User talk:StarTrekker
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Welcome[edit]
 First steps tutorialOur first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.  Getting helpMore information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
 Goodies, tips, and tricks
 Made a mistake?
|
-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 20:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Flickr2Commons[edit]
May I suggest using Flickr2Commons to upload images from Flickr? That way, you can do it all at once, it will rarely need a human to review the license, and you don't have to download the images, then upload them back. Elisfkc (talk) 03:58, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, thanks a lot! I'll try that out. It'll probably make make it a lot easier for me.*Treker (talk) 04:01, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 |
File:Owen Hart and the British Bulldog.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
Elisfkc (talk) 04:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
|
File:Owen and Yokozuna.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
|
Elisfkc (talk) 04:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Please avoid watermarked pictures[edit]
Elisfkc (talk) 19:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 | File:Teddy Hart 10.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 11.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 12.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:46, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 13.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:47, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 14.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 15.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 16.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 17.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 17:50, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 18.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
Reventtalk 18:05, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 19.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:06, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 3.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:08, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 4.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 5.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:22, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 6.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:23, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 7.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:24, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 8.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart 9.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart vs Dragon Shynron 2.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:27, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart vs Dragon Shynron 3.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart vs Dragon Shynron 4.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:29, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
| File:Teddy Hart vs Dragon Shynron.png is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
.jpg){kind=link}
Reventtalk 18:30, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Note regarding duplicates[edit]
For the sake of anyone looking at this talk page later, *Treker did not upload any duplicates, and shouldn't be sanctioned for doing so (not that he would be). These 'became' duplicates because I noticed that he had uploaded thumbnails, and so uploaded the full-resolution originals, and they were not in the same image format. It's no big deal. :) Reventtalk 00:33, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Oh. That's nice to know. Thanks a lot.
*Treker (talk) 11:40, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- If you upload a 'low res' image from flickr using the upload wizard (which tell the bot to review the copyright) the bot will automatically upload the full-resolution image on top of it. These were just a different file format. Reventtalk 12:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Flickr2Commons[edit]
I have just come across a few images you have recently uploaded from Flickr. I would appreciate it if in the future, you used the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool allows images to be moved to Commons from Flickr without having to download the images to your own computer. It also brings in the largest resolution of the image, as well making sure to list the correct license and url, making it easy for the automated Flickr Review system. Also, it is fairly easy to categorize images with this tool. Elisfkc (talk) 19:42, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I would love to use that thing but I tried it once and it didn't seem to work. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong with it.*Treker (talk) 22:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Did you authorize it? Elisfkc (talk) 16:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, I tried filling in all the fields and stuff but it never wanted to upload.*Treker (talk) 16:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yep, you have to authorize it. Click "authorise first" on the line above "Flickr user ID or name". It should work fine after that. Elisfkc (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, I tried filling in all the fields and stuff but it never wanted to upload.*Treker (talk) 16:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Did you authorize it? Elisfkc (talk) 16:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
File source is not properly indicated: File:Hartbreakers 2.jpg[edit]
|
| This media may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Hartbreakers 2.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
Elisfkc (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
File source is not properly indicated: File:Joey Valentine and one of the Flatliners.jpg[edit]
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Joey Valentine and one of the Flatliners.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.
