Commons:Help desk

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Community portal
introduction		 Help desk Village pump
copyright • proposals		 Administrators' noticeboard
vandalism • user problems • blocks and protections

Shortcut: COM:HDSkip to table of contents | Skip to bottom | 🌐 Help desks for other languages

Gnome-dialog-question.svg
This help desk is a forum for questions and help on

How to use Commons

Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them. Please sign your question by typing four tildes (~~~~). In order to get quick answers consider the following points:

Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after four days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days.


For quicker help, join our live chat room.
Translate this page
Commons discussion pages (index)

Contents

Copyright and using images[edit]

For the Dutch Wikipedia article on ancient Greek astronomy I have been looking for good images and found some (here is a complete overview) on the web page of an Ohio State University professor (here). The note at the bottom says: "While I reserve Copyright on these images, you are free to use them for any educational or non-commercial purpose. All I ask is that you contact me if you use them so I have a record". I therefore contacted the professor and exlpained everything, and he agrees with using some of his images for the Wikipedia article. He is even willing to provide better images (not online; higher resolution etc.). My question concerns the legal side: how do we do this? Providing each image with credits and a link to the original website, of course, but what exact license should I use? Or should the author send an e-mail for approval? Regards, Kiro Vermaas (talk) 09:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC).

Hi Kiro Vermaas,
Use "for any educational or non-commercial purpose" or "for the Wikipedia article" is not enough for Wikimedia Commons. We need a free license, which means use for any purpose, including commercial. Please see COM:OTRS for the instructions how to send a permission. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:29, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
+1 to Yann. Kiro, you should start in Category:Ancient Greek astronomers and look into the sub categories. However, Eudoxus of Cnidus is missing until now (I intend to change this later). Update: done. --Speravir — Speravir – 18:35, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies. I've sent an email to the author that we cannot upload his images. I uploaded some things in the past, and I guess I'll have to make some new images myself. I did, by the way, find the current collection of images on Commons and used it in the article, but it is a rather small collection. There is, for example, one image that illustrates Eudoxus' cosmological model, but I find it too simple and incomplete (perhaps photoshopping some labels to explain the rings would also help). Regards, Kiro Vermaas (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2017 (UTC).
@Kiro Vermaas: hello there fellow Dutchman, you could upload his images if he releases them under the rights permitted by Wikimedia Commons,if you wish to do so please refer to Commons:OTRS (this link), and let him e-mail 📧 them, though you should warn him that others may commercially use hin illustrations though he could request a license that he should always be named as the original author. --1.55.177.148 02:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I have completed the "permission section" on the file below[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Princess_Mary_and_Lady_Mayoress_Isabella_Lupton_1926.jpg

Please let me know if all is OK now. Thanks so much101.182.141.22 09:27, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

In the UK the work is likely to be in public domain - I corrected the license. However in USA it may be not until 1 January 2022 due to the URAA restoration. Ruslik (talk) 20:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks - I will place the file in an article on Wikipedia. Please remove the big red box - I have now placed the relevant information in the "permission" section. Thanks 139.216.210.155 21:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
You misunderstood me. The file should be deleted because it is not in public domain in USA. Ruslik (talk) 20:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Saving in sandbox[edit]

Hi,

I created an article in sandbox and clicked save article and now I cant seem to find it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariella Golomb (talk • contribs) 05:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ariella Golomb: the only edits you have made are in english Wikipedia Collana Con Nome, which is not in a sandbox but in main article space. As the article is not in english it will likely be deleted soon. MKFI (talk) 07:27, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
If you want, I can pass the text of that deleted article to you in your user space on the Italian-language Wikipedia, and you can continue to develop it there. - Jmabel ! talk 15:47, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Existing Wikipedia categories not found by Wikimedia Commons file upload wizard[edit]

Using the Wikimedia commons upload wizard to upload images, when I try to add categories such as "Visualization (graphic)", "Music visualization", etc, the categories are not found. I am instead led to a category creation page.

The Wikipedia topic "Music visualization", however, shows it belongs to the following categories (listed at the foot of it's page):

Category:Visualization (graphic) Category:Visual effects Category:Visual music Category:Music visualization Category:Music visualization software

Each of these exist, for example: Music visualization

Similarly, if I try to add the category "Online music education", it is not found. Again, it exists

Why are existing categories not found, and how can I correctly specify them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MusicVisualisation (talk • contribs) 06:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@MusicVisualisation: this is Wikimedia Commons, and we have an entirely separate category tree that is not part of the english wikipedia category tree. Category:Music visualization does not exist in Commons. Category:Visual music does however. Commons is an image bank for all different language wikipedias and other projects, not just english wikipedia. MKFI (talk) 07:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Apparently User:Music visualization responded to this by creating Category:Music visualization, which I think is OK. - Jmabel ! talk 15:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Rotated image[edit]

I requested a rotated (180 degrees) version of "File:Postberg, West Coast National Park 2.jpg". According to the history, the BOT has created the .jpg. The image on the WIKIMEDIA COMMONS page has not changed. When I click the image in the history I see the new, rotated image. Will the new image appear soon? Will the other resolutions be created? When will I be able to use the new rotation in an Wikipedia article? I am sure this has been asked before but I did not find it in the FAQ.User-duck (talk) 22:15, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Quite probably a caching issue, so reload without cache, cf. next lines below. — Speravir – 22:48, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Please purge your browser’s cache . (You only need to do it once.)

Internet Explorer: press Ctrl+F5, Firefox: hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload (or press Ctrl+⇧ Shift+R), Opera/Konqueror: press F5, Safari: hold down ⇧ Shift+alt while clicking Reload, Chrome: hold down ⇧ Shift while clicking Reload

Derivative works[edit]

I found a Flickr image which is Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic. This allows for derivative works.

