User talk:NuclearWarfare

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Hello. As a result of your request at Commons talk:Flickr images/reviewers, I have added you to the reviewers list. Please see the instructions at Commons:Flickr images/reviewers and add {{User trusted}} to your userpage. Best regards, Abigor talk 18:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are now trusted user for image renaming.--Anatoliy (talk) 13:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flinfo didn't insert the source for File:Union Station Toronto 22.jpg‎. I have manually added it. I wasn't sure if I should erase your deletion tag. I wasn't sure if a robot might falsely register that as bad faith. Could you please take another look and if you are satisfied, give it your OK?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 10:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't sure about why this particular one wasn't sourced, as the rest of your contributions seemed to be. Perhaps I should have written you a nice little message first; for that I apologize. Abigor has marked the file as good; everything seems to be fine now. NuclearWarfare (talk) 18:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have uploaded File:2nd Lieutenant Bossant.jpg with the indication "unknown author". However it is signed. The name looks like "H. Thiriat. se". Do you have any further information about him? Sv1xv (talk) 18:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quite honestly, I just uploaded that as it was from the English Wikipedia without checking for an author; I figured that the book source would be enough. I'm afraid I really don't have any further information. Sorry, NuclearWarfare (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search in wikipedia showed that it is signed by Henri Thiriat (1866-1897). See also File:Gaston Tissandier by Henri Thiriat.jpg by the same artist. I believe you should amend the "Author" field. Sv1xv (talk) 19:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks for letting me know, and feel free to let me know of any other issues. NuclearWarfare (talk) 19:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

---

Hello, NuclearWarfare!

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Image:Modern Art at National Gallery of Art1.JPG is uncategorized since 25 May 2009.
• Image:Stephan Keller2.jpg is uncategorized since 28 July 2009.
• Image:GrayCircle.svg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:RapidsNF8.jpg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Internment at Scapa Flow.svg was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
• Image:Yes...She's Texting.jpg was uncategorized on 18 January 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Emerson 1909 Annex BW.jpg was uncategorized on 31 January 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:K Street - Emerson Schools2.jpg was uncategorized on 31 January 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:K Street School 1889 Excerpt.jpg was uncategorized on 31 January 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:K Street - Emerson Schools - Clara.jpg was uncategorized on 31 January 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Peter Pakosh.jpg was uncategorized on 1 February 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Aspius Vorax.JPG was uncategorized on 8 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:04, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Gary Myers (writer).jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Graham Priest.jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Fresno PTA Officers 1934.jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Lee Battersby.jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Gene Camp.jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Erica Ash.jpg was uncategorized on 9 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Thomas Wade Head shot.png was uncategorized on 10 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Tim Hudak.jpg was uncategorized on 10 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Image:Rumen Galabov.jpg was uncategorized on 10 August 2010 CategorizationBot (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nuke, the group you showed me all appear to be identical. This might be unorthodox in a small way, but my system is lagging and there are restorations to be finished. Could you do me a favor and complete the PD-ineligible update and remove the speedy tags for that set only? You may cite this diff. Thanks, Durova (talk) 02:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete those formulas. They are not in use, not useful, and they are clogging category:Materials science and six other categories. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they are in use; see en:User:Logger9/Kinetic theory of solids. If you wish to convert them to the math syntax, go ahead, but it is just too complicated for me to do without images for logger and I. NuclearWarfare (talk) 01:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If they are clogging category:Materials science, we may create a subcategory for them. Sv1xv (talk) 04:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:User A1 replaced all the Spinxxx-images in en:Spinodal decomposition. But the user does not seem to learn. The article en:Kinetic theory of solids was deleted as a copyright violation, and I do not think we should care about that user page. Do I really need to make a DR for this junk? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is being rewritten in userspace; that is a perfectly valid reason to keep the images. As for the Spin-xxx ones; if they are not used on any project, feel free to delete them. Also, subcategories are always a valid thing to do; feel free to do that. NuclearWarfare (talk) 16:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the speedy tags that you removed on the Spinxxx-images, so that some admin will delete them. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. NuclearWarfare (talk) 15:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Can you please categorize your uploaded image? Start with this one, that is a quite new upload of you. --High Contrast (talk) 08:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing; I'll get right on it. NuclearWarfare (talk) 12:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