If you created the content yourself, enter If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
Elisfkc (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
|
File:V-Neck Floral Lace Lingerie Mini Babydoll Mesh Chemise.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
Alex Cohn (talk) 07:41, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:07, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi, my mistake, I thought you removed Category:Statues of Roman emperors but I see now it is not the case, sorry. Great work on the cleaning of the roman sculptures categories btw ! Léna (talk) 09:02, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Léna: No problem!*Treker (talk) 09:09, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
Regards, AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Statues and ancient Roman statues.[edit]
Hi Treker. Please pay attention to not mix statues with ancient Roman statues. "Statues of Roman men" is not the same of "Ancient Roman statues of men". A statue of Julius Caesar can be an ancient Roman statue or a statue of the 19th century. The iconography of a ancient Roman man don't means that it is an ancient Roman image or object. Best regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 04:36, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: I try very hard to keep the things separate yes. I find many times that the category is misplaced indeed, I attempt to fix it as often as possible.*Treker (talk) 04:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. --DenghiùComm (talk) 07:36, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
|
File:Jim Morrison's grave.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
Leoboudv (talk) 22:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
|
|
File:Jim-Jimi.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. |
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
|
|
File:27 Club wall.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. |
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
|
|
File:Texas Chainsaw Massacre drawings.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. |
Stefan2 (talk) 00:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Category:Gregory Ford Henderson[edit]
Treker Just curious, why would you remove categories for Category:Patricia Ford and Category:Alexander D. Henderson, III on Category:Gregory Ford Henderson's category page?--Greg Henderson 15:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- They're linked trought the navbox, there is no need to categorise relatives by other relatives.*Treker (talk) 16:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Hi, are you sure about your changes in the categories of this file? This in particular: why remove Category:Coins of Faustina Minor? --Phyrexian ɸ 08:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&diff=435116316&oldid=417718599){kind=link}
- @Phyrexian: Because Faustina is not on that image.*Treker (talk) 11:18, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- But it's on the other side of the coin. The category is about "coins of Faustina Minor" (which is what the image shows), not about "Faustina Minor on coins". --Phyrexian ɸ 19:52, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Phyrexian: As far as I'm concerned images should categorize people depicted, and I don't see any reason why "Coins of" should be treated any different than "paintings of" or similar. It's pointless overcategorization. We don't categorize cropped images by people who were cut out just because they were on the original work.*Treker (talk) 20:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- I see your point, but in my opinion it does not apply in this case. We are talking about a different object than an artwork. For instance Category:Coins of Faustina Minor is a subcategory of Category:Roman coins by emperor, which is not a subcategory of Category:Ancient Roman coins by subject. The first tree of categorization refers to the object as a whole, the latter refers as the subject shown in the image. Or, if you prefer, "by emperor" refers to the coin as an object, "by subject" refers to the coin as a medium of art. That's why the category should be mantained even if Faustina Minor is not seen in the image: we're not talking about the artwork, we're talking about the coin as a whole object. I expect to find in that category all the pictures of coins of Faustina Minor, even the ones that show the side in which she's not portraied. --Phyrexian ɸ 23:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Phyrexian: I don't agree with how Commons seems to do things with coins then.*Treker (talk) 23:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- I tried to find some guideline to clarify this point but I failed, all I found is copyright information, that of course does not apply to ancient coins. If you want to change how coins are categorized and start a discussion please make me know. Until then, if you have nothing against, I would restore this category on the picture. --Phyrexian ɸ 00:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Phyrexian: I don't agree with how Commons seems to do things with coins then.*Treker (talk) 23:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- I see your point, but in my opinion it does not apply in this case. We are talking about a different object than an artwork. For instance Category:Coins of Faustina Minor is a subcategory of Category:Roman coins by emperor, which is not a subcategory of Category:Ancient Roman coins by subject. The first tree of categorization refers to the object as a whole, the latter refers as the subject shown in the image. Or, if you prefer, "by emperor" refers to the coin as an object, "by subject" refers to the coin as a medium of art. That's why the category should be mantained even if Faustina Minor is not seen in the image: we're not talking about the artwork, we're talking about the coin as a whole object. I expect to find in that category all the pictures of coins of Faustina Minor, even the ones that show the side in which she's not portraied. --Phyrexian ɸ 23:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Phyrexian: As far as I'm concerned images should categorize people depicted, and I don't see any reason why "Coins of" should be treated any different than "paintings of" or similar. It's pointless overcategorization. We don't categorize cropped images by people who were cut out just because they were on the original work.*Treker (talk) 20:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- But it's on the other side of the coin. The category is about "coins of Faustina Minor" (which is what the image shows), not about "Faustina Minor on coins". --Phyrexian ɸ 19:52, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Mario The Hills Have Eyes.png[edit]
|
|
| This file may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Mario The Hills Have Eyes.png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
A1Cafel (talk) 09:05, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi Treker. Please can you explain me what are you doing on categories in Category:Ancient Roman moneyers ? Thank you. --DenghiùComm (talk) 16:56, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Coin categories go in "coins by moneyer", actual cateories for individulas who were moneyers get the moneyers category.*Treker (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Is there work in progress ? --DenghiùComm (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- I've moved about 40+ articles a few days ago. I will be moving the rest when I feel like it, feel free to help out.*Treker (talk) 17:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ok. This was the problem... the half of the cats moved to the new cat, and the other half not. Cheers, --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
