This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:
How to use Commons
Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.
Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. The latest archive is Commons:Help desk/Archive/2024/07.
I have uploaded the image from the original author however the images are not getting uploaded ... is there any way you could help me ASAP. Rashm771 (talk) 23:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rashm771: I assume that last response was from you. Please log in when carrying on a conversation such as this, because at least in theory User:2600:1003:B022:CE4A:F117:BBEA:BCAF:B04A could be anyone, and it makes it potentially unclear if that statement came from you.
You still haven't said whether you are talking about these files or other files.
Please do not upload files as "own work" unless they are actually your own work. If you do this repeatedly, your account will probably be blocked. Attribute the author accurately. (This isn't intended as a threat, it's a simple statement of fact.)
If these files are the (copyrighted) work of Debra L. Zynger, we need an actual license from her. Saying "she has given permission" does not amount to a license: we need a license such as {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} or {{Cc-by-4.0}} that explicitly allows anyone to reuse the file, including commercially, and to make derivative works. If she has posted her online with such a license indicated, you can just refer to that online post as the source. If not, then we need her (not you) to go through the process outlined at COM:VRT to provide such permission by email; probably best to have her cc you so you can keep track of what is happening.
Sure, how do I remove these uploaded files, I will get the required information from the person before uploading and submitting the draft! Thank you for your help. I am new to wikipedia and must have committed some mistakes. Rashm771 (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rashm771: if you want to delete your own recent uploads, just follow the usage instructions at {{My bad upload}} to tag the file pages. However, if you think permission via VRT is forthcoming, that's fine; get hold of Debra, get her to send the email, and then follow the process described at {{Permission pending}} to tag the file page. - Jmabel ! talk01:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello I have used the template however the images have not been deleted is there anyway the images can be deleted speedy. I want to submit an article to wikiepdia and I do not want to be blacklisted because of this error. Would you please let me know, thank you !! Rashm771 (talk) 14:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a large series of photos I want to upload, mostly of Shinto Shrines in Japan. I would like to mass upload them with similar names (say Immanuelle 2024 Japan trip photo x.jpg) and then rename them en masse after.
The reasoning behind this is that the folder I have is currently rather disorganized, and the tools provided here on wikimedia commons are very helpful for figuring out where the photo was actually taken. Because I can see the metadata pretty well here and look at the coordinates on the map provided to identify which shrine the photo was of, or similar.
If you're using Upload Wizard, it will use the file name it obtained from your source device, then present the opportunity for you to give the files another name during that process. Is that what you're looking for, or were you trying to rename them after they were uploaded? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RadioKAOS renaming them after they were uploaded. My files are all named like this, and the upload wizard does not allow me to view the metadata. I need to upload the file and then look at the stuff in the description. The upload wizard also is too unstable to upload any amount of files and fill in the information properly. Some of them are ones I can easily identify the location like IMG_3274 is at Mount Omuro but others are impossible without looking at the map linked in the description. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me)19:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
could we upload scanned texts or screenshotted texts ? The material is original (we own it) and are just available free of any charge also elsewhere. The digitized texts are a series of spin-offs of a still unpublished and very long fantasy/Sci-Fi saga, in the form of critical comparative analysis of the six main books.
We are asking here since we saw that wikisource lets upload only just published materials (which is not our case : the contents are available on the internet but not published on paper and are not planned to be any time soon).
Thanks in advance for any reply SGRPB7 (talk) 00:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SGRPB7: That's terribly abstract. Any reason you are not describing this more specifically? Normally, Commons is not a repository for texts. Could you explain whey this would be in Commons' scope? - Jmabel ! talk03:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure we got the point right, but we'll try to re-explain better.
First some introduction : despite asking in this English (general ?) section, all the contents are in ITALIAN language only (as is the Saga itself, btw).
We don't particularly precisely imagine what is "Common's scope" (and we believed we had just been referring to common'scope in our initial question ...).