It was watermarked so I removed the watermark and did some light colour correction.

I uploaded it and detailed the changes I had made. All metadata was left in tact and the description fields filled in for the original content creator.

Someone replaced it with the original watermarked image then added a warning tag.

What should I have done in this scenario please? I am new so I appologise if this is an obvious question.

Peeeeet (talk) 07:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@Peeeeet: First off, thanks for your contributions. I know it can be confusing or intimidating at first, so I really respect you trying to sort out all of the rules. I think that a good first step may be uploading the version with the watermark first and then either overwrite it with your preferred version or upload both and link them together as related images or one being a derivative of the other. One reason why is if you do a bad job removing the watermark, someone else can see the original and do a better job. For instance, the version you uploaded and the original from Flickr have several differences in color, aspect, and size. SO it's better to start with the original version as you found it and work from there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)



Thanks so much for the help, Justin. You explaination makes a lot of sense. So if I understand correctly, all I need to do now is upload my altered version again so that it is the current? I was worried it was going to be a whole snakes nest of fixes but that's not so bad.

This is as you say, a very confusing area. Every move I make seems to raise new questions and problems. This painful learning curve is thankfully softened by the kind help and advice of experienced (and extremely patient) users such as yourself. Much appreciated.

Peeeeet (talk) 07:47, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@Peeeeet: I think that the version as it stands is probably fine--others may disagree. I am not an expert on editing images. I am very bad at it in fact, so unless it's raw SVG code, then I don't know anything about color correction, removing watermarks, etc. Other users may be able to give much more intelligent advice about that. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:59, 12 July 2017 (UTC)



@Peeeeet: Thank you for your contribution. I don't know what the rest of your comment "Digital processing steps using GIMP 2: Watermark removed using clone tool to sample surrounding areas. Applied auto white balance correction. Trimmed colour histogram levels and raised index. Lowered overall saturation. Sharpened (unsharp mask)...." was, but that and more can be added to the source line now, or in the more experienced upload forms during upload.   — Jeff G. ツ 13:20, 12 July 2017 (UTC)



Thanks, Jeff. I'll get that cleaned up and moved to the right area.

Peeeeet (talk) 13:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Using my Image[edit]

Hello,

New to Wiki here. I tried to update an article last week with an image that I created for one of my products. The image was removed as violating copy write law. I created the image and use the image for my company. How can I get this image approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacti Steve (talk • contribs) 12:07, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@Tacti Steve: Please contact OTRS with a free license and the deleted image's URL or filename.   — Jeff G. ツ 13:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I contacted them but have not heard anything back. Just want to get this image approved. Any other suggestions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacti Steve (talk • contribs) 18:51, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@Tacti Steve: Welcome to Commons. They need some time to answer. Everybody at the OTRS-Team is doing that in his free time voluntarily. It could also happen that your pic will be deleted again but when they answer you they will restore the pic again. I know this sound strange but that is because of the copyright law which we respect here very strictly.--Sanandros (talk) 20:37, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

embedda data[edit]

I have noticed that some of the files I have uploaded are being marked by an Embedded Data Bot as having embedded data. Clicking on the link provided simply states that there is some kind of a password embedded in the file. I am the photographer and uploader and have no knowledge of any such password. Why am I getting these notices, should I be concerned, and is there some action I can/should take? Haven't found anything related to this in the village pump, faq, etc.... Here is a link to one such file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fort_Sumter_Artillery_image_9.jpg Thanks- DrStew82 DrStew82 (talk) 14:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

In that specific case the camera or the software you used to create the JPG embedded (added) another JPG in smaller resolution after the full size image. Since that second image cannot be used by the Wiki software (and most other software) and anything after the main image can be malicious content it is removed by the bot. If possible, check if you can prevent the creation of this additional thumbnail. --Magnus (talk) 14:57, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reply. I do notice that the files impacted were all taken with older cameras that I generally do not use anymore anyway. Not sure how I would have prevented them from creating the additional thumbnail but as long as I refrain from using them in the future this should not be a recurring problem. My more immediate concern is the pictures I have already uploaded that received this notification. Does that mean that those files will eventually be deleted? DrStew82 (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I assume that the bot "fixed" it when it uploaded a new version of the image. So you shouldn't need to worry about it getting deleted. --ghouston (talk) 00:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

There are at least two common ways that additional images are added to JPG files. The first is a thumbnail within the Exif data, which is limited to 64k bytes. The second is through the use of the "Multi-Picture Format" which allows combining multiple images, one after the other. It's used for stereoscopic images as well as bigger thumbnails. If the bot is picking up either of these things as "password protected data", I'd say there's something wrong with it. --ghouston (talk) 00:52, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@DrStew82: Embedded Data Bot wrote while reuploading https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fort_Sumter_Artillery_image_9.jpg "This file contains embedded data: After 2.2MiB (2295880 bytes, via Ending): Identified type: image/jpeg (JPEG image data, baseline, precision 8, 640x480, frames 3)". The embedded data appears to have been approximately 2.25-2.19=0.06 MB. Where did you see something about a password?   — Jeff G. ツ 01:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Oops, good question. Yeah, it's another jpeg thumbnail appended after the end of the main image, but without any Multi-Picture Format metadata that would make it valid. I don't think the bot did any harm in this case. There's another thumbnail in the Exif which the bot left alone. --ghouston (talk) 01:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
If you follow the bot's link "embedded data" it gives a reason for deletion: 9. Embedded data The file contains additional embedded data in the form of a password protected archive. --ghouston (talk) 01:22, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
I think COM:CSD#F9 is too specific.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes, if it were a real archive, whether password-protected or not, Special:Log/delete/Embedded_Data_Bot is the result. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:51, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
  • What is gained by uploading the new file version? The original is still available in the history, if somebody wants their secret embedded data back. --ghouston (talk) 01:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    If the embedded part is confirmed abusive someone can easily revision-delete. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    Some Admin.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    Is there any reason to think an admin would look at the file? The bot didn't add it to any review category. --ghouston (talk) 01:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    phab:Z591 may report it. The room have reports generated daily regarding what WP0s pirates are downloading. In other cases, nobody I guess--Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:51, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    Yes, the bot's owner, Zhuyifei1999 is an Admin who appears to regularly review the bot's logs in an ongoing effort to thwart the pirates, and doesn't get enough credit for doing so.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    I actually don't unless something goes really crazy. Jdx should get more credit :) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Template to link to commons file from which I have created a derivative work[edit]

