User talk:T Cells: Difference between revisions

T Cells is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Commons soon.

I am busy in real life and might not respond swiftly to queries. For urgent oversight matters, please write to oversight-commons@lists.wikimedia.org. If you require the assistance of a bureaucrat, please leave a message at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. If you seek the help of an administrator, please leave a message at the administrators' noticeboard.

Picture of the day
Ice crystals on a barbed wire in Hausdülmen, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany +/− [en]

Have you seen Ticket:2016060510006917? If not please reopen these discussions: 1, 2, 3. --sasha (krassotkin) 06:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done; krassotkin, thanks for the heads up. I actually took the tickets at face value. Discussion reopened. Wikicology (talk) 07:12, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! --sasha (krassotkin) 07:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(S)he has been rightly blocked before I had a chance to react. :-) --jdx ^Re: 09:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they have been blocked already. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 12:24, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

what the hell. this is my own creativity. i have all proffs with me. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 103.251.210.253 (talk) 07:55, 09 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about Commons:Deletion requests/File:Moon not too far.jpg? Please send your prove to COM:OTRS. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 08:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You flag this post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Miguell however it was me who upload all the materials on it, and your motif is wrong. The image in question was taken by us Nowartis™ that legally represent this artist "Pedro Miguell" and we kindly share it in wikipedia not asking for any right in return and letting everyone use the image if they want. [Definition of CC licensed things]

I kindly ask you to cancel the delete request.

Best and kindest regards Antony P Desmond Nowartis™ managing partner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonypdesmond (talk • contribs) 13:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please, kindly send permission to COM:OTRS. Wikicology (talk) 13:13, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By now the permission was sent in three different forms, email written by us, email with a permission statement attached and email with a permission text generated by OTRS. Please close the topic about deletion of the picture since you have all the rights needed by now. Best and kindest regards Nowartis™-AntonyPDesmond-managing Partner Antonypdesmond (talk)

In the meantime, you could add {{subst:OP}} to the description page of the file. Once the permission has been reviewed by our OTRS volunteer, the file would be kept. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Wikicology - I am attempting to help new user Marimari1004 (artist Mari Kim) save submissions of her donated photos to WC. They are: File:Mari kim.jpg, File:Marikim portrait.jpg, File:Marikim profile.jpg, File:Talking with flower series 1.jpg Three of them have been nominated for deletion. She is currently using the [1] steps to release her permission, and will use the Interactive Release Generator within the next day. Rather than responding to the Deletion talk pages, I am letting you know here, as you nominated 2 of them. Hopefully she can clear up the problems through the email discussions with OTRS.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 17:04, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, Bonnielou2013. In the meantime, she could add {{subst:OP}} to the description page of each file. Once the permission has been reviewed by our OTRS volunteer, the files would be kept. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 22:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I added the tags!--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 22:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The permission was succesfully upload can now close the deletion request? Moreover I dont like to show the pic in NewUserUplod is it possibile? Best --Bx67212 (talk) 10:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I see that the correspondence has been reviewed by User:Krassotkin. The deletion discussion would be closed any moment from now. I don't know if Krassotkin is willing to close the debate. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 10:41, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Closed by User:Krassotkin. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O arquivo: File:Bra-iraquara-BA-BR.jpg foi criado por mim e distribuído de forma livre pela Prefeitura Municipal de Iraquara (http://www.iraquara.ba.gov.br). No Brasil simbolos oficiais são de domínio público. Peço que mantenha o arquivo e retire das propostas de eliminação. --JUSBR (talk) 22:07, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uma vez que a imagem foi publicada em outro lugar, eu sugiro que você deve enviar permissão para COM: OTRS. Wikicology (talk) 10:07, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was not trying to talk over you or anything, but thought that mixing up 'here' and 'Wikipedia' might confuse the person. Revent^talk 18:37, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly agree with you and thanks for the heads up. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 18:51, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

When you upload content pictures (not wikimedia events) for Wiki Loves Women, please make sure to tag them Category:Images from Wiki Loves Women in Nigeria, not Category:Wiki Loves Women. Thanks. Anthere (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

example

Hi Anthere, I re-categorized File:Chierika Ukogu1.png and several other ones in the wrong category. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 17:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Wikicology :) Anthere (talk)

@Asclepias: FWIW, his 'see, look here' Hurst category is turning out to be a nice quick reference for images to either get rid or (mainly as poor quality duplicates) or replace wth a better copy.. I intend to go through the rest. Revent^talk 02:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad you will look into this somewhat awful category. Such category shouldn't have exist in the first place since Hurst is not the copyright holder of the images. I think this is a case of mis-attribution that needs to be urgently corrected, if we would ever keep those images here. Wikicology (talk) 10:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I took some for deletion. Please, take care of the rest. Wikicology (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The help is appreciated. On the ones where the ship was in British service, they are quite likely expired Crown Copyrights. I've been checking them against a search of the ship name at the IWM... unfortunately, they have not scanned everything. We might lose a few that would be okay if we 'knew', but... images of these of better quality and clear provenance are not hard to find. Revent^talk 13:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 14:44, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you checking into these photos. We want to make sure we are doing this correctly and get these images on wikipedia. Billy Frank, the man I work for, now has ownership of the LA Watts Summer Games, which will now be the USA City Games. These photos are our property through attaining the rights to the USA City Games. We do not know their original photographer but they are original photos taken by USA City Games employees over the years. How can I better caption them. And on Caitlyn Jenner photo that was in our archives nut now I see it is a photo of a photo, but I still think the original photo is our photo and is in our right, although I will remove it as it is a photo of a photo and I appreciate you pointing that out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrmeizlish (talk • contribs) 20:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are sure the original photographer was an employee of USA City Games and the photo was produced in the course of their service for the organization, USA City Games should send releasing permission to our support team. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 21:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why did you delete my picture? What kind of copyright I did violate if it is my own creation and I shot it ouside in a water channell which is a public area?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Click.gianluca (talk • contribs) 21:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator, they are the only users authorized to delete files. Thus, I never deleted your file and I don't think it was deleted by any administrator. However, I suspect that File:Floating Christmas.jpg is a copyghted image. The camera model is different from the one you used in taking other images you uploaded. I will confirm it tomorrow. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:59, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Copyright status confirmed. File:Floating Christmas.jpg is a copyrighted image you took from this website. I flagged it for speedy deletion. Wikimedia Common does not accept copyrighted material. Looking at the domain name and your username, you're probably the owner of the website but I'm not sure of this since anyone can create account with a username that bears someone's domain name. More importantly, the image was published on that website prior to uploading it here. The original photographer will need to send permission to our support team. Once this is processed and confirmed, the file would be restored. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 08:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This media was protected under by the virtue of the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.Anitnovic2016 (talk) 12:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I'll review the license later. Wikicology (talk)

(talk page stalker) Hi Wikicology. Thank you for your assistance at Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2016/08#File:Saturnino Urios.jpg. Just in case you haven't noticed, the file's licensing has been changed to PD by the uploader. The new claim of PD seems to clash with the uploader's claim at User talk:Anitnovic2016#File:Saturnino Urios.jpg of "Its our group project. So we paint Fr. Urios as our group activity". If it was a group project, the PD claim seems a bit questionable simply due to the apparent time frame involved based upon the apparent age of the uploader indicated here.

If you or Revent feel the PD licensing for the image is correct and acceptable for Commons, then fine with me. However, I think it should be pointed out that en:User:Anitnovic2016 has been confirmed to be a sockpuppet and one of the other socks (User:KatorseNiAmang) of the same master was used to upload files to Commons which were eventually deleted as copyvios. A photo of a statue named "File:Saturnino Urios.jpg" was previously deleted by INeverCry as a result of Commons:Deletion requests/File:FSUU CBS HISTORY.jpg, but a different file of Saturnino was later uploadedrecreated under the same name by Anitonovic2016. Then there is File:MAGALLANES LOGO.png which was also deleted here by EugeneZelenko as a lacking permission (the original was a photo of the emblem), only to be subsequently reuploaded under the same name by Anitonovic2016. The licensing on these previously deleted files now may be correct, but there also seems to be another issue at play here which may involve the use of multiple accounts by a single individual in a manner which may not be appropriate. If this was on Wikipedia, a SPI could be started or a checkuser requested, but I'm not sure how that works on Commons. Do you know if being blocked for sockpuppetry on Wikipedia or any other local Wikipedia also extends to Commons? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC); [Post clarified by Marchjuly to reflect below response received from Revent -- 02:16, 1 September 2016 (UTC)][reply]

@Marchjuly: Without 'really' looking, at least not right now, the earlier upload at File:Saturnino Urios.jpg was distinctly different... it was a photo of a statue. Revent^talk 01:06, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's right. I remember that one. Thanks for checking Revent. I will clarify that in my post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:16, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Revent: It seems that Anitonovic2016 has converted quite a number of files to {{PD-PhilippinesGov}}. Some of these, such as this might actually be PD, but others seem unlikely to be PD such as this, this (edit has already been reverted), and this (already has OTRS permission). The changes in licensing might be being made in good faith, but it seems to be being done without much thought and in some cases where PD may not apply. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anitonovic is uploading more files as PD which are questionable like File:Juan de dios Pueblos.jpg and File:Juanito A. Lao.jpg and also appears to be using en:Special:Contributions/180.190.78.200 for block evasion to make similar licensing changes to files uploaded by Anitonovic2016 and KatorseNiAmang uploaded locally to Wikipedia, add them to various articles or tag them for a move to Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly and thanks for this update. I took File:Saturnino Urios.jpg to DR here. I plan to go through all their contributions now. In the meantime, you may want to fill a SPI case against this user and you may do that at COM:SPI. Wikicology (talk) 12:50, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Wikicology. I saw that you nominated some of the files for deletion. Another IP, this time 180.191.87.227, removed the tags you added and reverted some of your edits. This new IP might be connected to the 180.190.78.200 and the other accounts mentioned in my above post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, Marchjuly. I think it's time to show them the door. I started a SPI case here. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 16:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, There is no need to tag section with {{Section resolved}} because we don't use that kind of bot there which means it won't work. Sections are archived automatically if the conditions (in the config) for the pages are meet. Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 11:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Puccinia poarum MS7 (3).jpg File:Medokýš NT4.jpg

I am the author of these files

the source is an author (own), a license. What is wrong ? Selso (talk) 17:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First off, see the minor changes I made to the two images here. You don't need to place a large image on another user's talk page. Secondly, the author is "Jerzy Opioła". This is misleading. Looking at your userpage, I see that User:Selso is Jerzy Opioła. Thus, in the future, write it like this "Jerzy Opioła". Now, change author to Jerzy Opioła and feel free to remove the tag. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

....Or drop it. You are insulting me and pissing me off at the same time. That may be fine for you...but I do get to reply. What is the very reason for the investigation and what are the current reasons you object to the images you have questioned?

There is no question that I am not perfect. If I have posted images that should be deleted then please...request they be deleted. However, when you post images to an investigation that clearly have the proper license and explanations then it is truly on you to fully explain yourself and what you object to. Without that, there is nothing for me to reply to or explain.--Mark Miller (talk) 07:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Miller, I don't have any issue against you and to your question, the reason for the investigation can be found in this archive. Your claimed of ownership of a work was debunked by the true copyright holder of that work. Thus, it becomes necessary to check your other uploads to delete any other copyrighted material to avoid copyright issues. I don't think this amount to an insult. More importantly, the issue has been resolved. I understand that we aren't perfect and we sometimes make mistake, thus don't feel bad about the situation. The investigation was not designed to humiliate you. Of course, you are doing fine here, no doubt about it. Relax and be happy. Your contributions are appreciated. Wikicology (talk) 08:32, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I never claimed the work as my own. There was a full explanation on the image page. It is not resolved to me....you have made ridiculous accusations and should be investigated yourself. The tag you left stated if it was not resolved to replace the tag with the comment. I had to drag it back out of the archives but I am now commenting. There is something very wrong with your accusations and your understanding of things but I am not going to give you any further respect until such time as you have filed your charges formally. Please be prepared to prove your allegations.--Mark Miller (talk) 08:39, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!
I am writing to let you know that COM:WLMNG2016 is not a shortcut to Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Nigeria, it is (or seems to be) a copy of it. So please synchronize these two pages and then replace the content of COM:WLMNG2016 with #REDIRECT [[Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2016 in Nigeria]]. --jdx ^Re: 09:18, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'll take a look. Wikicology (talk) 16:59, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jdx, I am not sure I know how to synchronize the two pages. Please, put me through. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 17:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Manually, i.e. using your eyes. Anyway, I have compared these pages and only photos in their headers are different. --jdx ^Re: 17:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--Sarajil (talk) 23:22, 16 September 2016 (UTC)--Sarajil (talk) 23:22, 16 September 2016 (UTC)== deletion request ==[reply]

DELETION REQUEST :

NOW I HAVE NO CLUE HOW ANOTHER POST IS ADDED IN MY POST :-)

ITS CONFUSING — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarajil (talk • contribs) 23:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hi i just received a deletion request on the grounds that my nickname and copyrights aren't the same , I'm new to this so i have no clue about anything i simply uploaded my images from my computer and i use the basic picasa editor to straighten my images ,thats it..

sarajil--Sarajil (talk) 23:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)--~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarajil (talk • contribs) 21:41, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sara, the camera metadata shows that the author is "picasa". I presume this to be the nickname of the author (I may be wrong thou). For example, my old friends call me ATM, this mean something different from "Automated Teller Machine" to them. If "Picasa" is the nickname of the copyright holder, this may simply mean something different from the photo software. I believe you but let's see what others think. Wikicology (talk) 22:29, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.flickr.com/groups/56318599@N00/discuss/72157601830651541/

kindly read this discussion for there are things the softwares can do nowadays that we have no idea ,there are many of more discussions about how picasa adds the author only if you do changes... for your satisfaction you can directly email picasa that if its true or not :-)

try a google search for the best place

Picasa adds itself as the author if you make any changes to the image and export or save the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarajil (talk • contribs) 23:06, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

you can check this as well

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/picasa-steals-your-work.37105/ n the best is google the info or just email picasa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarajil (talk • contribs) 23:09, 16 September 2016 (UTC) --Sarajil (talk) 23:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)sarajil[reply]