- I've moved about 40+ articles a few days ago. I will be moving the rest when I feel like it, feel free to help out.*Treker (talk) 17:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Is there work in progress ? --DenghiùComm (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Treker. Please can you me explain this ? Where is the non sense ? Thank you. --DenghiùComm (talk) 08:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: "Mints by country" belong in the parent category "Ancient Roman coins" and "Coins of the ancient Roman Republic" belongs only on coins from the Roman Republic not a broader category for people who made coins in both the Republic and Empire.*Treker (talk) 08:41, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- 90% of the ancient Roman coins with name of the moneyer are of the Roman Republic period. Only few moneyers are of the Imperial period. For this reason this category must be in both categories. Different way you create more precision cats and distinguish the Roman Republican moneyers from the Roman imperial moneyers. Thank you. --DenghiùComm (talk) 08:55, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: Why don't you create that instead since you want to categorize that way? I don't care about statistics, I care about categories being accurate.*Treker (talk) 09:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- I don't create categories for 1 or 2 objects. And these are not statistics, thes are historical facts. --DenghiùComm (talk) 09:35, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- It took me months to identify each coin (and I'm not done yet) and categorize them correctly. If you don't know the historical data, please let it be. I don't have time to re-check each moneyer of what era it is, I have too much backlog. --DenghiùComm (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: Why not create categories for 2 objects exactly? And no I'm not going to do what you say just because you say you've figured something out behind the scenes that no one else knows anything about.*Treker (talk) 10:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Creating categories is used to sort files to make them find more easily. If we make categories for one or two files, we replace the confusion of files with the new confusion of categories. This is the reason why I only create categories from 3 or 4 files or subcategories at least. There are users who create 3 or 4 categories for just one file. A madness! DenghiùComm (talk) 10:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: Why not create categories for 2 objects exactly? And no I'm not going to do what you say just because you say you've figured something out behind the scenes that no one else knows anything about.*Treker (talk) 10:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: Why don't you create that instead since you want to categorize that way? I don't care about statistics, I care about categories being accurate.*Treker (talk) 09:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- 90% of the ancient Roman coins with name of the moneyer are of the Roman Republic period. Only few moneyers are of the Imperial period. For this reason this category must be in both categories. Different way you create more precision cats and distinguish the Roman Republican moneyers from the Roman imperial moneyers. Thank you. --DenghiùComm (talk) 08:55, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
@*Treker: Hi Treker. Please can you finish your half-finished work between Category:Ancient Roman moneyers and Category:Ancient Roman coins by moneyer ? Thank you. Best regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2021 (UTC) Meanwhile I restored the canceled category, pending a more precise division of republican and imperial moneyers. Thank you.
Which P. Cornelius Dolabella?[edit]
You may revert to the the simple name "Dolabella" contained in the title, however which "Dolabella" are you speaking about anyway? --User:G.dallorto (talk) 22:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- @G.dallorto: I was aksing you. How am I supposed to know what human you were implying when you changed the name? Several men of ancient Rome bore the name "Publius Cornelius Dolabella".*Treker (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
|
|
File:Maria Carolina (1748).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. |
.jpg){kind=link}
Ecummenic (talk) 05:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
|
|
File:Light my fire.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. |
A1Cafel (talk) 03:22, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 18:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
|
|
File:Musashi Miyamoto statue.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. |
Yuraily Lic (talk) 19:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
|
|
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 05:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
|
|
File:Bubbles painted.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. |
Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
|
|
File:Blossom in chalk.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. |
Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:53, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
1 2 etc cats are years not numbers[edit]
Dronebogus (talk) 16:16, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Dronebogus: I see. Are there no categories for parts?*Treker (talk) 17:15, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Error in {{reply to}}: Input contains forbidden characters. Category:Items by number is what you’re looking for Dronebogus (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Ancient Roman bust and other sculptures[edit]
Hi Treker. Thank you for the interesting files of ancient Roman portraits and busts that you have upload. Please can you add the category of the Museum where they are ecxposed ? Thank you very much. Best regards. DenghiùComm (talk) 06:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- @DenghiùComm: Will do. 👍 Turns out they're from my country's oldest public art museum too, what a funny coincidence.StarTrekker (talk) 07:08, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you verry much ! Cheers, --DenghiùComm (talk) 05:47, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 |
File:Besucher auf der Games-Bühne von Far Cry 5.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion. (Reason: CSD G4 (Recreation of content previously deleted per community consensus))
Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk. |
User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Johnj1995.
I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 03:28, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oh please[edit]
Dear StarTrekker, Please think twice before subdividing small categories (22 images, already neatly arranged by year) into 4 mini-categories, like this one:Mick Jagger by year. Contra-productive: if I am looking for a suitable picture of Jagger alone, I now have to check 4 categories. Really useless, in my opinion. Vysotsky (talk) 22:18, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree, I do not find this to be a problem and it's pretty common for actors and musicians when there are so many images of them, Category:Mick Jagger is not a small category with only 22 images.StarTrekker (talk) 22:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC)