of threshold of originality or the only text logo. The combination of colours can be copyrighted under this law.Cameta (talk) 16:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Then please open a deletion request. Usually logos like this one are kept, but it depends of the country. Yann (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Cameta (talk) 20:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Copyright violation

I think you are wrong because all files you marked by a violation are of my property, so I designed it! Please unmark it because are mine!

Thanks for all --88.13.72.255 20:29, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Please log in, and indicate which files you are talking about. Thanks, Yann (talk) 06:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chantal Baroin 2.jpg

(Sorry, I am not French people and cannot understand French language)

Hello Yann, I'm a English Wikipedia user, but I think that it is a serious problem not only French Wikipedia and here but also English Wikipedia. You said on the deletion request page, "Personality taken during a public event." but I think that the deletion request may significantly affect the use of portrait image on all of Wikimedia project if the actress files a lawsuit against us and/or Wikimedia Foundation and win the suit (probably at French court, as her nationality. although I'm not sure how it works in US.). especially our NFCC#1 policy and the licensing resolution of WMF (An EDP may not allow material where we can reasonably expect someone to upload a freely licensed file for the same purpose, such as is the case for almost all portraits of living notable individuals.) because If the actress never permits taking a freely-licensed photos of him/her, that means we have no chance to get and use free images of the subject. also, a Wikipedia user said,

"Image does not meet criteria #8 of the NFCC, our understanding of the show is not hurt at all by not having the image. Additionally, we almost never use non-free images of living people, it's one of the most fundamental pieces of the NFCC" Sven Manguard Wha? 17:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

--Puramyun31 (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on the DR page, not here. Thanks, Yann (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I moved it, and I apologize for my mistake. --Puramyun31 (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I changed my comment, see the deletion request page. thanks. --Puramyun31 (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Camisetas de Inti Gas, León de Huánuco y UCV

¿Por qué borraste las camisetas de Inti Gas y León de Huánuco? Dices que hay violación de copyright, pero no es cierto porque yo cree esos "Kit body". Si violación de copyright te refieres a los logos, entonces te propongo una solución. Puedes restaurar los "Kit body" y yo las edito (borro los logos y publicidad de camiseta). Espero tu respuesta. Gracias.--Alonsito201296 (talk) 16:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Ahora también has borrado la camiseta de Universidad César Vallejo. ¡NO HAY NINGUNA VIOLACIÓN DE COPYRIGHT! Si te refieres a los logos y publicidad en las camisetas, puedo borrarlos pero si tú restauras las imágenes. Por favor, dame una respuesta. Gracias.--Alonsito201296 (talk) 03:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Madhya Pradesh location map

well, you replaced this map with this one, but forgot something very important: the coordinates

what's the point to have a location map without coordinates ? you should consider that the first file was widely used in map location templates, so you made ​​a big mistake. I leave it to your consideration. --Shadowxfox (talk) 14:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I added the coordinates. I don't think it was a mistake. Yann (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The maps comprises different areas, but they have the same coordinates,resulting in problems with templates.--Shadowxfox (talk) 20:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Ahmose-Meritamun’s inner coffin.jpg

Can you or another Admin mark this image please? I've waited 10 hours for it to be marked. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

10 hours is nothing. You need to be patient, we are all volunteers here, and I don't understand your request. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment: This was the same images that I saw at human review last night about 10-11 hours ago. Its seems that no one came to mark the flickr needing human review images category. As a personal policy, I don't use unapproved images onwikipedia. I hope you understand but its your call...if you wish to mark this single image. I can't mark my own uploads. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
• Mattbuck has marked it. Now I can use the image on this queen's wikipedia article. Kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:49, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
• The image is used here. I hope you agree that it is appropriate since there is some text mentioning this queen's inner coffin. Best Wishes from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

User_talk:Blan52

Yann,

The file I uploaded is not copyrighted. I'm a Principal in Shelby County Schools, in memphis TN. The district webmaster creates the school logos and distributes them to each school. Anyone may use the logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blan52 (talk • contribs)

Every file is copyrighted. As it has been used or published before being uploaded here, we need a permission from the copyright holder. It should be easy for you. Please see COM:OTRS. In addition, the license is missing. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Friendly notification

I've tagged File:Axa.JPG for speedy deletion as a clear violation of COM:SCOPE. You recently closed a deletion request (copyvio) for this image. Mono 01:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

This is a big company, so it might be in scope. Anyway, this is not a valid reason for speedy. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

DR

Hi Yann. Can you take a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by KostastozisT again when you get a chance? Thanks. INeverCry 01:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Disregard my ramblings on that DR page. When I posted this here, I'd thought the image was a copyvio, but I had that confused. As it is, the image doesn't look like an own work, but it does look old enough to be pd. As a religious icon, I would think it would probably be in scope. INeverCry 02:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Re-nomination of File:Diagramofhighestproposedtallbuildings.jpg

I was going to re-nominate File:Diagramofhighestproposedtallbuildings.jpg for deletion, but the nomination box advised to contact you first.

Frankly, a poorly sourced diagram with a building from a work of fiction should never have found its way onto the encyclopedias in the first place (unless of course the fictious building itself was under discussion). I have now removed its usage on es.wikipedia and ur.wikipedia where it was used in articles about real building projects. Can it now be deleted per my original nomination, or does the process dictate that I have to re-nominate it (ignoring the advice to contact the keeping admin)? Astronaut (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

This diagram is in use, so there is no question of deletion. See first with the Spanish Wikipedia, and once it is not used we can reconsider. Personaly, I would not care much. We have more than 16 millions of images, why bother about this one? Regards, Yann (talk) 21:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Odd that it took just 20 minutes for someone to add it back into es.wikipedia, ignoring my comment "eliminar diagrama con un edificio ficticia". Unfortunately, my Spanish is not good so I might not be able to pursue it much further. However, should a similar situation arise with another image, what is the procedure to re-nominate an image for deletion after someone decided 'keep'? Astronaut (talk) 19:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

droit d'auteur?

droit d'auteur?

Arquifer (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Le fichier Rachel Homan au Tournoi des Cœurs Scotties 2013.jpg ....

Bonjour Yann, Étant peu familier avec les licenses, je me demandais si le probleme de ce fichier était seulement l'attribut non commercial. J'ai l'intention de demander d'ici un moi à l'utilisateur Flicker s'il veut bien enlever la restriction. À ce moment là, l'évenement sera loin derriere nous et les problèmes de réutilisations commerciales seront moins problématiques. ChristianT (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Oui, c'est ça le problème. La licence est non-commerciale uniquement. Yann (talk) 06:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

They are good

Hello! I know hardly anything about photography. Hence would like your opinion on this. Are these snaps good enough to be Featured Pictures or Quality Images? They aren't mine, but just found them while surfing.

• File:The Leela Palace Udaipur.jpg
• File:The Leela Palace Bangalore.jpg

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The second is too small to be QI or FP, but you can nominate the first at QI and see how it goes. Nice pictures anyway. But are you aure these are own works? I have some doubt, as a copy of the 2nd can be found on the Internet. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I will try the 1st one then. Will also check if they are own works or not. The user has uploaded only 4 images till now and all are related to the en:The Leela Palaces, Hotels and Resorts. Maybe she is related somehow, or is professional photographer hired by the group. Or as you doubt, she has just copied it from their some website. But thanks. (And its okay to not leave a talk for me. I keep visiting my edits.) §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

If she a professional photographer, it would be best that she sends a permission, as I have explained on her talk page. This seems a bit like commercial promotion for that hotel group. Yann (talk) 07:29, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks like copy-paste work now. All images of her are now under deletion. Lets wait. Good that your noticed. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

On another note.... You have added kept notices on two talk pages of files nominated at the Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Titodutta. Did you forget to add it on others and close the DR? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

No, I'd like more opinions about the others. Yann (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Back room little museum of dublin

Hi there ! I work for the little museum and I added the picture of the backroom that you juste deleted. (User talk:Louisepb) What was wrong ? The curator of the museum took it and then post it on the website where I then took it ! And can use this image as I want so please, next time, ask before doing such a thing ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louisepb (talk • contribs)

As the image was published before being uploaded here, we need a permission. See COM:OTRS for details. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

problème pour ajouter des images

Bonjour Yann,

Tout d'abord je suis désolée pour les images que j'ai ajouté quelques jours tirées de Google, ce n'était pas très sérieux je m'en excuse, merci de les avoir supprimées. Je commence à mieux comprendre le système du coup je suis en train de télécharger des images pour mon article sur wikimédia qui sont donc libre de tout droits. Ma question est : est ce que je dois les télécharger à nouveau sur wikicommons sous mon propre profil afin de les intégrer en vignette à mon article ou est ce que je peux copier directement le lien de l'image mais dans ce cas la elle apparaissent hors vignette et se mettent en grand en plein milieu de mon article. Désolée je n'ai pas encore intégré tout les fonctionnements. Peux-tu aussi me dire comment ajouter des portails à mon article et pourquoi je n'arrive pas à voir mes références ? fr:Utilisateur:Geoffroyinès/Brouillon Mais peut-être que tu ne t'occupes que des droits des images, je te remercie en tout les cas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geoffroyinès (talk • contribs)