I closed the debate to keep the images. Thanks for your contributions to WLM. Wikicology (talk) 09:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Wikicology you have nominated some images from Ghana as part of the WLW Campaign for deletion. I am quite unclear because they are buildings and not creative works. Please explain why they should be deleted because I don't seem to agree with your reasons for deletion.Rberchie (talk) 10:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rberchie, I am glad to hear from you. I stumbled across those images while I was patrolling new files. Do you agree with this deletion? Are you familiar with COM:FOP? In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright of the original work. Thus, we cannot keep such images on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Ghana. Photographs of buildings are normally allowed if the building is old enough to be public domain (in many countries, where the architect has been dead for at least 70 years). Photographs of more recent buildings may be restricted because of the architect's copyright, though some countries have exceptions that allow photographs to be taken of any building in a public place but Ghana is not one of those countries. See Commons:Freedom of panorama. Article 19(1)(f) of this online version of Ghana Copyrights Act, 2005 restricted panorama freedom to cinema or television or in a broadcast by television. Let me know if you need further clarification. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 13:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I would like to plead that you remove the deletion tag put on the Yaa Asantewaa Statue image I uploaded. The reason you put for tagging it doesn't hold in this case because, Yaa Asantewaa died on 17th October 1921, so I believe if there was any copyright on the statue, it should have expired a long time ago, thanks--Celestinesucess (talk) 07:18, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Celestinesucess. This is not about the age of who the statue depicted. It's about the age of the creator of the work. Do you have any evidence that the creator of this work died over 70 years ago? Wikicology (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Before you put deletion tag on anything please do some few research on what is been uploaded here. We are trying to put local contents here and are been subjected to deletion when uploaded. So who contribute to commons? Please read about the subject here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaa_Asantewaa Noahalorwu (talk) 22:14, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The images were not tagged for deletion because they were out of scope. They were indeed tagged and deleted because they were copyrighted. We don't accept copyrighted images on Wikimedia Common. In most countries (Egypt and Nigeria for example), all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Ghana. BTW...I have nominated a couple of your images for deletion for the same reason. I hope you will learn not to upload copyrighted images here. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 07:35, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I take several photo and upload them to Wikipedia but cameras for some of this photos were own my friends. so this photos, all of photos that I upload for Wikipedia are my photograph that I take. pleas e correct my upload copyright . thanks a lot Khosro70000 (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Khosro70000, and welcome to Commons! Yes, really, Welcome! it may not look like I'm very welcoming to you, nominating your pictures for deletion, but I think you may have made some mistakes. In this case, there is no evidence that you used your friends camera to take those images. Your friends whose names appears in the metadata will need to contact our support team that they allow you to use their camera in taking those images. I believe this should solve the problem. Sorry to be the one to nominate your pictures for deletion. I hope you follow the instructions and add some more photos of your own - of interesting things in the world around you to Wikimedia Commons! Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

so Please Guide me for [COM:OTRS... How can I do for This, Please Guide me Exactly and simple for understanding this process:[COM:OTRS...??? Khosro70000 (talk) 17:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)khosro7000[reply]

Please, accept my sincere apology for this extremely slow response. I am busy in real life. For COM:OTRS, use this email template to send permission to COM:OTRS. It seems Mhhossein is willing to help. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 09:38, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll handle the job. Khosro70000:Ask your friend whose camera you have used to contact us. see OTRS. Howveer, your friend should send an email telling us he had lent you the camera. --Mhhossein ^talk 11:03, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

با سلام تمتمی عکس هایی که برای ویکی انبار و نیز بخش مسابقه آپلود نومدم عکسهایی هستند که اینجانب گرفته ام ولیکن قبرخی از عکس ها با استفاده از دوربین دوستان و همکاران گرفته شده است. لطفا کمک کنید تا حق کپی رایت اینجانب نسبت به همه این عکس ها بویژه در بخش مسابقه حفظ شود. با سپاس فراوان خسرو حیرت نگاری Khosro70000 (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)khosro7000[reply]

so Please Guide me for [COM:OTRS... How can I do for This, Please Guide me Exactly and simple for understanding this process:[COM:OTRS...???

This Building ... ist not "vila", "villa" or "willa" ... this building is "Tenement House" in polish language ... kamienica.

• And this building: File:Nowa Ruda, Piłsudskiego, vila II.jpg ... ist not "vila", "villa" or "willa" ... this building is "City hospital" in polish language ... szpital miejski. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.176.6.30 (talk) 21:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

85.176.6.30 21:09, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks! Wikicology (talk) 21:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry it's not good ...
  • "Szpital miejski 01" is not enough ... this is only "City hospital 01" ... better is "Nowa Ruda, szpital miejski 03" ("Nowa Ruda" ← the name of the city, szpital miejski 01 ← city hospital)
  • "Kamienica 01" is not enough ... this is only "Tenement house 01" ... better is "Nowa Ruda, ul. Piłsudskiego 18 - kamienica 03" ("Nowa Ruda" ← the name of the city, ul. Piłsudskiego 18 ← the name of the Street, kamienica 02 ← tenement housel) 85.176.6.30 21:37, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:55, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just want to check, did you see my response to the deletion request of my Mall of Asia Arena pictures? I posted it on the discussions page here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Mall_of_Asia_Arena

I don't agree with the deletion of that file since the FOP law in the Philippine is unclear, hence the status quo should be maintained. Also, when I do a search for "Mall of Asia Arena" now, there are still a LOT of pictures there of it, so how come mine was deleted while the others were not? RoyKabanlit (talk) 06:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RoyKabanlit and Welcome! it may not look like I'm very welcoming to you, nominating your pictures for deletion, but I think you may have made some mistakes. However,I am very glad that you agreed that FOP law in the Philippine is unclear. Our precautionary principle allow us to delete images of unclear copyright status. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what about the others, then? There are a LOT of pictures from the Philippines that are similar to mine, like pictures of private buildings? How come my pictures were the only ones deleted, while not the others? I really don't understand. As for my mistake, no, I do not believe I have made any mistake. RoyKabanlit (talk) 12:08, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello RoyKabanlit, can you prove that there are a lot of pictures from the Philippines that are similar to yours, like pictures of private buildings? This is an old rationale by those defending their uploads from deletion. Anyway, if there are a lot of pictures from the Philippines that are similar to yours, like pictures of private buildings, they might be kept here on Commons because the complex object on the photo, whether it is a building, sculpture, or whatever it is, is not the subject of the photo and not an essential part of the photo. They are applicable for de minimis. And I think your SM MoA photo is not applicable in that principle. Thanks, ★ Poké⁹⁵ 11:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "rationalizing", I am stating a F-A-C-T. Just do a quick search on Wikimedia Commons using the term, "SM Mall of Asia Arena" and see how many pictures you end up with. That's COMMON SENSE. So why are their pictures still up while mine is not? And what about the pictures of other private building in the Philippines? There are TONS of them in Wikimedia Commons, so how come they are still all up? RoyKabanlit (talk) 14:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RoyKabanlit, other stuffs exist is usually not a valid argument to keep images that meet one or more of our criteria for deletion. The truth is, There are several images here that probably should have been deleted longtime ago. At the same time, a lot of images do not exist that probably should. That being said, the fact that images of similar type exist does not mean your deleted images should be restored. It is very possible that the other images need to be deleted, but the deletion will only happen when they are noticed. Let this discussion focus on why your images were deleted and not why other images exist. Many thanks to Pokéfan95 for their brilliant response. Hope you are good, @Pokéfan95? With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 22:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well what can I say? If you insist on the "logic" of deleting my pictures but not the SAME pictures as posted by others, then it would be best if I just bring my pictures elsewhere where they can be better appreciated than just posting them here where they can be ARBITRARILY deleted. RoyKabanlit (talk) 01:04, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@RoyKabanlit: Okay po, I found those pictures and nominated them for deletion. Happy now? Just because we didn't found those pictures and nominated them for deletion the same way as yours, it is because we are discriminating your uploads. Of course not. No one is special here when it comes to deletion, even admins, bureaucrats, or even the Wikimedia Foundation. There are other places you can take a photo with without violating copyright. Of course we will be sad if you will leave Commons, but if you want to, then go do so as you wish. Thanks. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 02:26, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This crazy. And no you HAVEN'T found all of of them. Go ahead, go and search all of the private buildings here on Wikimedia Commons like "SM Megamall", "Robinson's Galleria", "SM North EDSA", etc., the list goes on and one and one. Include the PRIVATE HOTELS, MALLS, RESTAURANTS, HOSPITALS, etc. And why are CONTRIBUTORS being PENALIZED? Why are people who do delete content being prioritized over people who actually CONTRIBUTE content? Kalokohan. RoyKabanlit (talk) 02:48, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't said all of them. What I meant are those SM MoA pictures. I am reviewing other buildings to see whether they are de minimis or not. How many times should I say that we are not discriminating contributors? We are not penalizing contributors. We don't prioritize people who delete content over contributors who actually contribute content. And there's no need to shout here. We are just volunteers, and we can't guarantee that we can found all photos of buildings which violate copyright. Everyday, admins are deleting thousands of copyright violations and files nominated for deletion 1 week ago. That's tedious. All of us here are not perfect. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 03:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