Anyway, let's start over again
There exist a Sci-Fi/Fantasy Saga called : PluriLogia - Una Famiglia di Libri Paralleli, consisting of 6 eBooks called "Branche" (twigs). They are parallel polybooks or role books. They are not free at all (we own all the rights), and are distributed in self-publishing on different stores around, but we don't want to link them or promote here. They are not "edited" in classic sense in that they are just for sale but have no ISBN (they are protected by hashing on blockchains and also timestamped on some third-party clouds and partly on the Internet Archive and FB groups, Odysee, Telegram, Mastodon, etc) and so are not published "legally".
Then, a lot of spin-offs had spawn from this main works.
There are : short and very long detailed synopses, structural indexes (lists of chapter's titles) and mainly comparative critical analyses.
The concept of parallel books or role books is the recombination of Leitmotivs (like in Wagner's or Bruckner's music or role game thematic cards), specialization of templates, so the critical analyses focus on just one or a few themes (Leitmotivs) at a time, or otherwise focus on comparisons among "homologous" characters' features.
As of now, there are some 15 spin-offs, roughly in the range of ten pages each, but the detailed synopses are upwards of 100 pages overall. The number might possibly grow, slowly, in the future, but the most themes and aspects have just been discussed.
All this material is also just available elsewhere (from much more numerous sources than the main eBooks themselves), but this time free of any charge (the license is : free for personal use, share-alike without any modification, possibly mentioning SGRPB7, which stands for Studio Giochi di Ruolo Poly Books 7, as there are 7 ghost writers behind the Saga).
A point we strongly believe in : these contents we'd like to share ARE NOT PROMOTIONAL in any common accepted sense.
They don't even mention the stores, inside, but above all they are full-fledged critical analyses and delve deeply in the heart of inspiring principles of the project of parallel books.
Now initially we had thought to share them on WIKISOURCE, but there we discovered an explicit veto for NON-PUBLISHED / EDITED (possibly PAPER) books. And we strictly interpreted this required feature as "legally" published, not just self-published.
Here on WIKIMEDIA, instead, the rule seemed to only require original and personal work. The only doubt was : here the hype was not on TEXTS, but other forms of communication.
In the absence of some really certain indication (all what is not explicitly forbidden may be considered allowed, isn't it ?), we could consider to try to upload and see what happens. In case some admin would take down the content, he/she would eventually mention some form of violation, if any.
(Final note : the spin-offs are not planned to be translated in English, since the Saga in itself won't and it is absurd to decouple them).
@SGRPB7: It's a bit hard to work out what some of what you are saying here, because there are some terms that you've used in English that make little or no sense. In some cases, I think it's a matter of false cognates from Italian, but it's hard to be sure. (By the way, nothing wrong with it being in Italian, Commons is largely language-neutral. For certain community purposes English is preferred, but not for content.)
"We don't particularly precisely imagine": I think you just mean "we are not familiar with". That is why I linked it. Let me link it again: Commons' scope.
And it looks pretty clear to me that what you are describing is out of scope (see below), so the rest of this is probably moot.
"They are not 'edited' in classic sense in that they are just for sale but have no ISBN" just makes no sense. "To edit" in English means to go through a document making corrections and revisions. I'm guessing you mean "published", but that is also a pretty ambiguous word, which can simply mean "making something available to a reasonably broad public" and can also mean formal publication (as you allude to with ISBNs).
"not published 'legally'": I'm really uncertain what you mean here. Presumably not that they have been published in an illegal manner, which would be the normal sense of this in English, so I'm guessing you are saying that the way they have been made available does not legally constitute publication, but you don't say with respect to what law. What you've described sounds like it constitutes publication as understood by U.S. copyright law, which is the relevant law for Commons, since we are legally based in the U.S. I'm pretty sure the same is true of Italian copyright law, but since it is probably the most unique body of copyright law in the world, I could be wrong.
From COM:SCOPE: "Excluded educational content: … Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text. Purely textual material such as plain-text versions of recipes, lists of instructions, poetry, fiction, quotations, dictionary definitions, lesson plans or classroom material, and the like are better hosted elsewhere, for example at Wikibooks, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, Wikiversity or Wikisource."
So what it comes down to: how is this educational in a manner that goes beyond text? From what you've written, my suspicion is: "not at all." Jmabel ! talk16:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, we missed the link. We will now commit to study such Commons' scope.
But let us just reply to other remarks.