I have recently recreated and uploaded an SVG version of an existing file, in making it I used File:Xray illustration.svg. Is there a template or standard way to include attribution, or is what I've done now (just linked to it in the description of my file) acceptable? Beevil (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

You can use either {{Attrib}} or {{AttribSVG}}. Ruslik (talk) 20:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Perfect thank you, I knew there would be something but couldn't find a template and only came across commons:reuse. Beevil (talk) 22:10, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

uploading data[edit]

i tried to upload two pictures i took today of the gravestones of the Doan brothers. one uploaded fine but it would no accept the other the files were of the same size with different names. any idea what went wrong here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TWorthington (talk • contribs) 20:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Exact URLs and error messages tend to be helpful in such situations.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
@TWorthington:, you triggered a filter designed to prevent new users from uploading copyright violations (small images taken from web). In this case it was a false positive. The trigger prevents new user cross-wiki uploads of files smaller than 5 megapixels in resolution. The image you uploaded successfully was larger and did not trigger the filter. MKFI (talk) 08:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

After image upload, image now showing[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Robertgombos&ilshowall=1

The last four images not showing.

Any idea what's going or? Error or my mistake? Robertgombos (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Looks fine for me – sometimes thumbnails just take a moment to be generated on the servers. --El Grafo (talk) 14:18, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete Catmove (erl.)[edit]

Creator:Charles-Nicolas Cochin >>> Category:Charles-Nicolas Cochin the Elder. THX --Frze > talk 10:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Vasteh ick nich (Dräsdner Säxsch kannsch nüsch). Was wolltest du sagen? Ich sehe nur, dass {{Creator:Charles-Nicolas Cochin}} in die Kat.-Seite Charles-Nicolas Cochin the Elder eingebunden wurde. Ist das falsch? — Speravir – 23:34, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
OK, Ping @Frze. — Speravir – 17:42, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Frze > talk 06:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Preussens Gloria[edit]

Can I upload this audio file to Commons? --Pjoona11 (talk) 11:47, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Probably not: The original composition is from 1871, so it's old enough to be in the Public Domain pretty much anywhere in the world, but newer recordings of it can still be subject to copyright. There is not enough information available at archive.org to find out whether the recording is free and it certainly doesn't sound very old. Personally, I'd keep my hands off it for sure. --El Grafo (talk) 14:15, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
OK; I won't upload it. Thanks for responding. --Pjoona11 (talk) 22:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

help changing company logo shown in Infobox[edit]

Hello,

I work for MarkMonitor and the company is no longer a part of Thomson Reuters. I need help understanding how to upload the new company logo to replace the older one shown in the Infobox. Are there references on the necessary steps to do this?

Thanks!

Ian — Preceding unsigned comment added by IanGriffin (talk • contribs) 17:26, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ian! Commons:Guidance for paid editors contains information about sharing company logotypes. If the new logotype is just text like the old one, please upload it here on Commons as {{PD-textlogo}}. You should upload it under a different name than the old one, and then the article on Wikipedia will need to be edited to use the new file. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:38, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Image of Alice Tangerini[edit]

  • Can I upload this image to the commons given this? If I could, then could I possibly crop out the extra space to focus the image on the person? Thank you in advance. Aoba47 (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    • Nope. Neither non-commercial nor no-derivatives is an acceptable limitation for Commons. And no-derivatives means the license would not even allow you to crop the face and publish it in any circumstances. - Jmabel ! talk 22:47, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
No, you can’t. The crucial points here are non-commercial (nc) and no derivatives (nd), cf. Commons:Licensing. — Speravir – 22:50, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Makes sense. Thank you. I am just going to stay out of the whole Wikimedia Commons stuff. Aoba47 (talk) 23:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
    • But please, if you take pictures yourself, come back! Those don't typically have these complicated issues. - Jmabel ! talk 00:26, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Like @Aoba47, I, too, work hard to avoid uploading any sort of image. It is a bureaucratic nightmare, and sometimes, months or years after uploading, somebody will find fault with the image and mark it for deletion. That requires me either to revisit something I've probably forgotten about, or to let the image just go away (after all the work I did in creating and/or uploading it). Life is too short to get involved with this sort of thing. Lou Sander (talk) 23:17, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Анимација турбомлазног мотора[edit]

File:Stiltj.gif — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahara (talk • contribs) 20:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Stiltj.gif — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahara (talk • contribs) 20:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

  • There has never been a file by that name on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 00:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Nor has User:Sahara made any prior edits to Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 00:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

The SVG armenian Wikipedia logo have truncated letters. Please, fix it.

