User talk:Tiven2240/Archive-1.2

हार्दिक अभिनंदन

कृपया माझे हार्दिक अभिनंदन स्वीकारावे हि विनंती. सोबतच माझे आशिर्वादही आहेतच.--V.narsikar (talk) 04:32, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Valued image

Hello Tiven2240, thanks for your vote on the valued images candidates. Just to inform you, that a vote increase the delay for the closure of the proposition, so when the last vote is a few days ago and you agree with this, don't vote thanks. Olivier LPB (talk) 15:10, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, have you read my message ? Olivier LPB (talk) 10:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@Olivier LPB: Yeah, I have am i doing anything wrong? I'll appreciate if u assist me with the same --Tiven2240 (talk) 16:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

In fact when you vote for an image a few days after the beginning, it will report the day of closing of the vote. Olivier LPB (talk) 21:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:A Trip Down Market Street (High Res).webm, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:A Trip Down Market Street (High Res).webm has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Lahori Gate (Red Fort).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment Not too bad, but perspective distortion correction is needed. The issue is that there is very little space at right, so File:Lahori Gate with Ramparts - Red Fort - Delhi 2014-05-13 3126.JPG might be better. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
• The name of the file could be better...--Jebulon (talk) 15:11, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment @Yann: rescaled the image do have a look, the image u have suggested is not too bright as one i nominated, hoping for a affirmative --Tiven2240 (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment @Jebulon: I am unaware of that procedure if u are familiar do assist me for the same --Tiven2240 (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment As the comments has been addressed i would like it being supported --Tiven2240 (talk) 01:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Question Y not no votes?--Tiven2240 (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment Impossible to correct perspective distortion. The framing on the right side is too short. Always think of leaving a little space. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Yes good now. Bravo to User:Hohum--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

}}

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Basilica of Our Lady of Sorrows (Natchez, Mississippi) - choir..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment - I think it makes sense to put a comma and then "altar" [note spelling - you should change the spelling of your file] or at least "interior" after the linked category in "scope", because it probably doesn't make sense to class this with pictures of the basilica's exterior. It's a useful picture, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: I didn't find the category of the interior of the Basilica as it's only of its kind i don't find to make a new category --Tiven2240 (talk) 16:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

In fact you show us, seen from the nave, the main altar and the two apsidal chapels on both sides. There is a balustrade which makes the separation with the nave: it is therefore the choir. As there is currently only one image from the inside it is not compulsory to make a category. The scope could be written: {{c|Basilica of Our Lady of Sorrows (Natchez, Mississippi)}} - choir. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@Archaeodontosaurus: As per yr comment above done the necessary changes. --Tiven2240 (talk) 07:31, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support - I'll support this now as useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:18, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Free images from external sources

Hi, When you copy free images from external sources, could you please add a {{Licensereview}} tag? Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:17, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@Yann: thanks for the same i am aware of it --Tiven2240 (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, @Yann: Our gentelaman Tiven2240 manually imported File:Ambox emblem question m.png. Can you help him out please in transfering the file along with the history. And also please do let him know where to make reuests for future transfers from sister projects to commons.

Thanks and warm regards

Mahitgar (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

NOT a "Social Media" Thing

I'm sorry if you think my upload images are all about social media or promoting the popularity of the Actor. Actually it is not. it didn't across on my mind about something social media thing. It is only just that those articles or events that indicated on the page of the actor, I make a visual image on it so that those readers that don't actually believe and didn't even bother to read references, can actually think that those mentioned or indicated are actually true.

Hope you understand what I meant. HAFIZ (talk) 17:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bint Hafiz: Discussion shall be made on the deletion page. Please discuss your matter there --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 05:28, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

About deletion

Hey,

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amit_Jadhav.jpg Is this not a valid commons? I followed https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:James_Hare,_2016-10-10_no._2.jpg commons to add mine.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitbjadhav (talk • contribs) 04:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

@Amitbjadhav: the picture that you showed is an active wikipedian and policy states that only personal images of people who are highly active on wikimedia projects are allowed only on talkpage.. hope I have cleared your doubts.. For more info have a look at Commons:Project scope/Summary--✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 05:26, 22 April 2017 (Ujpg

विनंती

खालिल कॉपी राईट्स फ्री नसलेली दोन चित्रे माझ्याकडून चूकिने चढवली गेलीय. कृपया त्यांना कॉमन्स वरून हटवण्यास मदत करा. File:D.Litt. Degree Certificate of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar from Osmania University 01.jpg & File:D.Litt. Degree Certificate of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar from Osmania University 02.jpg संदेश हिवाळे (talk) 07:43, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@संदेश हिवाळे: I have done it as per your request thanks for preventing Commons from vandalism 👌😀 --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 07:51, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia screenshot deletion?

Can you tell me why is it a copyvio? There are so many screenshots with these licenses. Are you really sure that I did the copyvio? Jerrykim306 (talk) 08:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jerrykim306: Wikipedia software copyright holder is wikimedia foundation. It is free to use but chrome the browser u have used which is non free. There is a copyvio because of it. If it's not a copyvio an administrator will remove my deletion tag. I am only the nominator the administrator will see whether to delete or to keep it. Hope you understand. Thanks --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 08:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but if the file gets deleted, I have to crop it(to cover the google chrome) and reupload. Is it right? I have a question about androids that is it also non free? Thanks. Jerrykim306 (talk) 08:42, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jerrykim306: Yeah android too is copyrighted; whether cropping the software and uploading is proper ask with an administrator @Daphne Lantier: I have pinged she may answer or consider asking at COM:AN Thanks --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 08:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

MediaWiki is a Free Software (GPL2 or later), Wikipedia's license is CC BY SA 3.0+GFDL, and Wikimedia Foundation denies that they control the copyright for contribution(Read the overview, section 1 and 7 of wmf:ToU.) so it does not constitute a copyright violation. Google Chrome claim is moot because there is no significant proof it is Google Chrome, and if you say small portion of the part is Chrome, it's de minimis. — regards, Revi 09:11, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Android is also free software (Apache License 2.0). ★Poyekhali!!! 00:26, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Train at Azad Nagar station, Mumbai.jpg

Hi, the above clearly is not a meaningless name – please do not perform such filemoves in the future.    FDMS  4    17:42, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

File:St. Jude shrine Alter decoration.jpg

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

   FDMS  4    17:48, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

File:UT MOBAIKAR.ogg

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

   FDMS  4    18:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Your LR request

Hello, I speedy closed your LR request, as a license reviewer. Your responses to the deletion requests made by FDMS4 is not what I would want to expect from a license reviewer. You showed there that you are not completely familiar with COM:DW and COM:TOO. Not only that, you ignored COM:PRP, which is the third most important policy in my opinion. Those three links are needed to be familiarise by each LR. To be honest, I appreciate that you want to help with the backlog, but imagine if I granted you the LR privileges. You may mess it up, and that doesn't help. Please note that although LR is a non-admin tool like patrol, the application process is not the same as COM:RFR. LR requires more trust than the privileges you hold right now. So now, forget the LR privilege first, then familiarise yourself with the policies and guidelines, and come back again (maybe 3 months, you decide) once you are confident that you can use the LR privilege and minimize the errors (as much as possible, I am not saying don't make any error, though that would be good of course, but as the saying says, a hardworking person makes more mistakes than a lax person). Thanks, ★Poyekhali!!! 04:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@Poyekhali: thanks for your message but I am little bit confused about the policies imposed. In the delition request of my images you have mentioned COM:TOO in which there is no mention of India (as image is from India). The nominator has no idea on which ground he is nominating for my images to be deleted. The church picture is that the problem rises? Or the text of thanking is copyrighted? And why only the nominator tagged on the day of my lr nomination that too with a baseless reason that it's derivative work of copyrighted work. Where Is the copyright? How can he claim it's a copyvio? Please give me an explanation for the same!--✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 04:59, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

It is not the text which is concerned, it is the church picture. And that's above COM:TOO. Although there is no mention of India for TOO, the picture is above TOO in the U.S. Commons requires that photos be free both in the source country and the U.S. Maybe the church picture is below TOO in India, but it is not the case in the U.S. Since the church picture is above the TOO, and that it is part of the subject of the photo, and that the church picture is essential to the subject and cannot be removed, your photo would be considered as a derivative work of a non-free work. COM:DM won't apply here. I hope that answers your questions. ★Poyekhali!!! 05:05, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Adarga (Nymphaea alba), Ciudad Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 2013-08-14, DD 01.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Adarga (Nymphaea alba), Ciudad Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 2013-08-14, DD 01.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello Tiven2240, 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) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Mumbai Timelapse - Movement Prevails Here.webm

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

— Racconish^☎ 08:59, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

{{Copyvio}} for COM:NUDE

Please don't tag nudity pictures as copyright violations unless they are copyright violations. Note also that COM:NUDE is not a speedy deletion criterion, rather it falls under our scope rules, all of which require a full DR. Storkk (talk) 13:27, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

@Storkk: thanks for notifying the same. Sorry for inconvenience caused, will take a note of it while editing in future , thanking --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 15:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Your DR

Hi Tiven, thanks for your DR. I deleted the file for being spam. It's a new try of some spammers uploading files via flickr-washing. Please have a look at outgoing commercial weblinks on such pages. Thank you & cheers, --Achim (talk) 20:47, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

about File:みかんちゃん.jpg

What do you mean? "This media is missing permission information" i took this picture and put it "{{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}" can you speak Japanese? わたしが撮影したこのファイルには、私が許諾を与えてます。何が問題ですか？ — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCC00313 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 10 June 2017 (UTC)--TCC00313 (talk) 17:39, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Reply to the same given on talkpage of USER:TCC00313 --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 17:51, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

"Commons:OTRS"　says

if in the case "I created the file myself. it hasn't been previously published, and I am the sole owner of its copyright." then "contacting OTRS is unnecessary".

tell me exact you want to , not link, by your own word.--TCC00313 (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@TCC00313: the image looks little bit unsharp seems like it is tampered. If u are the original copyright holder please send your consent via OTRS so that there is no doubt for the image and License. Your image will be restored by OTRS member once it is verified that you r the copyright owner of the image. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 18:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

"no permission" never means "There is a doubt that the image is not own".--TCC00313 (talk) 03:01, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

"This media is missing permission information" means "the image looks little bit unsharp seems like it is tampered"? are you sane? or bull shit?--TCC00313 (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

where is the guideline about unsharp image? you canonot warn without guideline. Tell me NOW or remove the template immedeately.--TCC00313 (talk) 23:04, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Anyway, {{No permission since|month=June|day=10|year=2017}} is completely unsuitable. Remove it.--TCC00313 (talk) 23:50, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

"no permission" never means "There is a doubt that the image is not own".Study HARD.--TCC00313 (talk) 03:03, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Your reason is only "unsharp". very poor reason. an photo goes unsharp because of a lot of reason,boy.--TCC00313 (talk) 06:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

if every unsharp photos are doubtful, that is ridiculous!--TCC00313 (talk) 06:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Remove the template or say something if you can.--TCC00313 (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

telegram copyright

Hi Tiven2240. you removed my picture. Does a picture published on Telegram chanels have copyright? Thank you.RostamxaniRostamxani — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rostamxani (talk • contribs) 18:28, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Rostamxani: it's correct they too are copyrighted. For more information about the same read COM:L as well as COM:CB Hope this helps Thanks --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 18:31, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Edi Veloso - further information request

Hi there, I received a message titled as "Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Edi Veloso", listing the files below which images have as source FLickr, with respective copyright license listed as Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International, including picture took by me. FInd below the file names and the link to Flick(https://www.flickr.com/photos/155584188@N06/) File:Japinha-Arizona.jpg File:Japinha-CPM22.jpg File:RicardoJapinha-qualeadele.jpg File:RIcardoJapinha-Floquinho.jpg File:RicardoJapinha-GRAACC2017.jpg