Yes, we used EDITED as an alias for PUBLISHED, as you understood. And we also agree with you on some ambiguity of the term. That's why we put some emphasis in contrasting "classic" publishing with SELF-publishing. And you also got it right about the adjective LEGALLY. We just meant the material does not seem to be classified as published under Italian Law, since it does not use classic mainstream channel of distribution or 3rd-party publishers. We did not mean we are publishing the stuff ILLEGALLY in the sense we are infringing copyright ! The books are our own, as are the spin-offs. Under Italian Law a book needs an ISBN to be published classically, so ours are ebooks in substance but not formally / legally, lacking that imprimatur from external authorities. As for US law, we don't know much about. We guess ISBN is required too, to be considered a publication. We are unsure about the legal status of our books. The only thing sure is : they belong to us, and are for sell somewhere as just FILES (regardless they are legally books or some undefined digital asset of some sort).
Wikiquote, Wiktionary, Wikiversity or Wikisource.
Here we had just examined WIKISOURCE terms, but as said they would only accept published materials.
Wikiquote, Wikitionary or Wikiversity would seem even less suitable, but we won't miss to examine their prescriptions too (BTW tnx for signalling).
We would need to understand better the sentence : ARE BETTER HOSTED ELSEWHERE.
Here some legal English is required for us to understand the actual nature of the phrase.
It seems, but we might be wrong, that it is AN ADVICE, not an actual COMPULSORY restraint. That is, scanned text is not the best here, but it would not necessarily violate terms. In the other targets (i.g. WIKISOURCE) it would explicitly violate the requirement of "official" published status, which we lack, and are unsure the self-publishing is acceptable (we deem not).
No we will submit the Commons' scope to some AI to get help in translation :D
BTW : we also own a huge load of abstract 3D GRAPHICS (generated by means of StructureSynth constructive geometry software).
Would you thing that BUNDLING together the texts with this graphics, in containers like PDF or even animated gifs or MJPEG, would add sufficient non-pure-text content and make all the bundle more acceptable here ? SGRPB7 (talk) 19:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear, I still see no reason to think any of this is in scope. If there were an article about the books in any of the Wikipedias (e.g. it-wiki) I would feel differently. - Jmabel ! talk22:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rajasthanroyal123, is it something promotional? Remember this is a help page where you can get answer of your question about wikimedia commons, it's not a personal notebook or article page. Wikimedia commons is a free media repository where you can also contribute by uploading media file.see Welcome, Get started and First steps. --KEmel49talk,Uploads06:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In Commons:Mobile app there is a section where anybody can review images uploaded by others and also thanks the uploader if its worthy or propose that file to be deleted if not appropriate.is it only in-app feature or available in website also? --KEmel49talk,Uploads06:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To thank someone for an upload (or any other edit) you can go into the history of the file in question, and there is a "Thank" button. I would strongly recommend against using this feature too much. Commons is not mainly a social network and I, for one, would be annoyed to get a lot of "thanks" notifications in my feed. - Jmabel ! talk16:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By mentioning about Thanks in mobile app, my intention was about positivity and to counter of ...propose that file to be deleted... please don't get me wrong. BTW,Thanks for providing link for reviewing files.i am a newbie though, just roaming here.You can visit My Uploads and see if anything wrong or need improvement (only if you're free).
Hi, I wanted to add two short clips of music for a composer's page who has none of their music on there. Is there anything I can do in this regards? The music and recording is in the public domain, and can be freely accessed. 1unit55Apple10 (talk) 14:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, can someone give a second review on the licensing of the file? It is a Yemeni Armed Forces handout to Al-Masirah TV (also keep in mind that Al-Masirah is a Ansar Allah linked media,) the use of the picture in Wikimedia Commons is via IRNA (irna.ir) which already stated that the picture is from Al-Masirah TV. The licensing seems complete so please I need a second review from an independent reviewer since the current reviewer is from the Middle East and might have COI. N niyaz (talk) 16:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The user who is asking this has no uploads on Commons (not even any deleted ones) and their only interaction with Commons before this was to edit a project page in Arabic. It looks like they have been active mostly on meta, where most (perhaps all) of their contributions have been reverted. The question clearly has nothing in particular to do with Commons, and I would encourage them to ask on the help desk of the Wikipedia in their native language. - Jmabel ! talk19:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The website states: "The Court produces videos and still pictures of all its public sittings and various official events. A presentation video is also available in a large number of languages. Such material is made available to the press, schools and universities free of charge for editorial use (copyrights exempt)." Is this suitable for Commons and if so, which tag should I use? (Particularly this photo) Prodrummer619 (talk) 11:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have several pictures of Dexter Very (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_Very) that I'd like to upload, but I'm not able to do so. They were in my father's memorabilia from this school where he attended and then was an employee for most of his career.