Wikipedia-logo-v2-hy.svg

--Rowan03 (talk) 03:03, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Fixed, but it is now wider. There is a Wikipedia-logo-v2-hynew.svg with a narrower font and the width used so far in the “old” version. I replaced all uses of the former with te latter file where possible for me. — Speravir – 18:22, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Upload wizard to be used for replacements[edit]

Can one use the upload wizard to replace existing images? The replacement images are identical, but better cleaned and better contrasted where it was possible. Also frames were added where it was missed in the original upload, but does exist in the originals.— Ineuw talk 05:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

  • You can replace existing images, but the upload wizard isn't involved. You normally have to have had an account a certain minimum amount of time and have a certain minimum number of edits to upload over an image (sorry, I don't know the numbers offhand) or I gather someone can give you this privilege manually. When you look at the "File history" section on the page for the relevant file, do you see "Upload a new version of this file" below the versions of the files? If so, you already have this privilege; click that, and proceed. If not, we can arrange to get you this privilege.
  • One aside: if the pictures are not your own, and the changes are in any way likely to be at all not to the taste of the original uploader, I strongly recommend uploading them under a different name as derivative versions. People generally aren't happy to have their photos overwritten by things they don't consider improvements. - Jmabel ! talk 15:34, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Also, just in case you haven't seen this information yet: you can find additional details about when it's appropriate to overwrite previous file versions (and when not) at COM:OVERWRITE. GermanJoe (talk) 15:46, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I am the original uploader. The source of all images is the Internet Archive, and I have the rights to do it. The user restrictions have been met long ago. My issue is that there are hundreds of images and I have been replacing the one by one. If it cannot be done through the Upload wizard, then please forget this post, and I will continue to do it individually. — Ineuw talk 04:21, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

file source not properly indicated[edit]

I have been informed that an image I posted File:CascadesMtnTreasure.png is missing source and licensing information. The image seems to have this information. Please inform me as to how to post this information.

The image was created by overlaying a drawing on a map from the US Forest Service.

Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilderAddict (talk • contribs) 15:57, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Please link the file in future. Look, how I did it: File:CascadesMtnTreasure.png. You should ask User:EugeneZelenko, why he set the according template. Look also into your talk page, because there two more affected files. — Speravir – 18:29, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
So these maps are not entirely your work. You need to provide links to source maps in images descriptions. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:01, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Change file format[edit]

I uploaded a PDF document File:Bicycle and Motorcycle Trail.pdf with images, equations, and text, but Wikipedia does not render it very well. Characters that are italic in the original PDF do not appear that way when the document is displayed in Wikipedia. I would like to replace it with a PNG version, but when I try to upload the new file, I get the message "File extension ".pdf" does not match the detected MIME type of the file (image/png)." When I try to change the file extension, I get the message "This is the name of the file you will be overwriting. You cannot modify this." Is it simply not possible to change the file format when using the "Upload a new version of this file" option? -AndrewDressel (talk) 16:34, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

That's correct. You have to upload it as a new file. --Magnus (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Selfies[edit]

I have started several English Wikipedia articles about living people. Many of these people would like to put a selfie into the Commons, so readers can tell what they look like. When one of these folks uploads a selfie, is it necessary for them to get a username first? (Most of them would prefer to avoid this, since they will probably never use that username again.) Lou Sander (talk) 23:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

@Lou Sander: Yes, we don't allow anonymous uploads.   — Jeff G. ツ 00:45, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
But isn't their identity protected when they get a username? Lou Sander (talk) 15:57, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
For this purpose, if you already had an account not closely associated with your real name, it would be good to create an account that is closely associated. Perfectly OK to have more than one account, as long as you don't do things like using both in the same discussion thread to create the false appearance of two people agreeing, or voting twice. - Jmabel ! talk 01:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Lou, another possible way would be if you’d upload the images, and the photographers would give a permission (then it not necessarily had to be selfies BTW). For permissions cf. Commons:OTRS. — Speravir – 16:32, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Using Cat-a-lot, "category redirect" comes up[edit]

I do a lot of categorization of unidentified images. I go to https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Media_needing_categories_as_of_4_December_2016 or similar page. I click on Cat-a-lot and enter a possibly appropriate name for a category for the image, "Association football clubs of the United Kingdom".

Cat a lot redirect.jpg

Cat-a-lot returns "Category redirect". If I copy the image to "Association football clubs of the United Kingdom," it is now on the redirect page.

Why doesn't Cat-a-lot, recognizing a redirect situation, automatically generate the correct category page, so that I can now follow its tree, and I don't have to leave Cat-a-lot?

To get the name of the page that "Association football clubs of the United Kingdom" redirects to, I have been opening a new tab and following the redirect. But that is unnecessarily time-consuming. Downtowngal (talk) 01:29, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

You should address your comments to Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot/Open_bugs_&_features. Ruslik (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Uploading file from the National Portrait Gallery UK that is over 140 years old[edit]

Please help with above file - is this all OK? Thanks in advance Srbernadette (talk) 04:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

  • On that page you say "permission=rightsandimages@npg.org.uk". What do you mean by that? Are you asserting that it isn't in the public domain? - Jmabel ! talk 05:36, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I've added {{PD-old-70}}, which seems safe on something that old. - Jmabel ! talk 05:38, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
    • I removed the "rightsandimages@npg.org.uk", as it is irrelevant here, and changed the license to {{PD-old-70-1923}}. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:50, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Copyright[edit]

Hi Helpdesk,

‪Secondarywaltz‬ left a message on your talk page in "‪File:YNSA Basis Punkte.jpg‬". File:YNSA Basis Punkte.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:YNSA_Basis_Punkte.jpg

What can I do to comfirm that I hereby confirm that I have all rights on this picture and it should not be deleted.