I am helping the Brazilian drummer and guitar player Ricardo Di Roberto(https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardo_Di_Roberto) to update his Wikipedia webpage. These pictures will be used for it, with his authorization (he is the person in the pictures). So please, as I am new on Wikimedia Commons, I really appreciate your support explaining me what is the procedure I need to follow in order to be in compliance with the Wikimedia Commons rules. Thank you in advance. --Edi Veloso (talk) 01:14, 11 June 2017 (UTC) Edi Veloso, June 10th, 2017

@Edi Veloso: . Thanks for notifying me about the same. Is there any official notice given by the drummer to use his pictures in the creative Commons license?. The images need to get consent of the drummer and also {{Personality rights}} as per COM:PEOPLE. If you think that it complies all the things as per above than request the drummer to send his consent via OTRS. The procedure of the same can be found at COM:OTRS. Wikimedia foundation OTRS volunteers will look surely that the images are in proper consent of the drummer and will restore the images asap. Do send the consent via the same. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 01:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tiven2240: , thanks for the quick response. There is just an email note. I will contact him to follow the procedures you have mentioned. But I have one last question : one of the pictures RIcardoJapinha-GRAACC2017 was taken by me, then I am the owner of it. In this case, even the picture is on Flickr, even I have authorized for Commons usage, should I also follow additional authorization procedure? Thank you in advance.

--Edi Veloso (talk) 01:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC) Edi Veloso

@Edi Veloso: In your image case you are the copyright owner so I request you to send your declaration via OTRS. As you said the image already exists on Flickr so as per COM:OTRS your consent is required. Don't worry even the image gets deleted by an admin. Once confirmed via OTRS it will be restored by them. Hope I clear all your queries. If any don't feel shy to hit my talkpage.. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 01:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@tiven2240 Thank you so much for the clear and complete explanation. Have a great week. --Edi Veloso (talk) 19:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Detroit Electric SP01.jpg

Hi Tiven, could you please explain why you tagged this as copyvio? I was going to just turn it into a regular DR, but it seemed quite unlikely to be a copyright violation, so I just undid you. Particularly, why do you believe this was not own work? It would be helpful in future, for all of your copyvio tags, to state why you believe something, rather than just make an assertion and hope the deleting admin will sort it out for you. Storkk (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2017 (UTC) @Storkk: have a look at https://tineye.com/search/da4855228df459298a637923097fd87a5967641e/?sort=size&order=desc do assist me if anything I've tag is not up to the point. Thanks --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 15:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

1. If you have a URL like that as evidence, please put it in the template. That is what I mean by showing "why" you believe what you believe.
2. Secondly, in this particular case, what do you believe that URL shows? To me, it looks like evidence that it is not a copyright violation, but perhaps you are seeing something I am not. Storkk (talk) 15:19, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Band Big G live performance at Dubai.jpg

Hi Tiven2240,

I couldn't help but notice that you have listed the image for deletion terming it 'out of scope'. Could you please explain as to why you felt so? Its for my own knowledge and would be really helpful in the future. The image pertains to an individual who has a Wikipedia page w: Gopi Sunder to his name. Thanks, Srijit777 (talk) 08:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Srijit777: deletion should be appreciated if discussed in deletion request. As per this image is conserned it was not linked to the article you mentioned above. The image has many versions as I have given it in deletion request about it. It too has a possibility of copyvios. There is a doubt that this image is non own work and lakhs evidence of the same as said in deletion request. It would be appreciated if you discuss the same in the deletion page. Hope that helps. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 09:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Mumbai (Bombay) in the 1930's.webm

File:Mumbai (Bombay) in the 1930's.webm has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

— Racconish^☎ 06:51, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Meet the East Indians of Mumbai.webm

Hello again, based on the comments on YouTube, it seems the uploader is not the author of the soundtrack. I suggest you should upload a new version without the soundtrack and ask an admin to delete the previous one. — Racconish^☎ 07:52, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@Racconish: Is there anything possible like File:Mumbai Timelapse - Movement Prevails Here.webm --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 09:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. Can you do it ? — Racconish^☎ 10:04, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@Racconish: is there any procedure available?--✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 10:34, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Please ask an admin to delete the original version. — Racconish^☎ 10:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@Racconish: I have asked User:Daphne Lantier for the same. Thanks for all that you do --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 11:29, 17 June 2017 (UTC)