High Contrast (talk) 08:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am kind of confused as to what this means. I thought they were already dual licensed. What are the differences between Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 and 2.5? Also, I can't edit User:Digon3/StandardLicense because it is protected. The best way to contact me right now is via email. Thanks. --Digon3 ^talk 15:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied via email. NuclearWarfare (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you used artistically incompatible versions of the symbols, when compatible symbol sets are available in some of the images in Category:Pluralism symbols etc... AnonMoos (talk) 22:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We were creating an image specifically for this article, which needed to have specific symbols. There was no pluralistic image that had the four specific symbols we needed. Awadewit (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, TIFF format serves no useful purpose (as compared to PNG) for this image... AnonMoos (talk) 22:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to change the format, please go ahead. I don't really understand the differences between the two. A friend was good enough to help us construct this image, and we are happy to have it. Awadewit (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Administrators/Requests/NuclearWarfare. Good luck! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rocket000's comment at the RfA is valid, so you might want to look into that. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ English ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ हिन्दी ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

---

NuclearWarfare, congratulations! You now have administrator rights on Commons. Please take a moment to read the Commons:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and its subpages), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care. Have a look at the list of Gadgets (on the bottom there are the ones specifically for admins – however, for example the UserMessages are very helpful too).

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-commons ^webchat on irc.libera.chat. There is also a channel for Commons admins, which may be useful for more sensitive topics, or coordination among administrators: #wikimedia-commons-admin ^webchat.

You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading. You can find the admin backlog overview at COM:AB.

Please also check or add your entry to the List of administrators and the related lists by language and date it references.

Congratulations! I will repeat what I said in the close: Consensus seems clear enough. However there are significant cautions in the opposes which NW would do well to heed. Please make sure you spend the time to understand the underlying issues and our culture before you undertake any actions that might be at all controversial, and if you are in doubt, ask. I mean that... if you are in doubt, ask. Commons is not en:wp. Best wishes. ++Lar: t/c 13:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be sure to pay close attention to the opposes, neutrals, and comments said; they definitely contained valuable advice. Thanks for the thoughtful closure, as well as the friendly comments. Regards, NW (Talk) 16:00, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know I opposed on you're rfa but I would like to say congratulations since you made it and are a administrator now.

Also one quistion, you say you will keep busy with the category unknown, please leave some stuff for me also because that is my playing ground :P When you need any help on Commons, a second opinion, advice or just a friendly chat feel free to drop by my talk page at any time.

See ya,

Huib talk 16:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, use the tools well. Camaron · Christopher · talk 16:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic stuff. I had the wrong url, but the right date... See you back on en. Bencherlite (talk) 19:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for catching that; that was one of the (very few things) I was going to bring up at the image review. Regards, NW (Talk) 19:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I'm following your contribs at present, looking for problems... a benign stalker! Bencherlite (talk) 19:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The OTRS system is looking for trusted volunteers to help staff our permissions and photosubmissions queues. I would like to invite you to look over what OTRS involves and consider seeking approval at the volunteering page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 19:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation to join. I'll be sure to think about it. Regards, NW (Talk) 20:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the confirmation job! The list miss a "blank" between Gyeongju and Seokbinggo, so the correct links are like below.

[1] [2]

and several images are also missed in the confirmation process, so please check on these files as well..

[3] [4] [5] [6]

 Done NW (Talk) 23:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And would you also check on my email named "Request for confirmation on Caroline Knox' flickr images" sent on August 15 and additional permission for #2009090110003917 Request for confirmation on Alain Seguin's flickr images sent on September 28 if possible? Thanks.--Caspian blue