Regards Tschockert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tschockert (talk • contribs) 07:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

@Tschockert: Please send a permission via COM:OTRS. Yann (talk) 08:52, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Car plates or human faces[edit]

Are here some policy about use immage which contains non-pixeled car plates or human faces?--Andriy.v (talk) 07:28, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

  • The laws of the country in which the picture was taken would apply. These vary widely, from France (where things like this are very much an issue) to the U.S. (where there is virtually no limitation on such things as long as the picture was taken in public space, and no endorsement is implied). Do you have a specific image in mind? - Jmabel ! talk 15:22, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
    Thanks for answer. I'm about this picture taken in Ukraine where you can clearly see a car plate number.--Andriy.v (talk) 18:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I have no idea of Ukrainian law on this. @Butko, George Chernilevsky, Sealle: can one of you help? - Jmabel ! talk 01:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately I don't know articles of ukrainian law related to this --Butko (talk) 06:33, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Song dynasty's 'Patriotic soup'(1).jpg[edit]

Hi, is it okay that I added a recipe of the file I've uploaded? I just want to make sure that I didn't violate anything.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 08:40, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

  • Is the text you added copyrighted? If you copied it from someone else's book or web site and they didn't grant an appropriate license, then it is probably a copyright violation. - Jmabel ! talk 15:24, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
    • The recipe is actually my own interpretation. Admittedly, I do have two cookbooks containing China's Chaozhou regional recipe. However, both books' interpretations suggest using potato leaves, but after researching the soup's history, it was impossible because back in Song dynasty China do not have potatoes until the Ming dynasty after traders brought them from North America. The Chinese people during the Song dynasty period likely used other leaf vegetable like amaranth, spinach, or ipomoea aquatic to prepare it, as no one knows which one they actually used back then. In addition, I doubt that some people, such as Americans, would even like to digest potato leaves even if they are edible, which I suspected is why the soup is not in any part of Chinese restaurants' menu here in the US. I included these choices on my interpretation in hope that people would prepare the soup faithful to the original recipe as possible. Plus, it is also can be a part of a healthy vegetarian meal. --NeoBatfreak (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
If you are the author of this text, then there is no problem. Ruslik (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, because after I researched the soup's history, I feel that China is no longer faithful to the soup's original recipe since the Ming dynasty due to they typically use potato leaves, which during Song dynasty period do not have. Due to my family was originated from Chaozhou, I've added the recipe of my interpretation in hope that people can start trying to be faithful to the original as possible.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:A Beaumont Sark flag 13 Jul 17.jpg[edit]

Hi, someone in a Facebook group of which we are both members, posted this picture. I asked her if I could use it for the identity of Sark. She said "sure". So I downloaded it and then uploaded it to Wikimedia. I don't understand all the different licences - what's the correct one to use or the correct way to get this uploaded so it can be used in Wikipedia? Thanks --MikeSarkID (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

@MikeSarkID: Please ask her to send permission via OTRS. We can then determine the correct license tag.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:57, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
More precisely:
  1. Did she take the picture herself? If so, then she can offer a license; if not, then the fact that she posted it to FB still doesn't make it hers to license.
  2. Assuming she did take the picture herself, then when she grants permission via OTRS, she should be specific about a license.
  3. Concurrent with sending permission via OTRS, you should replace the {{Remove this line and insert a license instead}} template with the {{OTRS pending}} template, and also add the template for the same license she chooses. That will prevent it being deleted in the meanwhile. If you don't do this, it will probably be deleted now and restored when the permissions thing is sorted out, but OTRS is backlogged by over a month so that could be a while.
Jmabel ! talk 01:26, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

OK thanks. Yes she did take the photo herself. I will ask her if she wishes to do the OTRS thing. Thanks. MikeSarkID (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

How to correct svg of Flag of Sark[edit]

The image that is posted in Wikimedia as File:Flag of Sark.svg is incorrect https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Sark.svg

This is corroborated by any of the other images in the same category https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Flags_of_Sark and also by the definitive UK Flag Registry as you can see here https://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/flags/sark/

I have asked them for permission to use / upload in Wikimedia. When that is granted, how can I get the correct flag to replace the incorrect one? Thanks, Mike --MikeSarkID (talk) 16:50, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

How to Add .MOV files[edit]

Sir, I tried to upload a video from my mobile to commons, but there came a popup showing 'Wikimedia doesnot support file type .MOV'. Is there ant way to add them.-IM3847 (talk) 04:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Please, see Commons:Video for a list of supported video file types. Ruslik (talk) 19:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Another San Francisco question[edit]

140 New Montgomery Street (PacBell Building) seen from Mission Street - cropped, perspective transformed.jpg

Can someone who knows San Francisco better than I confirm (or correct) that this is 140 New Montgomery Street (the former PacBell Building)? - Jmabel ! talk 05:39, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it appears to be en:PacBell Building based on Google Earth. The building is just opposite of Wikimedia Foundation on New Montgomery Street. Ruslik (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 03:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Once you know the address you can visit Google Maps to verify. This [1] is quite a similar view, although a smaller part of the building is visible. Possibly your picture was taken from a a second or third floor and Google's Street View is recorded at the street level. And the horizontal position of cameras do not quite fit, either. :) CiaPan (talk) 13:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
My picture was taken from street level, in front of the California Historical Society, but from a very different angle than any other image we have of the building. I'm pretty certain it is that building, but I can't work out how it fits in with any other image of the building we have. - Jmabel ! talk 15:05, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Jmabel ! talk 03:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Identifying insect[edit]

2017-07-12 Summer Lake 13.jpg

I took this image (File:2017-07-12 Summer Lake 13.jpg), and am unsure of the type of insect shown. Where would I go to help identify the insect? MB298 (talk) 23:04, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

MB298: Possibly en:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. It looks like a dragonfly to me, so I've put it in Category:Unidentified Anisoptera of the United States for now. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
http://bugguide.net is very helpful in identification of insects in USA. Much better then Commons :-( --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Antelope?[edit]

