User talk:Ronhjones/Archive 25

Hi Ron,

I'd like to formally request an undelete of Geopolitical Information Service, in order to allow me to add appropriate secondary sources (completely forgot!)

Thanks.

Tristanojbacon (talk) 09:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

You seem to be a cuddly human, rather than some kind of formless concept or a bot. You left a message on my talk pages about use of photographs. This was for the page The Essex Model House

So Braintree Museum said in an email I could use that photo which they supplied to me. Please clarify what I have to do for that and the useful photographs for the pages on Bath Cabinet Makers, Derek Richter

Please use plain English - I do understand the need for rigour for copyright reasons, but it is tedious to spend ages in funny backrooms ticking boxes and not really knowing wtf is going on. I tried the CC route and nobody liked that , then I used just straight uploading.

I really want to become proficient at uploading articles which will include my and others' photos and not get all stuck

Many thanks

Psychetube 14:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psychetube (talk • contribs)

It's going to get complicated....

There are several things to consider for copyright

• The dolls house itself - someone had to make it, as a 3D creation the creator would have had copyright over the article - just like a sculptor.
• The photograph also has some copyright as a whole picture, but not of the actual object.
• Now the article is in a UK museum, assuming that the pubic can visit this area (even if a fee is required), then the UK declares such places as "public space", and any 3D object in a public place loses it's copyright (it does not work for 2D articles = paintings) - see c:Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#United_Kingdom
• Therefore we are left with the copyright of the photograph.

As you did not take the photo (which would have been the easiest solution - I would help - but I don't live in Essex any more!), then your best place to start is WP:DCM. You need the museum to release the copyright of that photo to at least a CC-BY-SA license (or CC-BY, or CC-zero, or PD). Once the permission is sorted out then a ticket will be applied to the image, and all should be OK. If the image gets deleted meantime - then the OTRS team will get it undeleted when the permission is sorted. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:49, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Greetings, Thanks for informing me of the missing copyright information with regards to the photo of Professor Johnson. I am new to wiki editing and am finishing up my first wiki entry; the photo of Professor Johnson is the my first media upload. The photo was provided by Professor Johnson and I sent in an email to permissions-en@wikipedia.org that offered explanation and what I believed to be, at the time, sufficient documentation. I forwarded the original email containing the picture to that wikipedia email address, per this sentence: >>If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.<< I recently signed in and saw that the photo would be deleted today, 09/17, if I did not further document the photo's fair use. Professor Johnson is emailing me today with permission to use the photo, which I will then forward on to you. There are no copyright issues whatsoever to be concerned about with regards to this photo. But I would greatly appreciate your explanation of how I may avoid complicating media uploads in the future! Adamsec (talk) 09:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)ADAMSECAdamsec (talk) 09:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

OTRS takes more than a week to sort out the permission - we allow 30 days, but you have to add {{OTRS pending}} to get that allocation (I've just done that). The image won't now be checked for 30 days. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 15:27, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

>>Thank you for your help. To whom do I discuss the emails and permissions that I have already provided via the email address? So sorry for my ignorance and many thanks for your assistance! Adamsec (talk) 00:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

This image was deleted in october. It is our created content. It is a block EH and is our school Logo. I am not sure what additional information you need to know that it is our created content. Please advise.

Thanks!

Ezell-Harding (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to release the logo as a free image then check WP:DCM, note most logo owners don't like to do that, and they usually get used here as non-free - check WP:NFCC to see if that is possible- note: use a {{non-free logo}} as license and copy box from WP:FURG, keep size to 100,000 pixels max - look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Non-free_logo to see how other have written their pages. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

 Template:Infobox aqueduct navigable has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox aqueduct. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. James^x12345 23:00, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Replied Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, last September 14, 2014, you deleted the article on BasKet Note Pads (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BasKet_Note_Pads) on the grounds that its subject is a "Non-notable computer application; lacks enough significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources for standalone article". I would like to challenge that assessment.

The computer application in question was notable enough, back on its day, to be shipped by default with some mainstream Linux distributions at the time (Kubuntu comes to my mind, but there were certainly others), and, consequently, it was not ignored by the specialized media. A quick search on the internet revealed abundant (though admittedly short) reviews on the tool in a variety of well-known specialized technical magazines/websites. For example:

* | Basket Note Pads: Open source replacement for Microsoft OneNote (TechRepublic)
* | A brief look at BasKet Note Pads (ars technica)

It was also commonly mentioned when reviewing or comparing note taking applications for GNU/Linux-based operating systems. For example, this article: | Introduction to QuickNote and Geeknote appearing on issue 147 (2013) of Linux Magazine, describes Basket Note Pads as a "popular application".

Even though Basket Note Pads can now largely be considered a discontinued computer application, the article contents remains of historical relevance and, consequently, I would like to place a request for undeletion of said article.

Thanks, Julian_herrera — Preceding undated comment added 19:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@Julian herrera: No problem as it was just a PROD deletion - Note: it has no references, and unless improved, is unlikely to survive. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones, thanks for your message regarding the above mentioned file. I have sent the document regarding license and right at the logo on July 7th to the respective email address. I assume, because the document is originally in German, there was some sort of mix-up and it wasn't associated with this file. I have sent it again just a few minutes ago, hoping it'll work this time.

Cheers, User:Tobias.goetz (T. Goetz 19:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC))

@User:Tobias.goetz. What a mess... If you write in German in often gets put into the German queue, and they really are looking at usage on de.wikipedia, not here. I found both the German one (07 Jul 2014 16:43) and the English one (10 Sept 2014 19:50). The one in German could not be read by the English readers, so they sent it to the German queue (as I guessed they would). The English one (now two I see - I've joined them together), is yet to be seen - I have added a note about the earlier German ticket number (it might cause havoc to merge these...!) and I've added the unprocessed ticket number to the file image page (and removed the speedy banner). You now have 30 days to ensure it's all OK. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@User:Ronhjones I know right... I didn't actually write in German, but the letter that releases the license from the original creator to my company is in German (we got the logo from one of those design websites). I was checking the image page and there was the following message stated: "An email has been received by the Volunteer Response Team (OTRS) concerning this file, and can be read as ticket 2014091010021308 by users with an OTRS account. However, the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this page/file. This may, among other reasons, be because there was no explicit release under a free license, or the email address that the permission came from is not associated with the location where the content was originally published. For an update on the issue, please contact the user who added this template to the page, or contact OTRS volunteers at their noticeboard." Can you recommend a way to deal with this situation?? Thanks. T. Goetz 21:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobias.goetz (talk • contribs)

I added the ticket number just to assist - I can't do the ticket as I never learnt German (and the attachment is in German). It's in the queue for action (there are 30 in the en-permission queue and you are about 5th - I would expect someone to look at it within a week (hopefully), but we will need a bi-lingual person to sort it out!). Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

This file is allowed on the en.wikipedia as fair use. It is used on an Infobox. It's also part of the logo used on the TripAdvisor page. There are similar internet boxes logos for eBay, Facebook, twitter, TouTube, Panoramio etc. I have corrected the metadata to show permitted use as Infobox and linked page. Thanks. SurreyJohn (talk) 08:51, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Fair use image can only be used in articles, they cannot be used on user pages. Hence File:TripAdvisor Logo.svg is just fine, but File:TripAdvisorLogo.jpg is not allowed. Both Facebook and Twitter userboxes, do not have fair use images as they are just text. Sorry, but that's the rules. If you find any userboxes with non-free images, let me know and I will tag them as well. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:40, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

UK Trademark law permits the use of logos, provided they are not misrepresented. Nor does the law distinguish between a user page and an article (the law is "black and white"), so I assume the rules are wrong. Anyway, I've learnt here that bureaucracy reigns supreme over reason (no offence meant), so I've updated the image to text only version. I assume this wont get deleted now!