it would be helpful if you could post your comment/vote also there. --SI 19:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikicology,

You uploaded images by Ayanfe on the 30th of July. We never received permission in OTRS so the images are about to be deleted. Can retry to send the permission or explain the situation? Basvb (talk) 12:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Basvb, my believe is that permission has been sent to our support team. I'll confirm this with Wikimedia User Group Nigeria. Pinging Olaniyan Olushola. Please, do not delete the photos. I can assure you that this would be sent during the week if they haven't done that already. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 13:59, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image has nothing to do with Iran. Where do you get that idea from??? The place is clearly indicated. IF it were Iran - they have no copyright at all so far. From where do you get your Iran information?? But it is not Iran. It is Tanzania, made in 1927. How about googling the name, finding out where it is, and giving it a thought before blindly starting bureaucratic procedures? Kipala (talk) 20:15, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kipala. Thanks for the heads up and please do accept my sincere apology. That image was obviously nominated in error. Feel free to close the debate or ask someone else to close it as I am currently on a mobile device. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 20:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, accepted. Sorry for replying a bit roughly, hit me after a busy day, exactly what i needed... Kipala (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikicology,
Please calm down and lower your temper towards User:Rberchie. Without obvious reason, you are behaving way too aggressive towards him. Before starting any deletion request, you should please make other users aware of their (maybe existing) failures. Licensing and copyright is not an easy issue, and not everybody is aware of all possible pitfalls. We want to keep every user in this project: Wikimedia Commons is a community project, where others help each other – please follow this. Best regards, --Jcornelius (talk) 20:50, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out to me Jcornelius, you had just made my day. Rberchie is a friend whom I love so much. I don't have anything against him and I do really want to guide him. Copyright is very tricky and we all knows that. When I took Rberchie photo for deletion, he contacted me on my facebook page with aggressive comments, with a warning. I wasn't happy about this and I told him to use my talk page on Commons to discuss issues related to Common. He replied "Then you are not suppose to be my friend on facebook" and immediately blocked me. He returned to his talk page on common with personal attack that I have penchant in taken people's images for deletion. This struck my heart. in one of DR, they linked to my personal photos. I wasn't too happy with that either. How will discrediting Rberchie makes the world better? Rberchie fail to understand my motive. He thought I was only trying to discredit him and that is not the case. Well, I work with him to solve the copyright issues in the best way I can. Rberchie, if you felt bullied, I am sorry. Let me know if you need help, I would be glad to help. Thank you, Jcornelius. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 21:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jcornelius thanks for your prompt response I really appreciate.I have no problem if my pictures I upload are tagged for deletions and subsequently deleted if only it in is good faith. I am always ready to learn. The bulk pictures he tagged were uploaded long ago when I did not clearly understand the rules on Commons.I never attacked when he tagged them this was the message I sent him on facebook. I don't have any problem if you tag my pictures for deletion but they should not come out of being ill informed

I think I need to report this to an administrator Mfantsipim school was established in 1876 and most of the images you have tagged for deletion were built a 100 years ago about the personal pictures which were out of scope I have clearly explained as to why they are up there. Please be diligent with your work and you will go far.Good morning. I don't know how this come out as an attack. Go through this thread and you will you will understand why I say it is not in good faith. I must say he takes prides in thwarting the efforts of contributors in Commons. Visit this thread and you will know what I am talking about. He was trying to discredit me with statements like"Please, stop creating subsection on DR page. Someone who coordinate Wikimedia projects in Ghana and leads Wikimedia training should know how to use indentation and Wiki markup. Wikicology (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2016 (UTC) and I think that was not fair.Rberchie (talk) 00:31, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rberchie comments like this "I must say he takes prides in thwarting the efforts of contributors in Commons" is not helpful and this is one problem I have with you. People who have worked with me in the past can tell you that I'm friendly and always ready to help. Just look at the content of the message you sent me on facebook and put yourself in my show. If you had simply wrote " Wikicology, the bulk pictures you tagged were uploaded long ago when I did not clearly understand the rules on Commons. Please, let's resolve it or I'll fix the problem". I think that would be more helpful. However, don't feel sad about my comment thereafter. It wasn't intended to hurt your pride and I want you to view it as useful feedback that can help you improve yourself rather than put you down. As we go through life we have plenty of opportunity to learn and improve ourselves. Therefore, no matter what kind of criticism is aimed at you, analyze it to find something you can learn from it. When somebody is attacking your character it is hard to accept, but that does not mean you should ignore it. Criticism aimed at you may not make sense at the time. Generally speaking, there is usually some truth in criticism, even when it appears to be given out of spite and bitterness. It is often the case that a slight on your character is a fair reflection of how another person sees you at that point in time. Take a step back and try to see things from the other person’s point of view, perhaps ask a friend for their honest opinion. I have been bitterly criticized in the past, subjected to recurring harassment, outed, being a subject of discussion in drama boards, Jimbo's talk page, ArbCom case and also a subject of about three Wikimedia projects criticisms websites. I didn't attack my detractors in return but learned from their criticism. To be honest with you, it wasn't a good experience but it was very helpful. Recenly one of my detractors needed help here on Commons and I was the first to help them. Rberchie, please take my comments as useful feedback. All African editors have a special place in my heart. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 04:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, These were restored. It is the usual practice to mention this in the DR. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, as I have left comments on both the Picture page and elsewhere, I wanted to ensure you also were made fully aware of the trouble ticket that has already been submitted

[Ticket#: 2017012510017269]  which as I am sure you have read, contains my email with signed model release from Ms. Phoenix, her ID shots, as well as 2 additional emails, 1 from her, in which she again states I own the rights to the picture in question, and her Lawyer who also states the same and provides his contact information. To be clear: there is NO possible grey area for any interpretation from anyone regarding who owns my work besides me. I am waiting for closure on this issue for this picture I uploaded for public use. Please read the detailed comments in the discussion for the photo itself and I thank you in advance for resolution on this issue which is clear cut, and non debate-able. --Art javier (talk) 20:24, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, another update, Jetset Magazine has complied with Nikki's email and correctly listed me as the photographer credit on their site. The complete email string between herself, and the magazine owner has also been sent to the trouble ticket listed above, it also specifically cites this wikipedia issue, as well as another editor here Jim, who refused to believe she was herself because she chooses to use a gmail account (as pretty much every other model I have ever shot) and that correspondence with the magazine owner should settle that issue as well, although personally, I have no idea why any OTRS reader would question someone with a signature block listing all her verified accounts. I have no doubt you will look at this in an unbiased way since you were the first to point out that Jetset not listing me as the photographer did not mean they owned the photo, however, I'm glad someone here was silly enough to mention that so the issue could be addressed.