Hmm, I found that ticket, but it has been held by someone else. I'm new to OTRS, so I am asking around to see if it would be appropriate for me to do the ticket anyway. NW (Talk) 23:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your help with the deletion of the subcategories. -- User:Docu at 01:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Interestingly, I actually didn't even know about the CfD; Tiptoety just asked for my help and I figured I would spend an hour or so with some scripts. Hope I helped, NW (Talk) 01:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because the autor of the photo sent the e-mail, this is unfair, delete 3 times my pictures want to know that this violation was! You have broken the picture after deleting it. I demand the return of the picture because it is vandalism. I know the photographer and he told me the damn e-mail to the Brazil Commons. I am completely tired of this story, go out without explanation.--Pedu0303 (talk) 00:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I searched the OTRS database, and there was no reference to that image or the flickr link. What is the photographer's email that he sent to OTRS? NW (Talk) 00:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NuclearWarfare, when you delete a file like File:Usain Bolt Olympics Celebration.jpg, the delinker will automagicly remove all references to the file. So beware! You can prevent this by including "no-orgullobot" in your deletion summary. Nothing happened now because the delinker is not running (toolserver problems). Multichill (talk) 08:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, NW. Thank you for the super quick reviewing process on my OTRS request. I also want you to confirm these two photos in the same OTRS request [7][8] Thanks!--Caspian blue 12:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for all your good work :) NW (Talk) 15:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you undelete Template:! as it seemed to be in use and is making a mess of things like Template:Flickrreview. Was there a more specific reason for deletion because I imaging a fair few templates would rely on this, just like they do on en.wiki. Best, Rambo's Revenge (en.wiki) 01:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note; I undeleted it. I accidentally imported something that I didn't mean to, so I went to go and try to fix up the mess...and ended up messing it up even more. Hopefully it isn't all messed up; I think I cleaned it up. NW (Talk) 01:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that's worked. I'm not certain as purging won't work and I can't null edit the protected templates, but the code all looks fine so it should be okay. Thanks for your swift action on this. Rambo's Revenge (en.wiki) 01:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have noticed, it's usually a very bad idea to check "include all templates" when importing something from another project. It can break a lot of stuff. Also, cascading protection isn't a good idea either. The only effect it really has is protecting everything used in the documentation and defeats the purpose of having a /doc page. If the template itself uses other templates (or images) they should be protected individually. Rocket000 (talk) 16:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you protected main page images of the English language Wikipedia. While I can understand the protection and am perfectly fine with the protection, I was just wondering if you could protect them only from uploading, which is now possible with the MediaWiki software. You need to press "Unlock move permissions" and then you can set who is allowed to overwrite the file. Then, set the edit protection to all users, move protection doesn't matter as only sysops can move files anyways. Since the English Wikipedia main page wouldn't suffer if someone vandalizes the image description page, I'd be happy if you could make them editable when they're on the Main Page. Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 13:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. Thanks for notifying me. NW (Talk) 21:03, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you can do that now? That's pretty awesome - certainly reduces the hastle of reuploading to en.wikipedia! - Tbsdy lives (talk) 12:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you used to be able to. You can still full protect the entire image on Commons, which prevents any new uploads, but you can't enable upload protection only anymore. The developers turned it off for some reason that I'm unaware of. NW (Talk) 20:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nuclear, how do I go about this? - Tbsdy lives (talk) 12:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not really sure what you mean. Could you explain a bit more? NW (Talk) 20:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do we do with Tebsala's contributions as the OTRS is a problem? Besides which one image is totally out of focus. Cheers Ww2censor (talk) 16:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact the copyright holder, and ask them to forward a filled out version of of this to OTRS. NW (Talk) 18:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What should be done if no proper OTRS permission is received and how long does one wait? Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, if no proper email is received within a month, the image will be deleted. If proper permission is received at any time though, the image can be undeleted. NW (Talk) 22:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NuclearWarfare. The file(s) listed below have been marked with {{OTRS received}}, but there has been no complete confirmation of its permission status in the last 30 days. From what I'm able to tell, you were the person who added this template. Would you mind taking a look at this again? If confirmation cannot be found, this file should probably be marked for deletion. This should be the only notification you will receive regarding this image, so long as the comment I added to the image description page is not altered. Thanks! HersfoldOTRSBot^{(talk/opt out)} 22:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not an OTRS volunteer or did not add the "received" template to this file, it's possible I made a mistake identifying the correct user. I look for the most recent diff where the template was added, so if you reverted an edit where this template was removed, I can't tell the difference. If this is the case, please let my operator know at w:en:User talk:Hersfold. Sorry for the inconvenience!