@SurreyJohn: UK law may be OK, but you were using US Fair Use Law - it's not the same. WP servers are in Florida, fair use images have to abide by the Law there. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 16:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

TripAdvisor do provide free logos and widgets. Has anyone bothered to ask for permission? Their logo, or a widget to link to TripAdvisor would be nice! Shall I ask them? or let them provide something themselves?  SurreyJohn   (Talk) 16:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

That would be more sensible Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 16:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

{{Help me}} Hi ! I have gotten permission to use File:Janika Fabrikant.png by photographer Yvonne Böhler. She sent an Email granting permission to "permissions-en@wikimedia.org" on 16 Jul 2014. The image file has status deleted, and I cannot upload it again. I would like to show it on [[1]] in the Box on the right side. Thank you for your response. Ufdermuur (talk) 09:54, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Note that this has been posted on User talk:Sfan00 IMG so I've nulled the helpme template. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 10:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Zhaofeng Li: OTRS takes time, it's never done in a week (unless you are really lucky), so we allow 30 days - to get those 30 days one needs to add {{OTRS pending}} to the permission field - I've restored and added the template for you, but you need to sort out the permission - after much searching, I found the e-mail, no one has replied to the agent's e-mail reply of 04/08/2014 04:09 - unless that is done, it is will get deleted again. (NB:Since I've found the e-mail, I've changed the template to a "received but not approved" one. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:00, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ufdermuur: Pinging the right person... Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 14:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi.

I strongly think File:ClipBook Viewer screenshot.PNG's resolution is already low enough because it mainly consists of text and white space. At 375px, almost nothing is visible on an iPad.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 10:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It's almost 3 times the recommended size, and you already have it at 300px wide in the article. If you feel there is a real pressing need to have an oversized fair use (which most people probably won't see), then you should add such reasons to the Fair Use Rationale on the image page. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

We're talking about being barely visible here. 81% of the image is white space. If you are so sensitive about pixel count, I can crop the button half of the image.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sensitive - it's a guideline of 100,000 pixels - as a it's impossible to have a figure that covers every possibility. You can have more, you just need to ensure that your reasons for more, have been stated on the image page - otherwise someone else will add a reduce template, when you aren't looking. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I did add it to the rationale. The problem is that the person who adds the template or downsizes it does not even look.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 08:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Codename Lisa:. There is not much there that explains why you are using an image bigger than WP:Image resolution - I would suggest put a proper explanation in the "Minimality" field to explain that - a simple "no" in that field to give the default text is always likely to be ignored. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Im writing you about a page that I tried to create and you deleted. I am a fan of an artist and I would like to create a credit here for him. Can you please help me? This is the link of the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Arvanitidis

Thaks a lot.

Regards: Sofia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sofiadelig (talk • contribs) 16:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Sofiadelig: Creating new articles directly is next it impossible and any new user will not be successful IMO. We have plenty of other ways to create them, which are much less stressful. Therefore it's been restored as a draft at User:Sofiadelig/George Arvanitidis - you won't run the risk of endless deletion requests, while you improve the article. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 16:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones: Thanks a lot for your Message. Can I have please any suggestions about how can I improve my article and what I am doing wrong? Thanks a lot again.

@Sofiadelig: You need reliable references - IMDB, blogs, facebook are not reliable. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:13, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, re this edit - why remove the {{di-orphaned fair use|date=20 September 2014}} - the file isn't used anywhere, so fails WP:NFCCP#7. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:23, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Also this one - there is more than one frame, so it's not a screenshot - would {{non-free video sample}} have been better? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

You are quite right. I've refixed it - I fixed a load of images for this new user, all (well I thought all...) had a wrong license template at the top, which I removed and then fixed the licensing. obviously I got carried away in removing the first line... Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

And the other one, yes, sample is probably better than screenshot, and both are better than the original! Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ronhjones! I have read your notice on the file File:Glitch art - toast sandwich.jpg and I have begun the process of verifying permission by emailing permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Out of curiosity, since this Facebook post involves the active participants (the uploader and the artist) regarding the file, would this link suffice in granting permission based on Wikipedia's guidelines?--DrWho42 (talk) 01:30, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@DoctorWho42: Nope. It;s only "Shared with:Public" - not given away for full commercial re-use as all WP image are! The facebook page would need the magic "This images is released to CC-BY-SA-3.0" to be useful. I've changed the banner on the image - OTRS won't be done in 7 days! You now have 30 days. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 01:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones: Ah, thank you! Also: I made a mistake with crediting the right person's Wikipedia account. Their actual username is User:Aesthetic slime (despite going by Stella on FB). If a new email could be sent to the correct account, that would be great. Thanks again!--DrWho42 (talk) 03:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I think you should just give a move request for Mahidevran's article. Some users say she was a "Sultan" and the others like you say she was a "Hatun". So we should have a discussion about her title and then move the page. Keivan.f^Talk 06:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Keivan.f: It was claimed to be an uncontroversial move request by User:Retrieverlove - the redirect had to be deleted first by an admin to make way for the page move, as there was more than one edit in the history. The words in the edit summary (Mahidevran was never a Haseki Sultan or a Valide Sultan or an Ottoman princess) come from that user when they filled in the {{db-move}} template. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dr Ron Jones. With regards to the above image mark for deletion.File:WHO ebola response map.jpg. I have forwarded the E-mail from World Health Organization to use this file to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Permission was granted. This image is of pertinent importance to the "Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa" on Wikipedia. I have also submitted subsequent requested reuses of other files. World Health Organization WHO response is unfortunately slow, but understandable given the tremendous amount of work they are dealing with on the current crisis of this epidemic. Responses take about two weeks. This image was uploaded by --Monochrome_Monitor Kind Regards BrianGroen (talk) 08:29, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Templates changed on image to give you the allowed 30 days to get OTRS permission sorted. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting my images without giving me a chance to prove fair usage, dipshit.

I can understand the nomination for speedy deletion. I can understand why it was thought the images' copyright was infringed on. But I cannot understand why the images were deleted without giving me time to write my fair use rationale.

I was so happy to see the pictures I uploaded on the articles. One of them replaced a much-outdated photo. I literally cried when you deleted them.

Good job at making a girl cry, you jerk. Way to go.

By the way, I don't care if I get suspended or deleted for calling you jerk and dipshit. I'll just make a new account.

--Kaystar20 (talk) 21:24, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kaystar20: You can say what you like - but they were copyright violations - we never wait. Also they are of living people, you cannot have fair use images of a living person (it will get deleted as "replaceable"), I also note one is a Getty Image - you can't use commercial agency images as fair use, except if there is some very critical commentary about that image. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:35, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones:I understand that, but the speedy deletion said it would wait for seven days. For me it was about seven minutes. Why is that? --Kaystar20 (talk) 21:40, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kaystar20:The pages had two speedies - here's one of the pages...

{{db-imgcopyvio|url=http://www.zimbio.com/photos/G.+Hannelius/Muppets+Most+Wanted+Premieres+Hollywood+Part/jBNKWAr8Vw-}}
{{di-no license|date=21 September 2014}}

The second line is a pseudo speedy and gives you 7 days WP:CSD#F4 (hence the date parameter), but the first line is a copyright violation and gives you zero time WP:CSD#F9. They were added by different editors. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones:Okay, I understand that. However, the page that had the second line did not give me seven days. It was deleted even quicker than the first one. Any reason why? --Kaystar20 (talk) 21:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Kaystar20: - had there only been a di-no license template, then it would have come up for deletion on the 28th, but the F9 overrides that, we don't allow images tagged with F9 to last very long - otherwise the Foundation can end up with DCMA takedown notices. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I have a question regarding the classification Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files for a number of pictures I uploaded yesterday. I took these pictures at the Luftfahrt-Museum Laatzen-Hannover with the consent of the Museum. Why are they considered unfree? I took them and the museum allowed me to take them. Please advise MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It's German law. Without explicit permission from the copyright owners, then we have to use the Freedom of Panorama rules in that country. In the case of Germany - the objects must be in a full public place and permanant.; A German museum interior is unlikely to be regarded as a public place (as far as I know degree of FoP that is only in the UK), and such a display will be moved, changed, from time to time - so not permanent. If you have/can get proper permission - then the procedure at WP:DCM is to be followed. Do note that while places will often allow taking of pictures, as soon as one asks for copyright release to allow full commercial re-use, then they tend to go rather cold... Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 14:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I posted a question regarding your interpretation here. Two editors interpret the German law differently, referring to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Germany. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, i would like to ask why you have deleted this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinjer . There was said it has no significance or so. I have to say, I dont understand it. I am pretty new to this Wiki community and that page wasnt just made up for nothing, Jinjer is a real band from Ukraine, which starts its European tour in a month. I was asked by them to help them with this wiki page, so did I. Please recover it, or explain to me whats worng. I can verify it even more if thats the problem. For example look at their official website http://jinjer-official.com/. Thanks a lot.