Thanks in advance for being more helpful and polite and unbiased than the other editors I have seen here since my brief return after a 2 year hiatus, simply to prove this point:

Don't ever tell a photographer that owns a photo that he doesn't, he will have the resources at hand to prove he does, the model will side with him, and any magazine or outlet that used the photo will side with him too.

Best and thanks again for being the most unbiased editor I have read in the string so far. --Art javier (talk) 18:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind word. I can see that the photo has been credited to you on the website of Jetset Magazine. Just as I have said earlier, there is no clear evidence that "jetsetmag.com" is the copyright holder of the image. "Copyright notice" on website is not an evidence of ownership of copyright, also using the website email address to email OTRS is not an evidence that they are the copyright holder of all contents on their website. If they email OTRS that they own the copyright of a content, The official email address is only an evidence that the sender owns the domain. Unfortunately, Эlcobbola, a respected member of the community believed "a statement on a legitimate publication' website is, in fact, exactly that.". Of course, this is utterly wrong. However, Jameslwoodward is correct for deleting the image as our policy allows images like this to be deleted. Now that the image has been credited to you, I think he would be glad to restore it. I pinged him. Relax, he would take a look. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 07:30, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, that's not enough for him LOL I look forward to you interceding on this since all I get from him are rude comments, stating that I am not me LOL. Given that numerous people here have tried to infer I don't own my own photos, I feel like I'm pretty relaxed LOL But I thank you again for your unbiased help, you are literally the only one who has been this way.

You will also note, I am credited on the billboard as well. Perhaps ping him with that as well, since he still disbelieves it LOL. https://www.residentadvisor.net/event.aspx?899328

--Art javier (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since Jim is still unsure that you are the copyright holder of the image, I think the best way to handle this is to ask Jetset Magazine to email OTRS that you are indeed the copyright holder of the image. Once the correspondence is reviewed by a member of our support team, the image would be restored. Note that it could take some days or weeks due to the backlogs. Wikicology (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There, This was just sent into Permissions and I was CCed on it as well, coming from Nikki from her site, and listing [Jim] specifically too LOL

Ticket#: 2017012510017269 Nikki Phoenix Support <support@nikkiphoenixxx.com> To permissions-commons@wikimedia.org CC booknikkiphoenix@gmail.com art_javier@yahoo.com achiles300@yahoo.com Today at 12:41 PM To Whom it may concern,

The owner of this site, Nikki Phoenix, asked us to send in this email, since one of your editors (Jim) erroneously has asked for permission on this photo's use to come from us, instead of the Photographer, Owner, and Copyright holder, Art Javier, who has notified us that You have tried to tell him he doesn't own his own photo.

Note the Art Javier, (Art javier on Wikipedia) is in fact the Photographer, Owner, and Copyright holder, can use the photo as he sees fit, already sent in copies of Ms Phoenix's IDs and Model Release, Ms. Phoenix has already responded comfirming that he owns the photo and can do anything he likes with it, and Our Lawyer has already emailed confirming this as well.

Why it is that we need to send and email from her site, because this editor says:

Deleted: As far as I can see, we have no evidence that the subject of the image has the right to freely license it. That right usually belongs to the photographer. The OTRS message is from a generic address and gives no evidence of anything -- it includes a photo of an unknown person holding what purports to be a model release from Ms. Phoenix and the subject image showing on a screen. Note that Ms. Phoenix owns www.nikkiphoenixxx.com, so the fact that the OTRS e-mail comes from a generic site is itself suspicious behavior. Lastly, the OTRS e-mail has come in recently and has not yet reached the head of the queue, so the image must be deleted until the OTRS message can be acted upon.

Is puzzling, but in order to support the actual owner, photographer and rightholder, Art Javier (Art javier on Wikipedia) who donated this photo many years ago and took the photo for free, and to completely debunk false statements, we are happy to do so.

Regards,

Nikki Phoenix Owner NikkiPhoenixxx.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Art javier (talk • contribs) 21:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I'm puzzled why you would think that Jetset emailing them would make any difference, since they aren't the rights holder, and Permissions has also now been emailed by her Site, as well as me (Providing the Signed Model Release, and her ID shot holding her ids which is proof enough of ownership), Nikki, her Lawyer, and the site in question has already credited me as the owner and rights holder. At this point he's simply not wanting to admit being wrong, nothing else LOL. Again, this is the type of behavior that encouraged me to leave Wikipedia years ago, since I have better things to do than argue with people who simply won't admit when they are OVERWHELMINGLY mistake on their position. --Art javier (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you have to go through this stress to restore the photo. I would probably take it to COM:UDR tomorrow. BTW.. Your impression about Jameslwoodward is wrong. To be honest with you, James is a very nice administrator and I don't think he has anything against you. Wikicology (talk) 21:39, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There, I thanks and I would have to disagree with you since it's painfully obvious now to all involved that Nikki has reached out directly to Permissions and her Lawyer has as well in addition to all my documentation and emails, and even the site they are citing has already made a point to give me due credit. He Clearly refuses to admit his mistake, along with his friend. I would ask you to please take this to COM:UDR tomorrow since I don't even know what that is my friend. I do know when someone tells me I am not me, and I don't own my own photo that they are besmirching my name with False and Easily disproved statements despite their denials after their statements, Something I take as seriously as ensuring everyone properly credits me for my work. Hence why Jetset Magazine immediately corrected their error. Please assist me as I am now as equally embittered by my treatment here and lack of an apology from Clearly Mistaken pundits as I was when I left Wikipedia years ago. I am very happy to pass on that Nikki has also resent the entire email string from all her emails, gmail and otherwise through her official site email directly to permissions and asked for both those editors to be disciplined. I was CCed on the emails. I, as well as Ms. Phoenix, her Lawyer, her website and anyone who is using my work, will of course NOT let this go until I am properly credited here and my photo I donated has been restored. Many thanks, --Art javier (talk) 10:10, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Art javier, I took it to COM:UDR. see it here. It has been closed by Srittau who noted that the OTRS permission is pending. So, relax and let the OTRS process sort this out. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 10:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There, Thank you so much, I read what you wrote for the undeletion request. Thanks again for your help and support. You are what I had always envisioned Wikipedia to be about, with editors helping other editors and why I have been so disappointed with the attitudes and comments of other editors. I'm sure you can see why I would be frustrated, since I am the photographer, and I have already sent in the Model Releases, ID shots, and the Model, Lawyer, her Website, and event the site in question all side with me and state I am the owner of this photo that I donated here years ago for public use. I will make a point to try and stay in touch with you even if I choose to again cease being an active member here. --Art javier (talk) 21:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please, feel free to stay in touch. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 08:28, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I thought you would get a good chuckle out of this, as Nikki has sent in another email to OTRS that I was CCed on, and shared it as a blog on her sites. LOL http://www.nikkiphoenixxx.com/tour1/blog/for-wikipedia.html

http://www.iamnikkiphoenix.com/iamnikkiphoenixnews — Preceding unsigned comment added by Art javier (talk • contribs) 00:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again thanks again for all of your help, I'm personally astounded that these 3 editors have been so unhelpful, and unwilling to correct their mistake eventhough they have been proven wrong by you, me, Nikki, her Lawyer, her Site, and Jetset Magazine. --Art javier (talk) 22:50, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not close deletion requests that have not been open for seven days per Commons:Deletion requests. There are no "speedy closes" (except for disruptive DRs.) Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Noted. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 10:24, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was just stopping by to say hello, and to thank you for your help previously, I noticed that there is STILL no action regarding this case with the photo that Everyone clearly says I own, but I have found thankfully a community of Wikipedians who are much friendlier, more helpful, and non-vandalizing recently that have renewed my faith in the overall community.