2017-07-13 Valley Falls 01.jpg

I also need help regarding the image File:2017-07-13 Valley Falls 01.jpg; whether the animals in question are antelope or deer. It was taken near Valley Falls, Oregon where both animals could be seen. MB298 (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Placed on Science Reference desk. MB298 (talk) 00:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
The English language Wikipedia article Pecora suggests that the animal in question is neither deer nor antelope. See the classification in that article. Martinvl (talk) 13:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

PD-Australia[edit]

I need some changes to Template:PD-Australia (See Template talk:PD-Australia for details.) It has been suggested that a Template:PD-AustraliaGov be created, but I don't know how to do this. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I think you can use {{PD-UKGov}} as an example. Ruslik (talk) 19:52, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Too complicated. It uses {{autotranslate}}. I tried my best, but it gives an error. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
{{PD-AustraliaGov/en}} works, but {{PD-AustraliaGov}} does not. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:36, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
It was hard work, but I fixed it. The inclusion of {{PermissionOTRS}} caused the error message. — Speravir – 01:56, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

How come that the pictures I take aren't categorised as "Taken with Microsoft Lumia 950 XL"[edit]

Hello, I've been uploading quite a bit of pictures here lately almost all of then are taken with my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL, yet none of them appear in the "hidden category" Category:Taken with Microsoft Lumia 950 XL, the metadata does record the device, are these categories deprecated? My older pictures 📷 do end up in these "hidden" categories of other devices, only my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL pictures 📷 seem omitted. 🤔 --58.187.171.100 14:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Pictures don't get these kinds of Categories added to them automatically, you have to put them there yourself. Sometimes other users or bots do this as well but not necessarily in a systematic manner – I guess that's how your older pictures ended up in that Category. If you want to add this Category to all your recent uploads: Cat-a-lot works on Special:MyUploads. Hope that helps? --El Grafo (talk) 15:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I think my bot is the only bot that does the classification. It only collects up to 100 images for each device, because the Structured data project may provide a better way of storing such information in future, as discussed at the original Commons:Bots/Requests/BotAdventures bot request. For the same reason, it may not be worth adding the categories manually either, unless it can be done with minimal effort. The bot can do it effortlessly for devices that it knows about, but it does take some effort to update it with the constant stream of new devices, particularly mobile phones. --ghouston (talk) 00:13, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Photos from social media[edit]

What are the rules for images from social media (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter)? --DrewMayn (talk) 14:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, The same as for any other images: a permission from the copyright owner, usually the photographer, is needed. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Missing review tools[edit]

I do a lot of image reviews and I don't know what happened but suddenly, in the left-hand tool section, I no longer have the tools for adding no-source, no-permission, etc, buttons/link when on file pages. The only button/link of that type still visible are the "Nominate for deletion" and "Perform batch task" links but "Perform batch task" does not appear to be functioning either, however that's not useful for single image notices. Does anyone know where these links have suddenly vanished to? I did not change any of my preferences and yes I have quit my browser and also logged out and in again. Any ideas? Ww2censor (talk) 10:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ww2censor! Missing links in the tools section is usually caused by using user scripts with calls to deprecated functions. This can cause Javascript processing to terminate, causing other scripts not to be executed either. A common culprit lately has been addPortletLink, which should be replaced with mw.util.addPortletLink. Your common.js imports User:Kanonkas/twinkle.js, which in turn imports User:Kanonkas/warn.js, which calls addPortletLink, so that might be a problem. There may be other instances in the scripts imported from your common.js and/or monobook.js; I haven't checked. Check your browser's console (usually Shift+Ctrl+J or Shift+Ctrl+K) for error messages about deprecated functions. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:59, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

English translation of a WIKIMEDIA article written in Japanese[edit]

May I upload an English translation article once uploaded on WIKIMEDIA in Japanese, if I obtained an authorization from the author of the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamano Bullbear (talk • contribs) 12:46, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

  • This doesn't make sense.
    1. Commons doesn't have articles, so maybe you meant to ask this somewhere else.
    2. I am not sure what you mean by "WIKIMEDIA in Japanese". Wikimedia is the foundation that umbrellas both Wikipedia and the Commons. Maybe you mean "Wikipedia in Japanese"? In general, the English-language Wikipedia (but not Commons) would welcome a translation of an article from the Japanese Wikipedia, as long as they don't already have an article on the topic in question. - Jmabel ! talk 14:24, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Created with Inkscape in Catalan[edit]

The Catalan version of the template Created with Inkscape has an end of line and a dot at the end. Could someone delete that? Thanks --Joan301009 (talk) 15:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

That would be Template:Created with Inkscape/ca, and I don't offhand see the problem you are referring to:
Aquesta imatge vectorial ha estat creada amb Inkscape
- Jmabel ! talk 18:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Here it seems correct. Try to go to Template:Created with Inkscape and change the system language to Catalan. I think the error is that the last dot is added by the main template, so the specific language template should not have it. Compare it, for example, with the English version:
This vector image was created with Inkscape
-Joan301009 (talk) 22:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Joan301009, Jmabel: Fixed. The issue was in the Catalan language file of the underlying Template:Created with. In fact, I’m not fully happy with this, but it is the same solution like in the English and German languages. — Speravir – 23:36, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. -Joan301009 (talk) 23:59, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. -Joan301009 (talk) 23:59, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Confused and not a lot further forward . . .[edit]

Hello, My only purpose being here is to contribute a photograph I have taken to a page which will benefit from it. I don't think I can cope with the procedure I am faced with to achieve this. I someone who is practiced and at ease with Wiki will receive my photo and brief supporting information, I will be pleased to upload it or email it or whatever. In my opinion there should be no problem with its suitability nor its value to the page. I am sorry that I am too old to study the procedure I need to simply contribute one photo. Thank you for reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilmarnock2017 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