Mattto888 (talk) 09:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)Mattto888

Wikipedia only shows data that has been previously published elsewhere in releiable sources. Every fact should have an in-line reference to show where that item of data can be verified. With no references - the article is doomed. Any data that has no inline reference is caled "original research, and can be rapidly removed by any editor - see WP:OR. References can include "official" pages of the band, but they don't count as reliable - as they are self-published. I could restore as a contested PROD, but it won't last 7 days. In such a case I usually restore as a draft. New users always struggle with creating articles - and if you create it direct, then you will never know the policies needed to keep a page. Page is now at User:Mattto888/Jinjer, I've added a welcome template with lots of policies to your talk page - also look at WP:BAND to see what is required to keep a article about a band. I suggest you use the review process when you have finished (I've added a banner with a link to put the article in the review queue when you are ready)) Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

i have permission from the copyright owner, Jimmy Choo Ltd to use this image. Any email was sent from the company to the permissions email address you gave this morning. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophie Blythe1981 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Banner has been changed to {{OTRS pending}} to give you the allowed 30 days to get OTRS to approve the permission. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

It appears to me that the pages User:Biologychemistry and User:Biologyphysics are improper as self-promotion or worse. Because they are user pages, I am not sure whether they may be tagged for speedy deletion or otherwise be proposed for deletion. Assuming they are still in place when you read this message, I ask that you look at them and advise whether anything can or should be done about them or whether they must remain as is because they are user pages. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 10:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

They have both gone - Speedy Delete WP:CSD#U5 nicely covers such abuse of a primary user page. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I will make note of the proper tag. Donner60 (talk) 21:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, my name is Adam, to start thanks for helping administer this great site, I thoroughly enjoy its collaboration and information sourcing. I'm objecting to the deletion of the site at

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Gandino-Saadein_(Entrepreneur)

due to personal support and belief in its relevance. Let me know if there is any problems or concerns regarding the restoration of this site, thanks.

Adam.p.broker (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Adam.p.broker: Restored as a contested PROD - you might want to consider moving it to become a draft article like User:Adam.p.broker/Justin_Gandino-Saadein_(Entrepreneur) for improvement, otherwise it may get a full deletion request now that PROD has been contested. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones: I agree and would like to move it to become a draft article for improvement and seasoning, though without it using my user namespace, simply with the draft namespace. I know it can be done directly before the article is published, but I am unsure how to do the action myself now that its published and contested. The article page allows any user to move it I believe so any help or advice is deeply appreciated. Adam.p.broker (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Adam.p.broker: Oh, dear. The plot thickens. I've found two almost identical versions. It appears that User:Melpon (blocked as a WP:sock) had done a cut and paste move in August from Justin Gandino-Saadein to Justin Gandino-Saadein (Entrepreneur), and these two pages then kept being a redirect to the other for a while... I've just spent quite a while merging the two pages back together again (it's not easy!) So there now is one article at Justin Gandino-Saadein containing all the edits - that is now the page up for deletion. I cannot make it a draft anywhere at present as the creator is still active (User:Worthywords) and he should have first call, you can either ask him if he is happy for you to move the page to Draft, or wait until it gets deleted and then you can ask me to restore it to Draft. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones: My goodness, sorry for the mess I accidentally led to your door. I suppose letting it be deleted is the best option for now and try to fix it later on if its worth the time and effort. Thanks for taking the time to make the muddled situation a bit clearer though, its appreciated! Adam.p.broker (talk) 00:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Dear Ronhjones, since the date you protected the Ancient Macedonia article, the editwar has migrated to Alexander the Great. This user who edits in wikipedia openly to promote his radical POV that Republic of Macedonia should annex all Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian Regions of Macedonia (proven in his profile that promotes the radical terrorist United Macedonia concept) has been constantly reverting Alexander the Great from its stable format. Please also note that apart from stable, the current format is a result of consensus reached in February 2014. I look forward to your advice ? Stevepeterson (talk) 07:45, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

View its history, it was added by convicted editor Gtrbolivar. It is the same way consensus was reached on the Ancient Macedon article in 2009, and Stevepeterson considers that consensus void. Double Standards. It has nothing to do with annexation of the regions of Macedonia. It has to do with maintaining neutrality, not censoring or pushing a POV. Macedonia (talk)

Also, i do not know how it constitutes 'edit-warring', I have only reverted once. The editor should be blocked because of his perceived slights and his disruptions. Macedonia (talk) 07:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Nowhere near enough reverts for edit warring. Either of you could request dispute resolution if you think there is a problem. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Please undelete page about Eritrean singer Dehab Faytinga. There is sufficient evidence of notability as a musicician and singer, as she has released two records under the French record label Cobalt, "Numey" in 2000 and "Eritrea" in 2003. In addition she is featured in the "World Divas" CD released by Wagram Records in 2006 and in the "Asmara All Stars - Eritrea's Got Soul" CD released by Out Here Records in 2010. She released the single "Sebaki fkri" in June 2014 (<https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/numey/id139707461>, <https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/eritrea/id139704383?i=139705233&ign-mpt=uo%3D4>). See also following articles from the French newspaper Libération (<http://www.liberation.fr/culture/2002/07/23/faytinga-porte-voix-de-la-guerilla_410939>), the news magazine Jeune Afrique (<http://www.jeuneafrique.com/Article/LIN25014lacharefeds0/>) and the review of her record "Numey" by William Bain of World Music Central (<http://worldmusiccentral.org/2013/06/03/distinctive-performance-by-eritreas-faytinga/>). --Mathiotdom (talk) 07:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

I am new to Wikipedia, and would like to recreate my page on "Sabrina Dickens" supplying the correct information. At the time I was unsure how creating an article worked, but I would very much like to redo the article from scratch.

Many Thanks,

Sabrina Dickens BriD1988 (talk) 10:51, 26 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BriD1988 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

If I just restored it, it would not survive a proper deletion, it needs improving. So I've restored it as a draft for you at User:BriD1988/Sabrina Dickens. When you have finished, you can use the link in the banner to get a proper review with fear of deletions. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:54, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones,

last 2 weeks I was busy & couldn't go through my files. The above file had been deleted. The below 2 cameras belong to me. Therefore pl. be kind enough to upload teh file as the photographs were taken by me & they belong to me.

1/ Canon PowerShot A580

2/ Nikon (COOLPIX S3400)

Thank you.

Monarawila

Monarawila (talk) 05:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

@Monarawila: The file is on commons (c:File:Mano Wijeyeratne's and his Daughter Varnusha's gravesite in Meeduma, Rambukkana..jpg), not here. I can sort it out for you - it was deleted as there was no license given. All files must have a valid license - usually from this list Wikipedia:File_copyright_tags/All#Creative_Commons and the normal one is {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. If that license is acceptable (or pick another), then let me know and I will sort out the file. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 12:04, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones,

Thank you for your prompt reply.I uploaded file(File:Mano Wijeyeratne's and his Daughter Varnusha's gravesite in Meeduma, Rambukkana..jpg) with the license in proper way.Can you see to it upload it back, pl. Sorry for the trouble.