The file(s) in question are:

• File:Apc.org website.png

File:Sochi 2014 winter olympics official logo.gif 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--Hektor (talk) 14:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sochi 2014 logo.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

--Hektor (talk) 14:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sorry for spaming your talk page, but this is very important. On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images. As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents. Also they believe that common's policy is not so clear regarding the issue. And since you are the experts please join us at this very important discussion -- MaenK.A._Talk 14:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remember me from WP? Dale (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the deletion on this image, a little while ago. However, I just noticed that it has been reloaded though by the same user, along with a number of other images if similar dubious nature. would you be able to look into this? Thanks. --Kevmin § 08:37, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted all and warned user 13:03, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

I write to you because you are listed here Commons:PD_files/reviewers#List_of_PD_reviewers.

The Category:PD files for review was flooded some time ago and perhaps therefore PD review seems to have stopped. After some discussion on Commons_talk:PD_files#Has_review_stopped? the category has been cleaned up.

Perhaps you would like to come back and take a look at some of the remaining files?

Thank you!

--MGA73 (talk) 15:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you deleted the image this was cropped from. I suppose the same will apply to the above then. -- User:Docu at 06:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, you're correct. Thanks for telling me; I have deleted that image as well. NW (Talk) 11:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I followed spammer User:Harrismediallc over here from en.wp. Obviously they are representing a group, a Google search [9] shows that they are a web based PR firm and they seem to be doing work on behalf of a candidate for Governor of Arkansas. Kind of a newbie here on Commons still, I couldn't find anyplace for centralized reporting of such things so I just picked a name I recognized off the list of admins. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Beeblebrox. Nice to see you here. For future reference, Commons has both an administrators' noticeboard and a village pump for issues like these. Anyway, they seem to have only one undeleted edit here (didn't check for deleted contribs), which I'll take care of. NW (Talk) 18:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, that's it. I was trying WC:AN, didn't know what the official abbreviation/initialism was over here. Thanks for the assist. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. I wanted to apologize for the confusion I caused regarding this image and the main page on the English Wikipedia. I was not aware of the line that was quoted at the related deletion request.--Rockfang (talk) 01:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, neither was I, and I only did a quick check. I really should have let the DR go, but the image was on the Main page of enwiki and I thought it was probably best to handle it quickly. Thanks really go to Shimgray for his hard work in tracking the relevant (old) law down. Is COM:FOP updated yet? NW (Talk) 02:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't updated COM:FOP. I think if anything would need to be updated, it might be Commons:Licensing#Belgium. I'm in the middle of a minor Smallville marathon at the moment. :) If nobody has updated it by the time I'm done, I'll add some info.--Rockfang (talk) 03:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fake ticket, Fare Strike Movement.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

-mattbuck (Talk) 11:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, NuclearWarfare on September 12, 2010 it was proposed that the, File:JoeMiller.JPG, be deleted and the proposal was not challenged as it is a clear copyright violation that I have noticed. However, two months later the photo has not been deleted so I was wondering if you could delete it or help in the deletion process. - Thanks, Aaaccc (talk) 4 November 2010 (UTC)

 Deletion request closed. NW (Talk) 21:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again NuclearWarfare on November 25, 2010 it was proposed that the, File:Kelly Ayotte.jpg, be deleted and the proposal was not challenged as it is a clear copyright violation that I have noticed. However, a month later the photo has not been deleted so I was wondering if you could delete it or help in the deletion process. I have tried to speed up the deletion process by marking it as fair use. That way it would be a speedy delete but all time I've tried I have been condemed for doing so. - Thanks, Aaaccc (talk) 14 December 2010 (UTC)

It often takes quite some time for deletion requests to be closed, unfortunately. I have however closed this one and deleted the image. Best, NW (Talk) 01:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any Commons policy on how long copyright violation photos can be left for until they have to be deleted? Most photo are marked for deletion and left forever never being deleted. Aaaccc (talk) 19 December 2010 (UTC)