If you have created the photo yourself and it depicts a natural or utilitarian object or a person rather than something possibly protected by copyright, like a book cover or artwork, then that's a good start. Just go to the Upload Wizard and follow the step by step instructions there, and if you have any specific questions along the way, just come back here. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

License change allowed?[edit]

Hi! I have uploaded an image, File:New editor delivery Hires.png, which is a derivative of File:New editor delivery.png. Since the original image was licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0, I did the same with my image. However, I have now realized that it would be acceptable to have licensed mine under CC-BY-SA 4.0, which I would prefer to have licensed mine under. Please let me know if it is acceptable for me to change the license on File:New editor delivery Hires.png from CC-BY-SA 3.0 to CC-BY-SA 4.0. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) 23:33, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: Yes, go ahead and do it.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Thanks for the response! I have now made the change. Thanks again! Noah Kastin (talk) 02:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Speravir 00:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Upload wizard bug[edit]

Is it just me or is the Wizard offline right now? I get to the very end of the process, have entered the relevant information for each field (licensing included) and then when I click "next" on the last frame ('Discussion')...nothing happens. Have tried multiple files now, and attempted reboots in case I had a memory leak or something going on. Also worth noting that I uploaded a file just over an hour ago without issue. Is this particular to me or is something broken with the tool at the moment? Thanks in advance for any help. Snow (talk) 01:34, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Nevermind, I figured it out; there was a character which the Wizard would not accept in each of those instances. Feels like something maybe worth adding to the main documentation page, though. Snow (talk) 03:11, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Speravir 00:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Location on Thalaiyar Falls.jpg[edit]

Can someone please fix the parameters under the location template on File:Thalaiyar Falls.jpg? The correct coordinates are 10°13′24″N 77°35′56″E. Thanks! Daylen (talk) 04:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Delete the file[edit]

Please, delete mediafile - file:ВИТАЛИЙ_БЕЛЯКОВ.jpg It was wrongly ticked as "This is my own work". It should be re-uploaded.

--A.djan (talk) 06:25, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

  • For the future: if an image is allowed here on some basis, but the current information is wrong, the information should be edited instead of deleting and re-uploading. - Jmabel ! talk 15:08, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

File:European forest genetic resources programme logo.png is described with {{PD-textlogo}}, however en-wiki keeps its own copy w:en:File:European forest genetic resources programme logo.png with {{Non-free logo|image has rationale=yes}} description.

I do not know enough to judge which description is correct. Please solve the dicrepancy, and nominate or speedily delete the file, if it is actually copyrighted. --CiaPan (talk) 07:55, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This looks OK to me. Yann (talk) 09:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Yann, for your promt reply. I have just looked for the organization's web page http://www.euforgen.org/ (as the original source of the logo) and found a CC-BY-NC-SA note at the bottom of the homepage and multiple (most probably: all) its subpages. Does that resolve the issue? Does a note imply the logo is on CC ShareAlike licence, too? Can the NonCommercial clause cause any problem? --CiaPan (talk) 10:46, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Because the logo is too simple to be copyrighted, it doesn't matter what license they say they offer.
If we needed a license, NC would be a dealbreaker. - Jmabel ! talk 15:11, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:JacobsLadderPalatineChapel.jpg[edit]

I believe this is copyright-free artwork because the item photographed is in the public domain. To my understanding of recent U.S. copyright precedents, the photographer cannot assert copyright ownership over images of such artwork. (Even so, my own modifications would seem to turn the photo into something other than the work of the photographer.)

It may be that I have not used an appropriate 'tag', according to Wikimedia's system. I could not find an exact fit for the Creative Commons by-line used by the photographer. In any case, I plead befuddlement over the archane complications involved. --Nielshutch (talk) 08:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

This is a photograph of a three-dimensional structure. The photographer had a range of angles to choose from, and as such, the photograph exceeds the threshold of originality required for copyright protection. See Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag#This does not apply to photographs of 3D works of art. The copyright license chosen by the photographer, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 is non-free and therefore incompatible with Commons' mission and licensing requirements. That's why you couldn't find it when uploading. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Permission via Twitter?[edit]

An actor has expressed interest in releasing a picture of himself as CC-BY-4.0, and I want to make it as easy as possible for him. If he tweeted the pic, and I ran that tweet through archive.org's Wayback Machine, would that be an acceptable alternative to him emailing OTRS? -- Nick Moreau (talk) 11:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Is it a selfie, and/or he is the photographer that pressed the button and took the shot? In this case I don't see why not. If the photograph was a headshot/portrait taken professionally, a paparazzi still, or any photo taken by anyone else, he might not be in a legal position to release it as CC as it would belong to that person. In that case, OTRS would be needed because OTRS would need to hear from that photographer in question saying that they agree to CC for their work. (Many times actors/personalities use their headshots and release them as CC without being legally able to. Some photographers in some cases have actually refused a free license.) seb26 (talk) 12:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Not sure yet. I've just tried to explain the two routes in a series of tweets, trying to steer them to self-created, but I'm very glad that Twitter could count as acceptable for release. Thanks!
(I've previously had the parent of a celeb offer to send a pic they "own", and promptly send a pic of their actress daughter from a red carpet, photographed by a pro, and not understand the difference between "owning" a file and owning copyright.) -- Nick Moreau (talk) 12:43, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

music[edit]

please upload — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamed maikel (talk • contribs) 12:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

There's lots of options, here: Category:Audio files of music by genre -- Nick Moreau (talk) 12:44, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Nick Moreau You're wasting your time. The OP did not ask any real question, all his contributions were garbage and he got blocked indefinitely for useless, meaningless spam. --CiaPan (talk) 14:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Speravir 23:15, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Probable copyvio on Jerome Baschet.jpg[edit]

Hi all. The image Jérôme baschet.jpg was uploaded by my student, but she doesn't remember where she got this from... I found it here, and I'm pretty sure it's copyright-protected. Could anybody please check and delete the image, if that's the case? I explained the rules in class, she didn't seem to pay much attention.