Monarawila

Monarawila (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

@Monarawila: I've restored it - you removed the license (actually you had 2!) in the second edit - I think you got a bit mixed up with the format - which is slightly different on commons as it's multi language. I've copied the cc-by-sa-3.0 line from the first edit and restored the proper multi language headings. I've also removed the double dot in the file name so the image is now File:Mano Wijeyeratne's and his Daughter Varnusha's gravesite in Meeduma, Rambukkana.jpg. Do check that it's as you want it. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 17:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Do note that pictures of artwork taken in Sri Lanka cannot be published without the consent of the person that made them - I suspect those two memorials may be considered too "boxy" to be artwork - it's always possible someone might have a different view. See c:Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Sri_Lanka Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 17:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones,

I greatly appreciate & thank you for your quick & prompt attention extended to me on this regard.

Thanking You once again,

Yours Sincerely,

Monarawila

Monarawila (talk) 19:07, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You just deleted a file with this name on Wikipedia per WP:CSD#F11. There is a file on Commons with the same name. Is that the same file, and does that one have the same problem? --Stefan2 (talk) 22:15, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Also note that the EXIF of the Commons file indicates who the photographer is. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

@Stefan2: Looks the same to me - feel free to tag. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:22, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ron. Please could you restore three files that were deleted in August:

• File:Derek Richter, neuropsychiatrist.jpg
• File:Bath Cabinet Makers factory.jpg
• File:Richter table 1.jpg

The permission to use them has been received with ticket:2014092410011374. When they have been restored I will move them to Commons. Thank you in advance. Green Giant (talk) 23:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

@Green Giant:   Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the rapid response. Green Giant (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Um, excuse me, maybe you did not notice this but the Vivian James image you deleted was the subject of a non-free content review discussion and there were quite a few people who argued that it met the NFCC. Given that your deletion seemed to be a batch action it does not seem that you reviewed the discussion and you certainly did not say anything on that page.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 03:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

As a note, I see that the image had a di- tag (what triggered your CSD F7) in addition to the non-free review tag. In reality, when that was tagged with non-free review, the di- tag should have been removed so that it wouldn't have entered the CSD queue while NFCR discussion was going on. From purely a technical process aspect I would recommend undeleting the image (and removing that pending di- tag) so that the NFCR can finish properly. --MASEM (t) 15:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

If I recall properly, I removed the tag when the review discussion started, but another user restored it. As I understand speedy deletion, it should be used only for uncontested deletions, so the tag should have not been restored, and the file should have not been deleted under F7. Diego (talk) 16:29, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Images often have more than one deletion banner - It was reviewed as the time had passed for the {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} and had come up in the backlogged category. There was nothing on the talk page that referred to that deletion claim - just a silly claim that there was no copyright, and as we all know full copyright exists from the moment of creation of such an image. FWIW, although it was a batch deletion, every picture is individually loaded up in its own tab with linky and checked for suitability one by one - the subsequent batch deletion process has the advantage of de-linking the image's use in articles, which would take a considerable amount of time to do manually. I see the review has now been closed. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 16:39, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you please undelete the image? The review was closed merely because you deleted it, without analyzing the validity of the deletion. Diego (talk) 16:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

OK, but you'll have to re-open the review. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 16:46, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing to inquire about the deletion of the Charlotte Kate Fox deletion. I am attempting to rebuild the page and i'd be interested in knowing what was behind the decision to delete it in order to avoid this problem in the future. Thank you. Macparker27 (talk) 02:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Good morning Macparker. I am not Ronhjones, but if I were pretending to be him on this fine morning, I would have gone to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Kate_Fox and I would have observed that the article was deleted because it was a biography of a living person that did not cite any references or sources. Such things are not permitted on Wikipedia, and you can get a better idea about what should be included in your first article at WP:YFA. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 06:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

@Macparker: Well said... Also as it is a BLP without a reference, I cannot restore it back to main article space. If you wish you can have it userfied as a draft in you user space to allow you to continue working on it - (FWIW, creating articles direct, unless you are very experienced, is almost impossible, you will fall foul of some policy). I see you put a stub marker on it, stubs are not what they used to be - most get deleted nowadays. Articles really need to be able to stand on their merits from day 1 - hence don't create direct, use a user sub-page or go direct to WP:AfC. If you want it back as a sub page then let me know. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you move Justin Britt (offensive tackle) to just Justin Britt now that the other one is deleted?--Yankees10 19:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--Yankees10 19:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronh. A while ago I asked for help regarding a video for the BabyFirst page that would show clips from the show (copyrighted) so readers could "see" the programming being described in the article. They just sent me the file (in mp4 format). I was wondering if I could email you the file and you could tell me if it is appropriate for the page? If it seems encyclopedic and appropriate, I can work on getting it converted and whatnot. CorporateM (Talk) 21:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

You can e-mail me if you like. Have you my address - if not you will have to e-mail me for it, as I don't think the WP e-mail will allow attachments. I assume we are going for non-free. You will obviously need a WP:FURG and {{Non-free video sample}}. There's very few video samples - I don't see an MoS for them - suggest view WP:SAMPLE as a rough guide. Keep picture size under 100,000 pixels (I guess 250x400 or thereabouts), and under 30 seconds would be ideal. Also check Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Non-free_video_sample to see if there are any similar cases one can use as a "template" Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear User:Ronhjones. Thank you for your review of several photos that I uploaded. There were others in that set, but these apparently haven't been reviewed yet or the reviewer found the permissions. You mistakenly noted there was a file permission problem with the following images:

• File:Theta Triton Chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa, at Texas, Nov 1950, The Signet, Vol XLII, no 4, p446.jpg
• File:Pi Deuteron Chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa at Ohio State, March 1950, The Signet, vol XLII, No 2, p.122.jpg
• File:Pi Chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa at Franklin & Marshall, sm, The Signet, Mar 1943, vol.XXXV, No.2, p.103.jpg

Permission to use these was forwarded to permissions-en@wikipedia.org on Wed, 01 October, 2014 at 10:55 am CST by owner Michael Carey. Please review the permissions logs to affirm what I have explained here, and remove the deletion notifications. Thank you.Jax MN (talk) 22:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

The image page said they had been sent on 22 July 2014‎ - not 2.5 months later. It won't do. It takes OTRS up to 30 days to process a permission, hence the need to send in at the time. I'll see if I can see an e-mail. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:22, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes. That's when I requested it, and the fraternal group took an unchacteristically long time to send the approvals, unlike many previous requests for many other photos I have uploaded. Still, the permission has been logged. Thank you for suggesting you will go back to look for this. I have a copy if you wish me to forward it directly. Meanwhile, you have cited a lack of permission on additional photos from that same set of photos, taking up your time and mine. I await the correction. Am I obligated to note each error? Or will you review this entire set for which permission has been granted, and revise your entries? Here are a few more:

• File:Phi_Chapter_of_Phi_Sigma_Kappa_at_Swarthmore,_The_Signet,_Jan_1944,_vol.XXXVI,_No.1,_p.7.jpg
• File:Omicron_Triton_Chapter_of_Phi_Sigma_Kappa_at_UC_Davis,_May_1949,_The_Signet,_vol_XLI,_No.3,_p.309.jpg
• File:Nu Triton chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa, Hartwick, Nov 1948, The Signet, vol XXXX, no.4, p529.jpg

Please note when this set of photos is properly recorded for permissions. BTW, your Talk page suggests you are offline. Thank you. Jax MN (talk) 22:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jax MN: Found e-mail - processed it for you - bit of a queue jump :-) Done 11 images that were in e-mail. "Pseudo off-line" as I'm on OTRS at present, just popping in for a quick "no permission" from time to time. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:38, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ron, Thank you for your message! I wanted to let you know I emailed the signed photo release on August 13, 2014 and I resent it again today after getting your message. Let me know if you have any other questions!