If no action is being taken on them or if it is clear that they are copyright violations, you can mark them with {{Speedy}} and someone should get to it quickly (unlike deletion requests). NW (Talk) 02:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NuclearWarfare, I tried adding the speedy template as you instructed however it was reverted by other admins and called vandalism activity. Aaaccc (talk), 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Which image did you try that on? NW (Talk) 23:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried it on, File:Tomclements2.jpg, and admin Geagea reverted it I told them I was instructed to do so, but they wrote on my talk page criticizing this action. Aaaccc (talk), 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure that you have the name of that file correct? I can't find any evidence of it existing. NW (Talk) 00:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this photo right here. File:Tomclements2.jpg Aaaccc (talk), 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Would you like me to speak to Geagea? NW (Talk) 00:30, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do not have a conflict with Geagea but it is annoying to be contributing on the Commons with admins coming at you with different rulings on things. So if you can try to discuss a general ruling on it with Geagea. Aaaccc (talk), 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, again NuclearWarfare during my activities here I again came across a problem relating to your area. The issue is, File:Giannoulias Headshot.jpg is a copyright violation and overdue for deletion. Aaaccc (talk), 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, File:Elaine-Marshall-Headshot-05-10.jpg is a similar violation and overdue too. Aaaccc (talk), 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Again, File:Kenbuckforco.jpg, File:LeAlan Green Headshot.jpg is a similar violation and overdue too. Aaaccc (talk), 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm a fairly new editor. Would you please explain your reason for deleting File:Gay_couple.jpg as follows:

• 03:36, 20 July 2010 NuclearWarfare (talk | contribs) deleted "File:Gay couple.jpg" ‎ (Living persons global foundation policy violation: No evidence that the two are gay) (global usage; delinker log)

...as copied/pasted from the deletion log? I couldn't understand your reasoning from the wording, unless the uploader or either of the subjects depicted requested deletion. Thanks! Wi2g (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly positive the reason why I selected that particular image for deletion, but the deletion was done along the principles of this idea. NW (Talk) 05:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...I read the page you cited, and it doesn't seem to apply to this case. Assuming good faith, I hope you will undelete this file since there doesn't seem to be a firm reason for its deletion in the first place. Thanks again! Wi2g (talk) 15:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to COM:AN if you wish. NW (Talk) 20:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sochi logo, here we go again. Hektor (talk) 15:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sochi 2014 - Logo.svg 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

The user "Hold and wave", continues to remove unjustifiably other users' messages from its user talk. 79.36.143.69 17:55, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have time to handle this. Please ask another administrator. My apologies, NW (Talk) 17:58, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

reminder: Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Musée_Mécanique_181.JPG (close with your conclusion, please) :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I think my close cut out last time. Now fixed. NW (Talk) 03:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happens and is fixed easily. Thanks :) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NW I'm not sure about what sort of information is searchable, but do you know if it is possible to find the legal rights of a mother and her fetus? Would she need to give permission to have her fetus used for experiment, used to teach students, photographed, etc.? In other words, is she the legal guardian of it if it is considered a person or if not is it considered an extension of her body? Is it a fact that one does not need to give permission for their removed organs to be used for research, etc.? Inquiring minds want to know! Gandydancer (talk) 15:41, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that User talk:Jfdwolff is a practicing physician who have dealt with these kind of matters in the past, so I would ask him. I'm not really sure. PMID 18423351 states that "Patient consent to the publication of photographs showing them, whether the persons are identifiable or not, is a moral and legal obligation in both the United Kingdom and France," but this suggests that fetuses count as patients only if their mother intends not to abort them. And as you say, the provenance of the image is also very important, and I don't believe that's something we can just assume good faith about in such a sensitive matter. NW (Talk) 16:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and thanks for fixing my post to the link you suggested. I tried to send you my first award but could not figure out how to do that either. :P Best, Gandy Gandydancer (talk) 20:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Modern_Art_at_National_Gallery_of_Art1.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Missvain (talk) 02:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, NuclearWarfare

I see that you are a member of Wikimedia ORTS team and I was wondering if you could do me a favour. A file has the author as the source of the work. I was wondering if you could help obtain an ORTS ticket as many files like this one are deleted for no proof of permission. Aaaccc (talk), 29 September 2011

Hi Aaaccc. I'm afraid I don't have much knowledge about the situation, so I would prefer it if you could do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Example_requests_for_permission and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries have nice form letters that make asking about this sort of thing a lot easier. Once you obtain his consent via email, I would be happy to assist you in getting the matter sorted out with OTRS. Best, NW (Talk) 01:58, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know if WikiProject Permission requests can be used? Aaaccc (talk), 30 September 2011