	The Special Barnstar
	And a big thanks for going out of your way to point out to other editors that they were in fact Totally mistaken regarding a photo that Everyone, including the magazine in Question credits me for owning LOL --Art javier (talk) 05:26, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HI there, You will be happy to hear that OTRS has sided with us and restored the Photo (no surprise really, it was obvious we were right in the first place.) and the photo is back up where it belongs.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nikki_Phoenix_(RT_SF9A0489-cropped-small).jpg

Thanks again for your support and it has been nice for me to see that there are some friendly, helpful Editors on Wikipedia and also on Spanish Wikipedia that have restored my faith in this community. --Art javier (talk) 17:22, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Art javier, this sounds like a good news and thanks for keeping me updated. I left a comment here yesterday. I don't know if that might have drawn the attention of one or more OTRS member. Well, I am pretty glad the image was finally restored and I'm sure Nikki would be glad too. With kind regards. Wikicology (talk) 17:47, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, and I wonder if we could in fact remove the "general notability guideline" since the article has been cleaned up, the photo restored, and she clearly meets notability guidelines per other editors. I personally don't want to remove the template because I don't want it to appear as if I am biased in doing so because I was the person who uploaded the photo. Is this something you think you could do? --Art javier (talk) 21:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eventhough it already has met notability requirements:

Hi There, I'm reaching out to you because the article which you were kind enough to help me so much with has been vandalized, and now re-nominated for deletion. I would like to also point out that it has met notability requirements already by Devopam (talk) note the posting from him on the article's talk page:

Hi, I'm Devopam. Art javier, thanks for creating Nikki Phoenix!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Article has potential and passess WP:PORNBIO. Need recommended improvements in order to make it a good read.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Devopam (talk) 13:31, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

I was hoping you would please also comment on the deletion page so that we are very clear about the repeated deletions by this editor and now his attempt to delete a page that has already been cited as having met Notability.

Thank you so much in advance for your support and for having helped with the article as well :)

Here is the link for the deletion page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nikki_Phoenix_(2nd_nomination)

Best, Art javier (talk) 07:11, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the reason I insisted that a response from Yann is needed, is that in several earlier occasions Yann ignored the disapproval by the community and just continued the behaviour. I think it would be a waste of community resources if this needs to be brought to the noticeboard for the fourth time in the near future. Jcb (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jcb, people only change if they want to change. You cannot force someone to admit they were wrong or apologize. Only they have the power to shift their perspective. And sometimes, it’s just not going to happen. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 18:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, one of the purposes of AN/U is to force users to change their modus operandi if necessary. Admins are in place to serve the community. If the community disapproves their behaviour, they have to fix it, whether they want it or not, or leave. Please undo the premature section closure. Jcb (talk) 05:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikicology, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please read Commons FOP page before nominating a file for deletion. Beside I consider Mhhossein's behaviour inappropriate, so it would best not to support his action. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yann, of course you know I am familiar with COM:FOP. May I respectfully remind you that FoP exception does not eliminate the need for a license from the photographer? FoP exception vary from country to country. There is a freedom of Panorama in Nigeria and Angola but the terms and conditions are not the same. In the case of Angola, the copyright law state that "reproduction of "works shown permanently in public" is allowed "without the authorization of the author and without payment of remuneration on condition that the title and the name of the author are stated and that the work is respected.". Can you point me to where the architect was credited? I am struggling to understand why you closed the DR without taken that important clause into consideration. Unless the architect is credited, that image remain a copyright violation of the architect work. As others already pointed out, your closure of that DR was inappropriate. Wikicology (talk) 18:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

When you have completed the checking of all WLA pictures, please tell me. Then I'll come back to categorize them. Regards, Ji-Elle (talk) 08:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ji-Elle, I'm sorry for this extremely slow response. I feel a good number of the images need to be renamed. Do you have the file mover's right? Wikicology (talk) 10:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any rights on Commons, but I'm not the best person to rename files, as English is not my native language. Ji-Elle (talk) 09:44, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You picked the the Bus conductor picture I uploaded For deletion because you saw the picture on a nigerian blog? Nigeria blogs take pictures posted on Twitter, instagram and use it on their blogs all the time,even the big blogs in nigeria like Linda ikeji does this all the time without even giving where they took it from photo credit.pls kindly remove deletion from the bus conductor picture cause its mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayodeji111 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send evidence of ownership to our support team. See COM:OTRS. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 06:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I took that picture with a BlackBerry Z10 and had it edited so it can look very nice the way it looks now,i don't switch on Geotag on camera setting cause I don't keep Internet data on most times and definitely not when taking pictures,I'm in nigeria and buying data bundles is not cheap,if you know anything about Z10 you will know that exif data is only going to show map location if Internet is on and dimensions,Thats it.kindly remove deletion from the picture,please dont add this to my headache cause I already live in nigeria and that's enough headache on its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayodeji111 (talk • contribs) 04:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How is living in Nigeria an headache? Let's stay on topic. Exif metadata does not requires internet connection and I am struggling to understand why you linked this to high cost of internet. BTW...File:African woman selling cake locally produced.jpg is an image taken with Blackberry Z10 which prove you wrong. Wikicology (talk) 06:46, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I use a blackberry Z10 and that's exactly what I'm trying to tell you that on the properties(Exif Metadata) of a picture you take with a Z10 you will only see image number,dimensions,location and that you will only see location if you open geomap on the camera setting and geomap only works if the Internet on the phone is on,clearly you don't use a Z10 cause if you do you would have been able to comprehend what I'm saying by now and Yeah lagos in nigeria is a stressful place to live in infact it's the tenth most stressful city to live in in the world and Internet is expensive in the third world so please don't ever tell me what I can and can't say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayodeji111 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please, you need to be civil. There is no point to be aggressive towards me. Wikicology (talk) 07:23, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And please, don't create a new section. Answer below my comment. Wikicology (talk) 07:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good day everyone I am Ebenezer with the username EbenCoded, I am a contestant for the Wiki Loves Africa contest that started on 1st of October, 2017 and is ending 30th of November 2017. My pictures were suggested for deletion because they were not taken from the same device, that is true because I used different devices to capture different activities of African people at work, I made use of my camera, I made use of my phone too. i started first with my camera but it was a little difficult to take the pictures because people were feeling insecure with is understandable, i switched to using my phone so as to take the pictures of different people without their consent when at work which worked out pretty well because I took the pictures while holding my phone in my hand like I was using it for something else. As a result of this switching of devices, while uploading i uploaded the ones taken by my phone and and by my camera which I transferred to my phone's memory card and where i edited most of my pictures. This is an explanation and a proof that the pictures i uploaded are mine and mine alone. I therefore request that my pictures are not deleted from Wikipedia commons. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 197.242.99.132 (talk) 12:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with image EXIF metadata? Majority of the images are small photos with no metadata. Why didn't you upload the original photos if they are actually your works? This makes me to doubt that you owned the other photos taken with different camera. Wikicology (talk) 15:21, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the closure statement. If this closure does not get reverted or amended by an admin, the outcome is at least that those speedy closures have to stop. This will hopefully reduce the number of clashes with Yann. I am avoiding to get involved in DRs started by Yann, at least when I disagree with them in that DR. Just trying to keep some distance from each other seems to be the best that can be achieved at the moment. Trying to resolve issues via their user talk page has prooved pointless unfortunately. Jcb (talk) 17:30, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, unfortunately Yann has no plans to stop their behaviour apparently. Jcb (talk) 17:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the market. I'll take a look later tonight. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 18:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jcb, I left a note on their talk page, unfortunately they vowed to continue to speedy close DRs which is quiet disturbing. I'll be glad to ask for a review of their action next time they speedy closed DRs as keep in violation of COM:Deletion request. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 11:27, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for your help. I think now you understand why I wrote "Trying to resolve issues via their user talk page has prooved pointless unfortunately." above. Jcb (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Doubts about this contributor : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rabetremi