All the best, Penny — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.233.232.85 (talk) 23:33, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Replied in OTRS Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, we've received an email in OTRS about that image and I was wondering if you could restore it with the tag {{OTRS pending}}. The relevant ticket is ticket:2014092310031176 if you'd like another OTRS member to verify. —Mikemoral♪♫ 07:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Quick note, {{Non-free with permission}} might be permissible here if a proper fair use rationale can be written and is appropriate (e.g., {{Non-free use rationale biog}}), however, it's best to wait for a reply. Permission was granted for use on Wikipedia only, but if they will license under a CC/GFDL license, then it may be less of an issue. —Mikemoral♪♫ 07:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

It already had a {{OTRS received}} on it - the ticket number is 2014062010013161 - I suggest you merge the tickets (they didn't answer the first ticket either - the reply was sent to them at 29/06/2014 12:42). We can't leave images up for waiting for no replies, I gave it over 60 days and then gave them a 7 day warning at the end, and still nothing. It's obvious the deletion has prompted them not to reply to the questions, but to try to slip it through again, hoping they will get a different agent (which they did). Once the OTRS ticket is approved (if it ever is) then we can undelete. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I've merged the tickets. It seems the ticket I looked at was the response almost three months later. If there ever is sufficient and legitimate permission granted, I'll let you know. —Mikemoral♪♫ 08:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Ron, RE: File permission problem with File:Charles Robert Moore - Texas Methodist minister.jpg

I am reaching out to the photographer, a friend of Moore's family. Is it sufficient for the person to send an email saying something like, 'I took it, I own it, and yes you may use it.'  ? This has been published by many papers because the family forwarded it to news outlets on the event of Moore's death.

Could you please allow a bit more than 7 days? It may take a little time to get the photographer's reply.

Thanks!

Mark Coats, Austin TX, mbcoats@gmail.com
Mbcoats (talk) 01:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

You need the form at WP:CONSENT - the e-mail address is there. If it does get deleted before then, then when the consent form is approved it will be undeleted. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:12, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ron, I thought I had responded to your concern on File:Arthur Tonkin 1947 jpg.jpg. The pic was first published in Australia before 1955 and accordingly is in PD. I had attached that same PD rationale when I uploaded it back in 2009. It's a shame it's gone as of the many old (pre55) Australian rugby pics I've uploaded under the valid Aust PD rationale, it was about the only one that was in colour. What exactly was the problem ? Rdgs -Sticks66 12:07, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

It all down to the US laws - it was tagged with the following text... This work is not in the public domain in the United States because its copyright in the U.S. was restored by the URAA as it was still copyrighted in its source country on the URAA date (January 1, 1996 in most cases). It is therefore still copyrighted in the U.S. until 95 years after the year it was initially published (or until 2047 in some circumstances). - because the template got correctly modified to be {{PD-Australia|restored}}. Therefore it becomes non-free, and there was no non-free rationale to go with it. If you want to try for a full non-free image (and it's small enough for that, and the person is deceased - then let me know and I will restore it as non-free (and you can polish up the rationale after restore). Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ron,

On Oct 2 you requested documentation that the .jpg in question that the creator, in this Joe A. Taylor, have given permission for the article to be used in Wikipedia and committed to the public domain. Below is a full quote of the email exchange wherein I thought I had followed Wikipedia protocol in providing authorization from the creator with notification from Wikipedia: "Dear Daniel Schag,

Your permission has been accepted. I have made the necessary modifications to the file page.

Thank you for your contribution to the Wikimedia projects.

Yours sincerely, Utkarsh Atmaram

-- Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/ --- Disclaimer: all mail to this address is answered by volunteers, and responses are not to be considered an official statement of the Wikimedia Foundation. For official correspondence, please contact the Wikimedia Foundation by certified mail at the address listed on https://www.wikimediafoundation.org/

08/05/2014 19:35 - Daniel Schag wrote:

> Dear Utkarsh Atmaram, > > > > Please see highlighted text below from the owner of the picture > granting it to the commons in the exact words you suggested. > > > > Best, > > > > Dan > > > > > > *From:* Tile Heritage Foundation [2] > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 05, 2014 12:21 PM > *To:* Daniel Schag > *Subject:* MCW team 3 > > > > Dan, > > The image “MCW team 3” belongs to the Tile Heritage Foundation. > > Credit line: Courtesy Tile Heritage Foundation. > > Photographer Joseph A. Taylor. > > > > As president of the Tile Heritage Foundation, I grant you, Daniel > Schag, the right to use this image “MCW team 3” in Wikipedia for your > entry on Malibu Tile. > > I agree to publish this work under the Creative Commons > Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. > > > > Hope this works. > > > > > > Joseph A. Taylor Dschag (talk) 14:27, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

One can apply for permission before or after one uploads an image. In the case of OTRS Ticket 2014072810015447 (assuming that's the one you mean - you did not say the ticket number) - there is permission for an image called “MCW team 3”. The permission was approved, and as that name wasn't present on the system, would be applied when File:MCW team 3.jpg is uploaded. There is certainly nothing in that e-mail trail that refers to File:Matt, Roz and Bob Harris principals of Malibu Ceramic Works.jpg. As the attached image in the e-mail is noticeably smaller and the name is incorrect, I will have to reply in OTRS for you to affirm that File:Matt, Roz and Bob Harris principals of Malibu Ceramic Works.jpg is the image your are releasing copyright. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I would like to know why have you deleted the Absinthe Green (artist) page from wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Absinthe_Green&action=edit&redlink=1 It is a legitimate page of a legitimate artist , and the page was first created by the management of the aforementioned artist There is sufficient evidence of notability as a musician (quotes, official sources, discography and Absinthe Green's official pages) Can you please undelete the page? Subz3rofgreen (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, but it's unlikely to survive in it's present state. Official sources are effectively self-published and don't count here. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Reasons for deletion can be seen in the previous version here Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Our image has disappeared! 104.32.127.58 (talk) 01:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

We have given you every form of fair rights usage information known to mankind. You have destroyed our page by removing our image. This has GOT to stop. The community of Playa del Rey DEMANDS that you put our image back and fix the damage you've done with Facebook

I hereby affirm that [I represent Mike Izzo (copied), ] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [attached images/text]. I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. Thomas Lee McMahon (aka Moye Wicks) Appointed representative of Mike Izzo (copied) 2014-10-02 MoyeWicks (talk) 02:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

1. Which image? - I've deleted around 30,000...
2. Facebook is not part of the Foundation, we have no control over what they show.
3. As you noted in your last sentence "...and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project". We cannot guarantee images will stay.

Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

I just noticed that our page was deleted on July 25, 2014. Please refer to the entry found below.

01:14, 25 July 2014 Ronhjones (talk | contribs) deleted page Davis LLP (Expired PROD, concern was: No indication of notability, no reliable independent sources, nothing found via Google, was tagged for years without improvement.)

I'm curious to find out who proposed for deletion?

Thank you kindly, 99.232.113.9 (talk) 12:50, 4 October 2014 (UTC)Anh Huynh

Proposed by User:Huon giving the reasons stated Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

See also User talk:Davisllp where User:Davisllp (blocked for a violation of the username policy) asked for the page to be deleted. Huon (talk) 23:30, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I am the owner of that image! I took a screenshot photo of it! That's it! Ikhtiar H (talk) 07:40, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ikhtiar: No you are not. Taking a photograph does not transfer the copyright of the image - it belongs to Supercell as the designers of the game - they designed it, they have the copyright. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:53, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Kiwibaro (talk) 21:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)) Hi! I am puzzled as I replied to your notice both on the page you generated about the issue of permission and I forwarded an email from Bratsa to permissions-en@wikimedia.org <permissions-en@wikimedia.org> on Sept. 24, 2014. Here's the text

Here's the permission from Brats:

From: Bonifacho To: Maryse de la Giroday Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 5:02 PM Subject: Permission to use Scripsi

I, Bratsa Bonifacho, give permission for my painting Scripsi to be in my Wikipedia entry and am giving permission for reuse under a Creative Commons Share Alike licence: ( CC-BY-SA).