You can try asking, but I don't think that page has been used that often since its inception (only a handful of edits in the past two years). NW (Talk) 19:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, the file has been deleted for no permission. Aaaccc (talk), 12 December 2011

[10] Per what you did in changing the block - it was deemed a block account but has been around and has been used for more than "attacking". I am not an admin so I cannot see what was revdel'd, but I do believe that if it was "personal" information it is connected to a personal request made by the user and was discussed by him without any true complaint (except to say to bring it up was "harassment" but not to deny it was his prior account as uploader). The issue mostly deals with a public figure (WMUK) having a previous sock account that he asked for material he no longer wanted hosted on Commons having someone speedy delete the image (and then his later saying others could not delete images based on personal requests). I would think that this is very pertinent for many reasons when deeming an admin as trustworthy or not. He is also a public figure with his personal identity well known via his status in WMUK, so personal information would no longer be off limits for that aspect alone. He has used his WMUK status to try and say he is trustworthy, which opens the door completely for a review of outside conduct and behavior (which the conduct here is limited to mostly Commons material anyway). Ottava Rima (talk) 17:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to give Romaine a chance to explain their block before I take any further action. NW (Talk) 17:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why I asked for a review and not an unblock. :) I like Romaine so I think he may have been jumping the gun a bit but without admin bits to see revdel material I cannot possibly know for sure. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:32, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you kindly ask Nemo to strike the warning he placed onmy talk page? I think you may be able to do so in a more diplomatic (less Malleusesque) way than I feel like at the moment. Alternatively or additionally, could you comment on my talk page to the effect that the threat to block me without further warning is based on a faulty understanding of policy and is therefore invalid for the same reasons that the action against Bali was. Thanks.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have since told Nemo that his interpretation of policy was wrong on Resolute's talk page. I think it's probably best to just ignore the message he left you, but if you want, I can leave another note. NW (Talk) 23:32, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please do so. As my number of contributions here is two order of magnitudes less than that at Wikipedia, I think it will be useful to have a more senior editor be seen to comment. Otherwise the next time someone gets the wrong end of the stick, I might really be blocked. After all, there is a lot evidence that who you know is very important in Wikimedialand.--Peter cohen (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aa Workman with flprmk2 01.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Globbet (talk) 00:09, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear NuclearWarfare. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of your inactivity in the past six months.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at the current inactivity run page within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you, OdderBot (talk) 11:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NuclearWarfare. I noticed you gave yourself a lot of user rights. But I made two adjustments in it:

1) I removed the autopatrol right as it's redundant with patrol

2) And I removed upwizcampaigns, because that's only for a small group of people.

Kind regards, Trijnstel_talk 21:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks for the adjustments. NW (Talk) 21:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All the images have been moved and the descriptions are fixed for La Shawn Ford and Marcus C. Evans, Jr.--TonyTheTiger (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. NW (Talk) 21:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:St.-Lambert-surrender.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

High Contrast (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Adam Worth.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Adam Worth.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Kelly (talk) 19:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Guillotinemodels-left.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Kelly (talk) 11:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Affected:

• File:55eerie.jpg

Yours sincerely, Themightyquill (talk) 08:53, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Navy baking bread.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

De728631 (talk) 19:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Navy and Marine Corps Overseas Ribbon.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

– Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 10:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I spoke with Joe Geiger, Director of archives West Virginia Division of Culture and History. He is fine with any historic image of the state capitol building I wish to use on wikipedia (WAY before 1923) from the archives, as long as I am able to do 2 things 1) keep the watermark if there is one on the picture and 2) mention them as the source along with their web link

Can you point me to someone, or show me how, in the upload wizard, what I need to indicate so that the pic I upload is not removedCoal town guy (talk) 00:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belarusian Arabic alphabet-P 2.png 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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Seveleu-Dubrovnik (talk) 17:49, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lisa Brown (politician).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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ��� Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!^{Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS).} 12:41, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:327722296 ee38b0dd33 b.jpg has been marked for speedy deletions , Wikimedia commons doesn't permit uploading personal files/copyright violations,spams and files without a source/license. Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now ! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 06:11, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wye Valley Junction.jpg

[edit]

File:Wye Valley Junction.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! Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

bjh21 (talk) 14:06, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]