Regards,

Ji-Elle (talk) 06:34, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ji-Elle, I nominated the images for deletion for multiple reasons. a) There is no evidence that uploader is the copyright holder of the images. The watermark on the images may implies that the copyright holder is "Station Masque Bar" or "Boss Mag". b) The images appears to be personal photos that are not realistically useful for educational purpose. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 06:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also doubts about this picture [2] and some others by same contributor.

Hi Ji-Elle, the image is OK. You can use it on the article Child sacrifice for example. Vast majority of their other contributions are fine. Regards,. Wikicology (talk) 20:45, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas T Cells!!


Hi T Cells, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
   –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 20:23, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas to you, Wikology! 🎄 --Ruthven (msg) 22:57, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas is all about sharing love with your loved ones. That’s why I am taking the time to share love with you and I hope to get some love back. . --The Photographer 15:01, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please review image linked in the subject field. Thank you in advance. ArturSik (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArturSik, most YouTube videos are not eligible for upload to Wikimedia Commons. Do you have evidence that the original video was released under a free license Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC-BY) which is compatible with Commons? If no, then it's not eligible to be hosted here. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:44, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• hi. The video has been released under Creative Commons Attribution licence (reuse allowed) and this information can be found in the link provided by me in the Photo’s details. ArturSik (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that it was released under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC-BY). Wikicology (talk) 01:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is the video's whole description:

Published on Mar 8, 2017

Wypowiedź: Margaret, piosenkarka.

Margaret lubi zwrócić uwagę tym co ma na sobie. Ostatnio burzę wywołała jej stylizacja inspirowana latami osiemdziesiątymi: za duża jeansowa kurtka, spodnie z falbanami, sandały na wysokim obcasie i… widoczne kolorowe skarpety. O butach i swojej stylizacji opowiada Margaret.

Category News & Politics

License Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)

ArturSik (talk) 02:58, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Kabir at Wikimedia event in Nigeria.jpg, 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!

 

  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 00:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff G., what's going on? I think De minimis apply here. Is there anything I'm missing? Regards. T Cells (talk) 07:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is the banner freely licensed? The two big photos on it?   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 11:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not considered infringement nor a derivative work. It is clear from the photograph that I was interested in the young man rather than the small photos in the banner. The small photos are entirely out of focus and incidental to the overall subject-matter of the photograph. T Cells (talk) 11:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff G., will you consider to remove the tag or request for input at Commons:Village pump#Copyright? Let me know what you think. Regards. T Cells (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Commons:Village pump/Copyright#File:Kabir at Wikimedia event in Nigeria.jpg.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 14:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I commented over there. Regards. T Cells (talk) 15:31, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi T Cells, thanks for your request for license reviewer status. The request has been closed as successful, and you've been added to the list of reviewers. You can now start reviewing files – please see Commons:License review and Commons:Flickr files if you haven't done so already. We also have a guide how to detect copyright violations. Potential backlogs include Flickr review, Picasa review, Panoramio review, and files from other sources. You can use one of the following scripts by adding one of the lines to your common.js:

importScript('User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js'); // stable script for reviewing images from any kind of source OR

importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); // contains also user notification when review fails, auto blacklist-check and auto-thank you message for Flickr-reviews.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons ^webchat on irc.freenode.net. You can also add {{User license reviewer}} to your user page if you wish. Thank you for your contributions on Commons! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Didym (talk • contribs) 15:07, 22 May 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

Hi, with files like File:1930s Fighter (Unsplash).jpg, adding a license review template with the current link and recent date of review does not make sense. The license I uploaded these with has changed at source, so it is not possible to verify the license this way. This is why the specific explanatory unsplash template is used for all 30,000 uploads.

Please consider removing the license review templates as they are not evidence of the verification they appear to be.

Thanks --Fæ (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for the heads up, Fae. T Cells (talk) 18:39, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Reopening of this thread is in fact disruptive and counterproductive"

The thread was in dire need of some reply to point out what got lost in translation. As I provided that, the thread could be closed right after that but I didn't want to actually make that call myself. Steinsplitter has, so that's all resolved now. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 16:18, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, friend. Happy editing. T Cells (talk) 16:24, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you notice that this image attributes the Gamma-Rapho photo agency and Getty Images before you gave it a good review? I suspect it is an unacceptable image. Ww2censor (talk) 20:56, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at the image again and I have to agree with you. Sadly, I didn't notice that it attributes Getty Images. My eyes went straight to the author, Jean-Claude. My bad! T Cells (talk) 21:17, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed it. I'll take a closer look again tomorrow. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Regards. T Cells (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) - Ww2censor & TCells - Just a heads up I've reported the image to Flickr as it's more than likely the Getty uploader never gave permission for their image to be used in this way, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:45, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know it seems stupid but there have been instances in the past of people having their LR right stripped from them for promoting early. Even if it is by a few minutes I wouldn't want that to happen. Please make sure the full 48 hours have passed before doing any promotions. Thanks. --Majora (talk) 21:13, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Majora I'm in Nigeria and 21:19 is 9:19 PM by my time zone. Is there anything I'm missing? Thank you. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 21:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Check your clocks and look at your timestamps. You promoted them at 21:06 and closed the request at 21:12. 13 and 7 minutes respectively too early. We have to go by the server clock. --Majora (talk) 21:26, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh.. Majora, WAT zone is one hour ahead of UTC. I sincerely apologize for the closure. I closed the request based on WAT. I'm really sorry. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 21:33, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously the closure was correct. There is nothing to be sorry about there. It was just a timing thing. Like I said, I just don't want someone to bring up that you did it out of process because of a timing mistake. And there being precedent there to ensure that the full 48 hours is given to all LR requests. It is better to leave it open for an extra hour or two than to close it a few minutes early. I just wanted to give you a heads up. --Majora (talk) 21:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and thank you so much for the heads up. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 21:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE I need someone to properly attach an image to a wiki page I read that lacks image.

I added a link on the page indicating a proper image for that page. Please kindly help by attaching the image well & referencing it to proper image owner. Thanks alot for improving Wikipedia. Below is the affected page.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mambilla_Power_Station Ebere Jude (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a link to the image in question? Or do you mean you have an image you wish to upload under a free license? Regards. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 16:26, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, just look at you. It's like you're wearing ice!

Thanks for such a helpful and inspiring user page, and so very many thanks for your favorite gallery. It's very, very, very healing!