________________________________________

Bratsa Bonifacho, Artist T 604-254-1405, F 604-254-1314, Toll Free 1-877-254-1405 www.bonifacho-art.com ________________________________________

What more can I do?

Kiwibaro (talk) 21:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC) Sincerely, Kiwibaro

PS Note sure I'll be find my way back onto this page.

@Kiwibaro: A message was received at OTRS at 26/05/2014 22:39. It was read and replied at 27/05/2014 05:30, and at which time a simple "OTRS received" notice was applied to the image. The e-mail reply asked a couple of questions (and an answer is needed before the full OTRS ticket can be applied), and so far no-one has bothered to answer them. If the sender of the e-mail did not get the reply, I can get it re-sent. Once the questions have been answered satisfactory, then the image can be undeleted. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:22, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Ron, I do not understand what you mean by OTRS and questions ... as far as I'm aware I received nothing through that system ... I have received permission from the artist which was sent on to permissions-en@wikimedia.org <permissions-en@wikimedia.org> on Sept. 24, 2014. This is an option that was offered in the instructions included with your Sept. 23, 2014 notice. Isn't the issue permission? If necessary, I will of course struggle with this OTRS thing. Where is it & how do I get there? 24.86.50.197 (talk) 17:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Kiwibaro: All e-mails sent to the foundation with either "info" or "permission" at the start of the address are not read by the Foundation, they are handled by WP:OTRS agents (I am also one of those). So on the 27th May an agent added an {{OTRS received}} banner to the image - this shows that an e-mail message was received and there was some problem to be resolved and a reply was sent out. There is then a 30 day period to get the file permission sorted. After 60+ days, with no answer we had to assume the e-mailer is not bothered and it gets deleted. The e-mail was received at 26/05/2014 22:39 and the reply was sent at 27/05/2014 05:30 - if the copyright holder did not get the reply, I can re-send it and hopefully we can sort it out. - I've found another message (from yourself?) at 24/09/2014 20:48, I'll reply to that, and maybe we can more forward. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

"Rugby union in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (Expired PROD, concern was: two pages exist. this page is outdated)" - Thanks for this. Good as ever to see Wikipedia expand its coverage.-MacRùsgail (talk) 15:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

There is a much better page at Saint Vincent and the Grenadines national rugby union team Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:47, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

That is about the national team, not the sport in general in the country, which is slightly different.--MacRùsgail (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi can you please restore this photo? The permission email has been sent multiple times. It should have been moved to wikipedia commons months and months ago. I do not know how to do that. Double check permissions as I have asked the photographer to send it twice in the last few months. Thanks so much! Artthings (talk) 19:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

There is one ticket in OTRS (2014052310018091) - about this image. Received 23/05/2014 20:08, replied 27/05/2014 10:24, acknowledged back 27/05/2014 14:25, and nothing received since. I have also searched for Michael Rababy (as it says that on the image page), and his e-mail address as seen in the ticket - there are no other messages from him about this image. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:55, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Ronhjones, an email containing the licence agreement was sent to permissions@wikimedia.org from the copyright holder since August 4th 2014. I am 99% certain it was sent because I was also copied to the mail. Is there something wrong with Wikipedia email account? Darreg (talk) 23:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

The e-mail was received and replied at Ticket (2014080410007838) 04/08/2014 14:19. The person the e-mail was sent to failed to answer the questions raised by the OTRS agent - until he replies with those answers we can do no more. I had great difficulty in finding the ticket as no-one had put the image url in the e-mail - you can't search for an image when the name is not there. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Since the email has gotten to WP, I do not understand why there is still a challenge here. I can verify that the email used in sending the image is 100% genuine (yes I know this is not equivalent to ownership of license; since My picture!=My Copyright). After my explanations (in early August to the copyright holder) on WP image copyright policies, the sender of the email told me (via mail) that the image was captured with his device and it was not used by any modelling agency. I personally think we should assume good faith, since there is no reason why we should deem his words as untrue. I can even send you proof of our conversation off wiki (I don't even think that should be necessary). I have added images in the past and the OTRS agent did not ask any questions but only verified that the image was copyright compliant, why is this case different?Darreg (talk) 21:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

It's not my ticket - you'll have to discuss with the OTRS agent - we cannot discuss a private e-mail here. FWIW, I would have raised the same issues as (s)he has. Remember free images will be moved to commons, and they are very experienced and critical on such images - they will instantly raise questions. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:05, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

in the history of the file uploading he identified he was the author and the copyright. I clarified the copyright with the template. He was a novice user with a lot of frustration at the way things are done in wikipedia and left. I tried to smooth things but it didn't go well. This deletion is another example of the troubled path of trying to work in wikipedia.--Smkolins (talk) 22:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The early edits just say

Created by Duane Troxel. 
Not under copyright

There's not a single edit that has enough information to allow it to stay. The upload Wizard would have made a better job than that - I suspect he's used the old basic upload form, which probably means he is not really a new editor. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Just remembered looking at image - there are 7 images on that image - each one needs a source (and license). Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

This is why I warn anyone trying to load pictures. It's often fraught with layers of both syntax and administrative processes. And if everything isn't obvious and right it's deleted. There may well be many good reasons all this exists and keeping things clear of lots of mistakes. Yet even good attempts - yes needing citations - also get deleted just as easily. There are very few cases where someone is helped along. --Smkolins (talk) 01:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Far too many images are uploaded that violate copyright, people copy them from all over the internet and hundreds of images are deleted every day! The copyright laws are very complex - it's easy for text, you read something and re-write it in your own words - of course, that doesn't work for images. Any one experienced in images is always willing to help if asked, but few do. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:12, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I have forwarded the owner's written consent in using his photo of "Rabbi Yosef Qafih in his Private Study" on Wikipedia, (written to me in an e-mail), to the Wikipedia "Permissions." - Davidbena (talk) 01:08, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

@Davidbena: (Just caught me before bed!) Changed banner of File:Rabbi Yosef Qafih in his Private Study.jpg to an {{OTRS pending}} - allows 30 days to get permission approved. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 01:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ron, you recently worked with me on an issue where I asked to confirm my identity.. I just wanted to inform you of a RFC which has been opened in case you were interested in keeping up on the matter. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/redundant-nudity-controversy#Discussion%7CWikimedia Thanks David Condrey (talk) 07:17, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Good luck. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but why was Predrag Radovanović deleted? FkpCascais (talk) 23:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@FkpCascais: Unsourced BLP - The article is about a living person and appears to have no references. All biographies of living people created after March 2010 must have at least one reference to a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks. Can you point me where the discussion of the deletion was? Because I can easily source the article and he passes by far notability, so I can ask to recreate the article and I´ll add the sources. FkpCascais (talk) 23:58, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@FkpCascais: There is no discussion for a WP:BLPPROD - the article is tagged for 7 days and if no refs are added, it goes. PRODed articles can be restored on request - but I can only restore to a draft sub-page under your user name or to Draft space as there are no refs. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, if you can restore it to my user space it would be great. I see it wasn´t listed at WP:FOOTY where it should have been, so that is why I missed it. Many thanks. FkpCascais (talk) 02:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