ADDENDUM: All other uploads from user are copyvios, please delete. :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domusaurea (talk • contribs) 17:00, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Domusaurea (talk) 16:46, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. All files tagged or deleted. Yann (talk) 17:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Duplicates where new version is higher-resolution[edit]

I've been cleaning up pictures from Geograph Britain and Ireland, and I occasionally come across a situation where Commons has the same picture at different resolutions, but where the older version is at a lower resolution. For instance, File:Dacre Castle, 2011.jpg (uploaded 2013; 640 × 424) vs. File:Dacre Castle (geograph 2648020).jpg (uploaded 2015; 800 × 530). According to Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion, "The generally accepted rule is to delete the newer duplicate," but obviously we want to end up with the higher-resolution version on Commons. So should I upload the high-resolution version under the old name and then flag the new version for deletion as a duplicate? Or do I just flag the old one as a duplicate because it's a lower resolution? For added credit, what if one or other upload was by a bot? --bjh21 (talk) 18:08, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You can flag an older version for deletion if it is an exact duplicate of a newer file but of lower quality (including lower resolution). The rule that you cited applies only if files are exactly the same including resolution. Ruslik (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
If the information for the two is identical, then higher resolution is much more important than newer/older. If the one with the lower resolution has better information, though, it's worth copying over this better information to the higher-resolution version before marking the lower resolution as a duplicate. Since the lower resolution will be turned into a redirect, the information would otherwise be lost. - Jmabel ! talk 20:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Thanks both! --bjh21 (talk) 21:58, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Copyright help regarding File:NGC 7079.jpg[edit]

I do not know what license is suitable for this file.--Fucherastonmeym87 (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2017 (UTC) --Fucherastonmeym87 (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

  • @Fucherastonmeym87: then why do you think it is eligible to be on Commons? - Jmabel ! talk 04:39, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
    Good question indeed. http://cseligman.com/copyright.htm is totally incompatible with Commons:Licensing. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:07, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
    Also, Fucherastonmeym87, you've got to stop uploading files with bogus licensing claims. I've just gone through all of your uploads, and I don't think I found a single one that didn't have something seriously wrong with it. For most of your uploads, you'd taken public domain images from 2MASS and made up some nonsense claim that they were published under a Creative Commons copyright license. In other cases, you specified a completely different Creative Commons license than the copyright holder specified. And in several cases, you seem to have taken completely non-free images and just made up licensing claims to suit your needs. You can't keep doing that. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:37, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Deleted, user warned. Yann (talk) 10:42, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Commons-related open source projects[edit]

I have a new open source project that is related to Wikimedia Commons. Is it OK to list info about the project on my user page? If yes, what other pages/places would be good to announce the project? Any limitations or guidelines to note? Thanks. - Shared Media Tagger Developer 1 (talk) 07:10, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I think it is ok. Ruslik (talk) 20:15, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Replacing a picture on Airport Carbon Accreditation page[edit]

Dear HelpDesk Officer,

I need to replace an erroneous picture on Airport Carbon Accreditation page with a good one, but somehow the system wouldn't let me delete it. It's about the picture called "Pledging airports". I wanted to replace this pic, but somehow when I uploaded the right pic, it was created as a duplicate and doesn't show on the page.

Could you help me please?

On another note, how could i become an administrator of Airport Carbon Accreditation's page?

Thank you in advance for your help. Kind regards, Agata Lyznik

<email> — Preceding unsigned comment added by AgataLyznik (talk • contribs) 14:32, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

  • This is hard to answer, since you don't link anything. In general, you don't "replace" pictures on Commons, though you might upload a different picture under a different name and use it instead of the prior picture in (for example) a Wikipedia article. - Jmabel ! talk 15:10, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Okay Agata... a lot of issues to sort through here.
  • You haven't provided any links, but I'm guessing you're talking about replacing File:Pledging airports.jpg, which is used on en:Airport Carbon Accreditation on English Wikipedia, with the more recently uploaded File:Pledging airports' logos.jpg.
  • Changing which image is used in the article is simply a matter of editing the article. Neither file is marked as a duplicate.
  • You are claiming that those files are entirely your own work and that you are the copyright holder. Obviously, you haven't created these logotypes yourself, so that's not true, and you cannot publish files like these under a free license without the consent of all the involved copyright holders. Many of the logotypes may be simple enough to be ineligible for copyright protection, but given the low threshold of originality required in the UK, at least the logotype of Bristol Airport is likely to be problematic.
  • You cannot delete files yourself. Only Wikimedia Commons administrators can do that. Administrators on Wikimedia Commons (this site) and Wikipedia (including English Wikipedia) do not administrate individual pages. No one is allowed to act as though they are the owner of a particular Wikipedia page.
  • As you included an @aci-europe.org e-mail address in your message here, I'm assuming you work for Airports Council International Europe, which appears to be the owner of the Airport Carbon Accreditation programme. In that case, not only are you not allowed to claim ownership of articles about the organisation's initiatives, but you should not be editing them at all, because you have a conflict of interest. Please note that if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia, you must disclose it, and failure to do so is a violation of the site's Terms of Use.
—LX (talk, contribs) 15:54, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Help needed to edit file[edit]

I have just added a file

Illustration of Queen Victoria's visit to Birmingham with Sir Thomas Martineau. Mayor of Birmingham (center) 1887

Please can you edit the top half OUT and only have the second half of the page (the men inside the square) which is relevant. I could not do this. All the information is correct. Please help. Thanks203.132.68.1 01:27, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after four days. Jmabel ! talk 03:21, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Help_desk&oldid=252542969"