Oui, je ne suis pas très actif sur Wikipedia, mais seulement sur Commons. J'ai ajoute un exemple dans ta page Brouillon, et une balise pour les references. Oui, il faut déposer les images sur Commons, avec la source et une licence. Pour les images anciennes, il faut utiliser {{PD-art}}. Yann (talk) 13:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Modified map of Aquitaine - 12th century

Hi Yann, Thanks for your communication about the image : File:France 1154 Eng newAnnotation fullRes 2.jpg. I'm afraid I am rather new to posting modified images onto Wikimedia and probably haven't done it correctly. I was copy editing the English Wikipedia article 'Duchy of Aquitaine' and found the image used in that article to be unclear as to where Aquitaine actually was, so I followed the image's link to Wikimedia Commons and noticed that the copyright notice was Public Domain. So I modified the image in Photoshop on my local machine to show Aquitaine more clearly, and uploaded the modified jpeg into the same category, since I needed to link to it from the Wikipedia article.

Should I just mark the Wikimedia modified image on its page as Public Domain and leave everything else as it is, or do I need to revert to the old image in the Wikipedia article and delete the modified image in Wikimedia? Richard-sr (talk) 15:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

It is OK to keep the modified map, but you need to indicate the source, and the license. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:47, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have placed a 'PD-retouched-user' template for the copyright notice and made clear on the information template that the work is derived from File: France 1154 Eng.jpg by User: Lotroo. Richard asr (talk) 18:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Works by Villanueva Oñate

Hi, I'm having all these messagges about the unclear property rights for Villanueva Oñate's works published in his article. Well, all these works come from on of his descendants and he is now trying to obtain a permission from all the other family members to sign a declaration. But it is going to take some time. Meanwhile, the archives are going to be deleted? We are trying to bring back to public knowledge the works of an exiled journalist from Spain because of a civil war. I thik this cause deserves a caring attention, could you help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giltoll (talk • contribs)

You need to add a license to each of your uploads. If the work is in the public domain, {{PD-old}} is probably OK (80 years after death in Spain, 100 years in Mexico). I see that Francisco Villanueva Oñate died in 1946, so that's probably not the case. Otherwise, you need a permission from the copyright holder. See COM:L for details. FYI, these works are accepted on Wikilivres which has even a Spanish section. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Concern about alleged copyright infringement.

Dear Yann,

I have been trying to get proper copyright information for my contributions but couldn't find the right tags with the red circle c to indicate that it's a non-free image and indicate that I'm not violating anyone's copyright in anyway, shape or form. I just need the template for that so I can update the rationale and copyright information for that purpose. that is all. All I need is a little HELP!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceray70 (talk • contribs)

Your uploads are copyright violations. You are not allowed to upload then here without a proper permission from the copyright holder. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of an image

Hi, You deleted several of my uploaded images that I was uploading for the page Ashrafuz_Zaman_Khan I agree that the first few uploaded by me was directly taken from another source, but among them "File:Imam Ashrafuz Zaman Khan.png" (the photo that I ultimately used in that page) was prepared by me. So can you please restore the image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahsanur-wiki (talk • contribs)

This image is a TV screenshot, so there is a copyright on it. You are not allowed to upload it without a permission from the TV channel. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:33, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It was available on youtube from where I collected it. youtube doesn't allow copyrighted material; so I guess this is ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahsanur-wiki (talk • contribs)

No, it is probably a copyright on Youtube too. Beside, you didn't provide a source and the license is wrong anyway. Yann (talk) 08:48, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Križ1.JPG

Hi, could you please comment on this closure? The license is clearly not stated and why should we assume that the secretary had the right to release these photos in the public domain? Only the original copyright owner (the creator of the work) can do so.[6] --Eleassar ^(t/p) 09:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

OK

Ho compreso, non carico più immagini, cmq le uniche immagini che non sono regolari per il sistema wiki, sono le ultime due, caricate stamani. Mentre le altre caricate in passato sono farina del mio sacco. Questa mattina ho caricato le due immagini di Rol Gustavo perchè mi occorrevano in wikipedia. Posso eliminarle senza problemi, oppure ci pensate voi? Il fatto è che mi stanno arrivando decine di email per questo mio errore, non capisco il perchè. Comunque mi scuso per l'errore fatto. Grazie per il tuo tempo.--Giuseppe luci (talk) 09:02, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

sufficient originality?