@FkpCascais: It's all yours at User:FkpCascais/Predrag Radovanović - PRODs do not get listed at Wikiprojects (I don't know why not). It is recommend (but not compulsory) to notify the creator. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:38, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh, now I see what happend. There was a minor confusion. The deleted article came to my atention at the watchlist because you removed the links from several articles. So I assumed the article was the one intended to be in place in those places (about a pre-WWII Yugoslav international footballer). However now I see that there is a young basketball player with the same name who´s article was created, and seems rightfully deleted. I will just reeplace the content with the notable footballer. Many thanks! Best regards, FkpCascais (talk) 02:28, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

@FkpCascais:Ah, all clear now! - To be consistent, I've deleted all the basketball edits - see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Predrag_Radovanovi%C4%87&action=history - so you are now the creator. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 12:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ron, you left me a message regarding a photo I have uploaded. The photo is released under CC 3.0, but it's not properly documented, it was communicated to me via a third party. I will need to track down the author directly to get a an official written permission via E-mail that I can forward to the foundation. What is the proper tag to add to the photo while I get this cleared up? It will take a few days to a couple of weeks to get the E-mail. Thanks. AxelKratel (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Banner removed as you have the OTRS pending - see WP:DCM and form at WP:CONSENT. You have 30 days at least to get permission, but OTRS is not instant! We can always undelete (nothing is ever really deleted) at a click of a mouse if permission arrives late. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

The author has given permission, E-mail has been sent from both me and directly from the author of the picture. How will I be informed when this has been processed so that the pending notice can be removed? AxelKratel (talk) 16:41, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

THe OTRS agents will reply by e-mail. If they approve the permission, they will amend the image page and change the {{OTRS pending}} to a {{Permission OTRS}} ticket. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:56, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Why did you delete this article after a source was added? 89.144.194.122 (talk) 19:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

No in-line sources added as required for a BLP - just external links. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you please bring back the article? I will create in-line sources. Many thanks! 84.112.209.138 (talk) 21:30, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

You'll find it at Draft:Hubert Berchtold Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks! I have just added in-line sources, I hope they are ok now? If they are ok, I would also like to do the same for Fabio Violetti. Can you please also bring back this article? 84.112.209.138 (talk) 14:30, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

All yours - Draft:Fabio Violetti Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:15, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you for the notice! My first screenshot added to a page Billboard K-Town. Has the image already been resized automatically by a Robot, and do I need to make some changes, or do something more? I wish to keep the image upload in my User name (you know how we newbies are so proud of everything we do!) Thank you!--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 17:43, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bonnielou2013: You can reduce it yourself (Theo's Little Bot has not been there yet). You will always be the creator, and your name will always be against the first upload. It's 1,028 × 866 = 890248 pixels, if you want to reduce it, I would suggest around 350 x 294 - just upload using the "Upload a new version of this file" link on that page, and change {{non-free reduce}} to {{non-free reduced}}. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:08, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Wikipedia's maneuverings are still as clear as mud to me...I should have read the correct submission size in the first place! It's easier going with helpful, easy-going editors like you! Thanks Ron!--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 22:21, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bonnielou2013:The sizing is explained at Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Image_resolution - not many people find it! Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:47, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Could you please explain why you classified File:Krista Ford, business student and former captain of the Toronto Triumph, of the Lingerie Football League.jpg as noncompliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria?

You are aware that the image has been the target of unexplained removal from the article in question? Geo Swan (talk) 00:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

It was tagged by User:Stefan2 with {{di-replaceable fair use|date=3 October 2014}} - it's virtually impossible to have a non free image of a living person. If there is a special need, then there must be critical commentary associated with the image. A non free image of a living person in an infobox will never work. I don't review the previous edits of an article - just the image and the deletion rationale. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones,

• Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dinesh_Weerawansa.jpg

The owner of the above photograph had given his copyrights for me & he had sent an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org kindly request to see to it please.

Thanking You,

Anuradha

අනුරාධ (talk) 05:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I see e-mails from yourself and the "owner" - the "owner" never replied to the questions from the OTRS agent sent at 06/09/2014 00:54. Hence no permission ticket has been granted. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:43, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

After your help on the last image, I found that I needed to reduce the size of another image that I recently uploaded for Non-Summit. I also made a correction on the source, which editors had tagged. Could you please look to see if everything is OK now? I'm trying! Thanks again,--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 16:27, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Latest upload looks well small enough. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Is it possible for you to review/approve both the image size and tag on license or discuss what I need to do more? I do not see an editor or administrator associated with the tag to communicate with.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 23:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

You have the WP:FURG, the non-free license, and an image of <100,000 pixels. That all one needs - note it always possible that someone takes a free image (maybe someone with a camera in the studio), that would then replace the picture, as you cannot have a non-free image if there is a free one available - always possible but probably very unlikely. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:43, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I hope it passes review! Putting an image on WP is like trying to get into Fort Knox! (the gold lies within!)--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 16:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

You are only scratching the surface - there are plenty of places to come unstuck. Not to mention every country in the world is different as to what you can take (and use) photo of. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones,

• Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gamini_Dissanayake_statue.jpg

This photograph was taken by me from my camera. Therefore I kindly request to rectify the error & do not delete, please.

Kind regards,

Anuradha

අනුරාධ (talk) 05:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@අනුරාධ: The artwork has copyright - unless the sculptor has been deceased for more than 70 years then (s)he still holds the copyright. Sri_Lanka does not have the freedom that I know you are used to in India. see c:Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Sri_Lanka. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

අනුරාධ (talk) 06:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you recently deleted a photo I uploaded with all necessary information under the grounds of fair use and claimed that it violates non-free criterion #1 "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose."

However I am sure that the photo does not violate this criterion as the object depicted is not an existing object and therefore it is impossible to have a free photo of the object. Furthermore, the image was created by DCNS to depict their product and finding a photo of the object depicted is already hard, much less a free photo, hence, I am sure there is no free replacement.

An almost completely similar case like this has happened in the past and was approved by administrators, so I see no reason why this should not be approved. Type 26 Global Combat Ship fair use]

I have read through all the non-free criterion and am sure that "Gowind free use.jpg" satisfies all of them, along with the availability of all relevant information needed.

Please take into account the points I have mentioned and thoroughly reconsider your deletion and I hope you will reinstate the photo in due time. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junchuann (talk • contribs) 06:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

@Junchuann: I'm prepared to believe you for now - I looked at the quoted source before deleting - http://en.dcnsgroup.com/press/new-dcns/ - but that is just a title page to a whole range of press releases, and after a few pages of that, I gave up - searching for "Second Generation Patrol Vessel" on that site also failed to come up with a page, so I could not be sure as to the suitability of the non-free rationale. I will restore for now, but you must change the source ASAP to the individual press release for verifiability (so I'm looking for a url like http://en.dcnsgroup.com/2014/10/01/dcns-d%C3%A9bute-les-essais-en-mer-de-la-fr%C3%A9gate-multimissions-fremm-provence/). User:Stefan2 may well go for a WP:NFCR - that's up to him. Naturally if the ship is built then this image will have to go (which is why I wanted to read the press release). Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi there,

The Davis LLP page was previously deleted. I am looking to restore it with new (though similar) content. I have submitted the text through the Articles for creation process (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Davis_LLP), but am now unsure if that was the correct route to go. Could you advise?

Thank you.