Geekdiva (talk) 02:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words and for all your contributions to Wikimedia projects. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 06:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... which of your names given on your user page (Olatunde Isaac) is your surname and which one is your given name? I know that the pattern differs from culture to culture. You could even put the information on your user page, perhaps along with the cultural background (based on your mention of its Wikipedia, perhaps Yoruban?) that created that pattern and the components of your particular name.

I swear I didn't try to bribe you with a WikiLove kitten in order to get this info! 😸 It only occurred to me after I gave you a WikiKitten, and only then because "Isaac" in my native American English is usually a given name. Thanks, and keep up the good work! It's interesting, AGF people like you that keep me coming back to edit mode even when I get tired. —Geekdiva (talk) 03:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
	Hi T Cells, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to Commons,    –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 18:50, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Davey2010. Compliments of the season. Regards. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 19:35, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome and thanks so much :), Take care friend, –Davey2010^Talk 20:41, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

I'm wishing you all the best for the New Year and I hope you're going to have many memorable photo opportunities in 2019. With 2018 coming to an end, it's time to look back at the past 12 months. I'm curious – what would you consider your best shot of 2018 and why? I invite you to share your image and your thoughts in order to provide others with the opportunity to celebrate, learn, and enjoy:

Your best shot 2018

Thanks for all your effort in sharing your vision of the world with others under a free license!

Warmly, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Group photograph after the Yoruba Wikipedia workshop1.jpg

And also:

• File:Group photograph after the Yoruba Wikipedia workshop.jpg
• File:Yoruba Wikipedia Workshop Day 2.jpg
• File:Yoruba Wikipedia workshop Day 1.jpg
• File:Photo with LASU VC.jpg
• File:Wikimaster Conference.jpg

Yours sincerely, - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 23:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators noticeboard#Request to re-evaluate T Cells' license reviewing right. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 01:56, 3 January 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മല���ാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

• File:Chief Seriki Abass story buildings.jpg

And also:

• File:Slaves carrying equipment on slave tade mission i.jpg
• File:Portrait of a slave 02.jpg
• File:Slaves Under punishment.jpg
• File:Slaves carrying equipments on slave mission.jpg
• File:Slave led by Leutenany Mizon 01.jpg
• File:Slave led by Leutenany Mizon.jpg
• File:African chief who preferred to die rather than to be capture's slave 01.jpg
• File:African chief who preferred to die rather than to be capture's slave.jpg
• File:A slave under punishment.jpg
• File:Images of Seriki Abass.jpg
• File:Images of slave.jpg
• File:Acient photo of Chief Seriki Abass.jpg

Yours sincerely, - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 02:27, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you are rather passionate for Wikimedia Commons and although I do not hope that what happened last week will discourage you from donating your images (and other images from the Wikimedia UserzGroup Nigeria) to Wikimedia Commons. Anyhow, if you are looking for more stuff to do on Wikimedia Commons the OTRS team always needs more help, and although it's a thankless "job" (hobby) that will probably get you more angry impatient people commenting at you than people who admire your work, one cannot minimise how valuable OTRS validated works are for Wikimedia Commons and the free internet as a whole, maybe there are even a lot of Yoruba language tickets awaiting an answer that you could so eloquently answer. As you're also very active in Nigeria maybe you could also contact local organisations and your government to donate their works to Wikimedia Commons as well, maybe something to think about. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated: Why not set up an archive for this page? It takes me forever to scroll on my mobile device and the conversations date back to 2016. I mean you can organise this page as you like, it would just be easier for people to see the most recent conversation, especially on a mobile device (reckon that most Nigerians also browse the internet with a snartphone). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trung, thanks for your encouragement. I experienced the worst in 2016. I was subjected to recurring harassment on the English Wikipedia and one account was indefinitely blocked for harassment. Thus, what happened last week was not new to me. I applied to volunteer at OTRS sometimes in 2017 but the English Wikipedia warriors quickly jumped there to criticize me, citing the ArbCom case in 2016. Thus, my application was declined. I'll be happy to volunteer at OTRS if I get nominated (if there is anything like that). As you are already aware, my works primarily focus on creating awareness about Wikimedia projects in Nigeria and I have done quiet a lot of works to promote Wikimedia projects in Nigeria. I designed and coordinate almost all outreach works, projects and partnership in Nigeria. In May 2018, I was in the Senate of Nigeria to discuss possible collaboration and for the Senate to donate their works for Wikimedia Commons. They have agreed in principle but we couldn't move forward due to the preparation for the 2019 General Election. About, archiving, I'll look into archiving my talk page when I'm a bit less busy. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 06:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Talk page guidelines#Archiving. I recommend the configuration for lowercase sigmabot III from w:Help:Archiving a talk page#Options. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 19:07, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would be completely opposed to T cells being an OTRS agent. As in "completely opposed". Anthere (talk) 21:53, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly suggest you do not delete comments of people pointing out their opposition to you being an OTRS agent. [3]. Anthere (talk)

Since I cannot edit on Commons:Administrators/Requests/Elisfkc anymore, I wanted to reach out and thank you for your support on my admin request. Even though it didn't end the way I wanted, I appreciate your support. --Elisfkc (talk) 02:30, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcomed Elisfkc and I am sorry it turned out that way but feel free to apply again. Regards. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 12:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear T Cells,
There has been a tag on deletion of some ofUser:Pambelle12 images for Wiki Loves Africa 2019. I wish to draw to your attention that images of file 06,07,08 portray a particular sequence and the game is on blowing of a bubble which will obviously come in different forms and bubble effect for future reference and use. We wish to alert you that the only image that does not have any relevance is that of *File:Bubble Blowing 09.jpg* which should be deleted. Thanks for your promptings and waiting for the effect. Best regards, --Joy Agyepong (talk) 18:12, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joy Agyepong, please always provide a link to images and any associated discussion. Well, I assumed you were referring to the images below;

• File:Bubble Blowing 06.jpg
• File:Bubble Blowing 09.jpg
• File:Bubble Blowing 07.jpg
• File:Bubble Blowing 08.jpg

OK;

File:Bubble Blowing 07.jpg and File:Bubble Blowing 08.jpg are redundant with File:Bubble Blowing 06.jpg as they depict same stage in bubble blowing from the same angle. File:Bubble Blowing 06.jpg is not being considered for deletion. Only File:Bubble Blowing 07.jpg, File:Bubble Blowing 08.jpg and File:Bubble Blowing 09.jpg is being considered for deletion. File:Bubble Blowing 14.jpg may also be considered for deletion as it appears to be redundant with File:Bubble Blowing 15.jpg. Regards. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 00:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good day, I'm Yusuf (yufifa.lato72@gmail.com). Please some of my images are been nominated for deletion. Please how do I go about it, because many of the images are snapped by me. Please kindly help me through. Thanks Yufifalato722 (talk) 15:48, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Yufifalato722, your images were not nominated for deletion because there was a doubt that they were taken by you. They were nominated because they are not realistically used for educational purposes. See Commons:Project scope and COM:EDUSE. Regards. T Cells (talk · contribs · email) 19:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TCells,

Some of my pictures were flagged redundant. Pls kindly review the files flagged. They are original pictures taken by me at the events stated in Jos Nigeria. You can observe from the mrta data information and also the multiple pictures uploaded of one scene. Please kindly restore it & remedy this anomaly. All what I have posted are authorised and originals. Thanks //BR Josh Eson L. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Eson (talk • contribs) 20:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]