Hi Yann, what's your opinion about File:Périgueux jumelage Amberg.JPG in regard to threshold of originality. --Túrelio (talk) 10:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

The drawing is certainly original enough, if I compare with our current logo policy and practice. Yann (talk) 10:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Izy ze Frog - Photos

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Izy_ze_Frog Bonjour,

Je viens de trouver vos messages de Warning ainsi que de menace de suppression de compte... comme c'est la première fois que je poste via Communs je ne m'y suis pas bien pris, une explication aurait peut-être été plus conviviale ? J'ai la permission d'utiliser ces images, c'est moi qui ai mis le copyright sans savoir que ce n'est pas la bonne manière de faire. Je vais essayer de comprendre ce qu'il faut que je fasse pour que mes photos d'illustration d'article passent et je me permettrait de soumettre le résultat à votre approbation. Izy ze Frog (talk) 22:28, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Désolé, mais il y a 2000 images supprimées chaque jour. Difficile de savoir à l'avance quand il manque la licence et la permission. N’hésitez pas à me demander si vous avez besoin d'aide. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 08:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Envoi email à Commons

Bonjour, Les responsable a envoyé un email à Commons pour permission, peux-tu me confirmer que maintenant tout est en ordre ? Merci d'avance pour ton aide, Isabelle Izy ze Frog (talk) 16:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

sorry

Hi Yann, I had expected to get the permission emails from the copyright holder right after I posted the photos, but that obviously didn't happen. Sorry - I've gotten the permissions now, and I'm forwarding them to commons. hope that clarifies everything. please let me know if i'm still in violation. Teason112263 (talk) 19:34, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU - I finally found how to access my messages in Wikipedia Commons...

Yann, I would like to thank you for your patience with me. I just found out that I can't just copy pictures that I thought were free on the internet and relative to the editing that I have been doing. I am also sorry to you and a several other wikipedians for the problems that my novice skills have created.

I will try to be more mindful in the future, and I thank you again...

CalligRick (talk) 02:17, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

why delet File:Pakistani actor lehri.jpg

can i ask why you delet this file. File:Pakistani actor lehri.jpg --Nooruddin2020 (talk) 09:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Because it is a copyright violation. Please read COM:L before uploading more images. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

please tell me , how do you know ? that this is copyright violation. & how next time i could upload files with preventation of copyright violation.--Nooruddin2020 (talk) 12:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Mars Direct Base Art 001.png

You've been a bit delete happy, and removed a personal artwork I had to upload to avoid copyright restrictions. Undo ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctorheredoctor (talk • contribs)

This file comes from The Mars Society, so we need a permission from them. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:55, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

RE: Guerrilla Girls Image

Hi Yann. Thanks for your feedback on the Guerrilla Girls image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_Girls). This is my first time using Wikipedia, so I'm still unsure of how everything works. The image is a copyrighted one, owned by the artists themselves. In an email correspondence with a group member, I obtained permission to use the image on the article page as long as I also include the group's website as source link in the description. I did all of this, and also sent an email to Permissions with the above-mentioned email thread to prove that I could use the image. Is this procedure incorrect? If so, could you kindly explain to me what steps I need to take to make sure the image can be used on the website and will not be deleted? Thank you for your help. Hstamler (talk) 19:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yann, still confused about this. Would appreciate any suggestions! Thanks! Hstamler (talk) 20:07, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Please explain to me

What is the reason for the exclusion of my photos? Please I would like to know why you do not let me post my pictures here on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annikki Almeida (talk • contribs)

You copied all images from the Internet, and that's not OK. You are not allowed to so without a permission from the photographer. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Pratyya Ghosh

Hi, I'm Pratyya Ghosh. This my alternative account. I'm here to tell you that I've read the page you told me to read. Now is there any question for me? If there kindly ask at my talk page. I mean at User talk:Pratyya Ghosh.--Ghosh10 (talk) 03:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Then you can request a unblock. A fellow admin will review it. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

talk page deleted

Re deleted File:Heidi Brühl (1942-1991).jpg. The question of deletion started on that file's talk page yet it's been deleted along with the file. Is that right? Shouldn't that discussion be preserved (archived) on that talk page? Further, shouldn't there be a link on that talk page pointing to the deletion request? In the interest of helping future editors deal with similar situations, I think all relevant discussion should be preserved as much as possible. – JBarta (talk) 12:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, I moved it there: Commons talk:Deletion requests/File:Heidi Brühl (1942-1991).jpg. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:26, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Trop jaune et pas assez gris ?