HolisKent (talk) 17:35, 14 October 2014 (UTC)HolisKent

WP:AfC is the best way to go. It takes a very experienced editor to be able to create (and maintain) an article directly into article space - even I use AfC! Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:39, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones, Thank you for your input in Wikipedia, but you deleted very beautiful pictures. I already contacted with OTRS, the owner of the pictures gave me permission to upload the pictures. You can contact Black Fig Designs and ask them. Please visit the following page: http://www.blackfigdesigns.com/what-are-suzanis/ Sincerely, Eugene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eugene1984 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

@Eugene1984: There was a bug in OTRS - we could not search properly, it was fixed on the 18th Sept, and last week the index for earlier e-mails was re-built. Thus I was able to find the e-mail about them. The ticket 2014052810017583 has never been approved, and we are still waiting for a reply to the last message sent at 28/05/2014 21:37. I can re-send the last message if that will help. We cannot add the ticket to the images until we get the reply. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Ronhjones, Thank you for your prompt reply. Could you please resend the email? Sincerely, Eugene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eugene1984 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

You blocked Maelbros224428 (talk · contribs) on 12 October for a period of 48 hours for persistent unsourced edits. Just about as soon as the block expired, the pattern continued. Perhaps this needs a further look? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:52, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Sigh... Some don't learn why they were blocked. 1 month now. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Judge Alonzo Conant jpg deletion by Ronhjones

Dear Sir, Thank you so much for the note regarding my father's photo. I had sent a note to citing that it was a family photo taken by my mother in 1954. So, that the photo can be added back, please help me with returning it to the page. I will do what is required today if you can please assist me. Realize that I am an "old girl" and thus not very savy in computer protocol. Here is my letter of statement that you can use to reinstate the photo. I hereby affirm that I, Ellen Conant Krohn, the creator and sole owner of the exclusive copyright of Judge Alonzo Conant (photo).File:ACphoto.jpg/thumb/Judge Alonzo Conant ,https://commons,wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AC_photo.jpg. I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware tht I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or many not be kept permanently on a Widimedia project. Ellen Conant Krohn Copyright holder 16oct.2014

Please advise as soon as you can. With your help, I can do what I am supposed to do such that the photo may be reposted to the article on Alonzo Conant in Wikipedia. Thank you in advance. Ellen Conant Krohn (daughter of Alonzo Conant) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Econantkrohn47 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir I must add that the photo was part of my mother's estate and left to me. I am sole owner and holder of this photo. Please let me know we you will re-instate the photo. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, Ellen Conant Krohn, daughter of Judge Alonzo Conant Econantkrohn47 (talk) 13:11, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir: At age 67, I am not trying to do anything tawdry, or illegal or inappropriate, I am solely asking you to help me get my fathers photo re-instated to the Wikipedia page: Alonzo Conant. Please respond by assisting me such that my father's photo can be re-instated on the Wikipedia page. I believe that legally you will not have any problems with this. I have done nothing illegal and only tried to do what is right and proper to assure that this photo is legally mine and thus o.k. for Wikipedia to re-post this photo. This photo is paramount to my fathers article. I hope that you will make sure that this photo is put back to the original position on the page. Thank you in Advance. Ellen Conant Krohn daughter of Judge Alonzo Conant Econantkrohn47 (talk) 14:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ronhjones! I am South sea surfer (User_talk:South_sea_surfer). You deleted user "I have had sock puppets -a. j."'s talk page? Well I see you did. I want to thank you for doing it. I will share a small secret with you. I WAS THE USER "I HAVE HAD SOCK PUPPETS -A. J.". I will not have sock puppets again!

P. S.

If you are going to say anything back, please tell me on my talk page, not yours. I will not check your talk page again so you might as well tell me on my talk page. South sea surfer (talk) 13:30, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

????????? Never deleted User:I have had sock puppets -a. j. at all, very odd. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:06, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, Does the attached comment mean that you will re-post my father's photo to the Wikipedia page. Truly, I assure you that the ownership of Dad's photo is solely owned by me and no one else. Look, Dad has been deceased 48 years.. Why is it with all of the supporting data that I have provided, Wikipedia editors are reticent to put my father's photo back on the Wikipedia page in his name? Please see fit to either contact me with what I must do or just replace the photo. Thank you.I anxiously await your reply. Sincerely, Ellen Conant Krohn daughter of Judge Alonzo Conant

I think I could use some help here. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:05, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

The place to ask is Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. My non-expert opinion is that while the image is probably not "free" - ownership of a copy of the photo does not give copyright, which normally belongs to the photographer - it should be possible to use it in an article under the non-free content criteria. JohnCD (talk) 15:32, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

(Econantkrohn47 (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC))

@Econantkrohn47: User:Huon has kindly restored the image and added a non-free rationale for you, and reduced the size for a suitable non-free image. I've have then added the non-free license as well.

The OTRS ticket 2014061910021235 can always be used if you can supply enough information and permission.

Although you may own the photo, it is plain that your father did not take the picture. Copyright belongs to the person who pressed the shutter, not the subject. It's possible that the image is Public Domain, it's going to depend on a range of factors who clarify if the photograph is still in copyright or not - some are below - some mutually exclude the others!

1. Who took the picture
2. Where it was taken (Country)
3. Was a copyright logged / transferred
4. The date of the picture
5. The date of death of the photographer

On the article, I've added the "Infobox officeholder" for you, you just add details to the right of the "=" signs - for more information see Template:Infobox officeholder. I've put the image in the infobox for you. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, Thank you so very much for clarifying and helping me with restoring Dad's photo to the Wikipedia page. I appreciate your patience and assistance. Thank you. Sincerely, Ellen Conant Krohn daughter of Judge Alonzo Conant (Econantkrohn47 (talk) 20:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC))

Hello,

I noticed that you have deleted an image that I had uploaded online (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Adilson_E._Motter_photo.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1), citing that there was no proof that the creator of the image had released it for use in Wikipedia. The image I used came from the biographical webpage of its author, which has a note saying that the image has been released to the public domain by the author:

http://dyn.phys.northwestern.edu/bio.html

I am new to uploading content to Wikipedia, so I would like to ask you: is a note on the person's website not enough to justify that the image is in the public domain? If it is enough, could I upload the image again, using the website above as proof of release?

Thanks in advance, McNaldi McNaldi (talk) 19:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

@McNaldi: Although it looks good - there's one small error (very often made) in that the person in the photo does not own the copyright, unless there is a formal written transfer of copyright to him. The person who owns the copyright is usually the person who presses the shutter. At WP:OTRS, we get hundreds of images of the person claiming the copyright, when asked for some proof of copyright transfer it all goes quiet... I would suggest trying to e-mail him to try to resolve the problem. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 13:43, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you delete Michael Brady (baseball)?--Yankees10 22:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--Yankees10 23:12, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you do Jesse Winker?--Yankees10 20:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--Yankees10 20:17, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Ron! Just wanted to let you know I mentioned you at WT:CSD here and would love to hear your point of view on maybe changing or clarifying the policy. Kelly ^hi! 18:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

A number of files, such as File:Nell Bryden Sam Atkinson Portrait.png, were tagged with {{subst:npd}} by a user because they had been tagged with {{OTRS pending}} for more than a month, but you removed the {{subst:npd}} tag, stating that the files were tagged with {{OTRS pending}}. Why did you do this? --Stefan2 (talk) 15:20, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

User:Kelly tagged them, but cannot check OTRS to see what is happening, or when the last communication occurred - often e-mails bounce back and forth over weeks (and I have known it to take well more than a month). As you well know, I do get round to purging the old OTRS pending images. The search facility in now fully repaired (which has been a real pain - hence I was only using the 60 day category), so we are now able to find the messages in OTRS, therefore I will be having a good look though many of them - but that does take some time - I did do some 30 day ones the other week, but there are rather a lot to search for. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:37, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I see that this also is being discussed at WT:CSD, so I replied there. In case you didn't notice, some or all of those files were listed on yesterday's PUF page. You might wish to check those. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

You tagged this with {{subst:npd}}. Did you notice that something which looks like an OTRS ticket number is mentioned in the permission field in the information template? Does the ticket have anything to do with the image? --Stefan2 (talk) 23:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Wah! The e-mail was started so long ago that my "last 3 month" search failed to catch it (Created: 09/06/2014 06:15). Not that it matters here. Last message from OTRS at 22/08/2014 10:30 - no answer since for any of the Aarnio images. The Ticket number was probably added by the uploader, after they got the first reply (the ticket number is used in the subject lines of the e-mails). Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)