Salut Yann.

Il est rare que je m'adresse à un reviewer en FP sur sa page perso pour commenter son vote.

Il est probable que la facilité de pouvoir échanger dans la même langue contribue à ma démarche d'aujourd'hui.

Tout d'abord, je ne conteste naturellement pas ton droit le plus absolu à t'opposer à mon Berlioz, et je ne cherche pas à te faire revenir sur ton vote.

Néanmoins, je crains que ton opposition ne soit pas assise sur des bases assez solides, et je souhaiterais te donner quelques explications.

Ton argumentation dit en gros: "c'est trop jaune, j'aurais préféré gris".

Comme je te le dis sur la page de proposition, je peux tout à fait pousser à fond le curseur "désaturation", et tu auras une image en noir et blanc.

Mais ce serait aussi incongru que pour n'importe quelle photo en couleur.

En effet, cette teinte (que tu me permettras de qualifier de "sépia" plutôt que de "jaune"), a été voulue par le photographe, et ne résulte en aucune manière d'une atteinte due au temps.

C'était la mode à l'époque, mais les photographes choisissaient tous cette teinte. Je t'engage à regarder l'historique de cette image.

Te souviens-tu qu'il y a quelque temps, j'ai proposé une photo autoportrait de fr:Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard (en noir et blanc authentique !) qui fut promue ? L'homme, non content d'être un photographe, était aussi un théoricien et même un historien (déjà) de la photographie. Il a écrit et illustré un bouquin sur le sujet, dont je te propose juste de regarder cette page. Tu y verras la preuve de ce que j'avance: on pouvait "colorer" les épreuves à volonté.

Donc, ma version est, je crois, la plus fidèle possible à l'original (tu peux trouver le lien sur la page du fichier), dont je n'ai fait que rehausser les contrastes (et aussi désaturé un peu, d'ailleurs). Je ne changerai rien au résultat et n'en ferai pas une version en noir et blanc artificiel car, comme je le dis en commentaire de ton vote, ce serait trahir cet admirable portraitiste qu'était Pierre Petit.

Pardonne ce commentaire un peu long, mais je voulais te donner personnellement cette explication.

Mille mercis de m'avoir lu,

Bien cordialement à toi, --Jebulon (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Salut,

J'ai change mon vote en commentaire. J'ai fait une version N&B, et je pense qu'elle est meilleure, mais si l'original était de cette couleur, je retire mon opposition. Je pense aussi que même si l'original était sépia, ta version est trop jaune, et pas assez brune. C'est probablement simplement du au passage du temps qui fait jaunir les documents.

Je crois aussi que la licence est fausse. Ce doit être {{PD-old-100}}, et non {{PD-art}}. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 14:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour Yann,

Je te remercie de ton changement de vote, même si j'aurais préféré te convaincre...;)

Bien sûr qu'une version en strict noir et blanc serait visuellement "meilleure": il est plus facile de jouer sur la palette des gris sans s'embarrasser des autres nuances, notamment au niveau des réglages de contrastes. Cette photo a d'ailleurs été reprise "en gris" dans des journaux (tu les as aussi sur Gallica, tape "Berlioz Petit" dans "images" et tu les verras), mais décidément ça ne me convient pas. Je vais quand même essayer de réduire un peu les jaunes pour voir, mais je ne souhaite pas trop m'éloigner de l'original.

Pour ce qui est de la licence, si tu regardes bien, pour être précis, c'est {PD-art|PD-old-100}, en fait. C'est ce qui m'a été conseillé, et qui me parait d'ailleurs le mieux adapté.

Quoi qu'il en soit, je te remercie du temps passé à t'intéresser à ma production, c'est toujours intéressant de discuter.

Bien à toi, --Jebulon (talk) 14:42, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Pour donner un exemple, je trouve cette image bien meilleure que celle de Berlioz : File:Nadaud BNF Gallica.jpg. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)