@Williampeck1958: You cannot cross-upload images to Commons when you are on Wikipedia, because your Commons account is too recent. You can upload your images when you are here on Commons. After you upload them on Commons, then you can use them on Wikipedia. -- Asclepias (talk) 12:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Williampeck1958: There needs to be some rationale for the photos to be free, in the sense of Commons policies. If they were published at the time (such as if they are scanned from contemporary newspapers), the needed 95 years since publication would have expired, and the 'licence' would be {{PD-US-expired}}. If, on the other hand, they were never published in the legal sense, but just ended up in his collection, it is trickier: the photographer would need to have been dead since 1953 (if they lived to 70, they would need to have been older than 21 at the time, etc.). If the photographer is unknown and the photo unpublished, copyright expires in 1926 2026. In these cases the template to use is {{PD-US-unpublished}}. –LPfi (talk) 08:11, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are some other even trickier cases if they were first published 1 March 1989 through 2002 (or published with notice 1978 through 28 February 1989), where they would be protected 95 years from publication.
Conversely, not that it matters much here, but most things published in U.S. newspapers, yearbooks, etc. up to and including 1963 will have expired (even if they are far less than 95 years old) because almost no one except a handful of newspapers renewed their copyrights, as they then needed to to retain them. - Jmabel ! talk18:04, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, true. Perhaps Williampeck1958 should consider whether first publication in those time spans could be likely. However, if there are no specific reasons to believe some of the photos could have been first published 1978–2002, I think we can ignore that scenario. Likewise, only if we think a photo could have been first published 1929–1963, we have a reason to check for non-renewal. –LPfi (talk) 07:00, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I recently uploaded a logo of a public university in Malaysia. Since the existing logo used in the English Wikipedia was a PNG, I found a SVG version from the Chinese Wikipedia by another user. I do apologise for not asking earlier, but I wish to inquire about the copyright status of this logo. Thank you! Scuffedsherm (talk) 14:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for replying! Yes, I did base the 2021 date from the upload date by the original uploader at zh-wiki. 1962 may be referring to the actual year the logo was made. This is the part I am unclear about, whether I should base the copyright information of this re-upload on the zh-wiki info or actual. Scuffedsherm (talk) 08:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Normally, scan and upload dates are completely irrelevant. The only reason we would use them is when we don't have anything better: it gives us a latest possible date for the work. The relevant date is the date of creation for the intellectual property in question. - Jmabel ! talk16:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how to upload a Word document Moncho42 (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
El piano de Gardel
Gardel además de utilizar varias guitarras para sus actuaciones profesionales, algunas de ellas de muy alta calidad, también siempre mantuvo un buen piano en su casa para estudios de vocalización, afinación de su propia voz, música y composición, asimismo lo utilizaba para pequeñas audiciones de ensayo de sus obras y para amenizar tertulias familiares o festivas con amigos.
El último de sus pianos que adquirió fue un cuarto de cola de la afamada marca Carl Bechstein número de serie 137958; caja sonora 61246; manufacturado en Berlín en el año 1930, que instaló en su casa de la calle Jean Jaures y que reemplazo a uno anterior que ya no le satisfacía. Esta adquisición la realizo en el mes de diciembre del 1932 en la firma representante de pianos Bechstein, Casa Iriberri Bellocq & Cia., ubicada en la calle Florida 431 de Buenos, Argentina. La compra se realizó parcialmente mediante varios pagos mensuales de los cuales se conservan los correspondientes recibos (ver fotos)
Actualmente este piano se encuentra en perfectas condiciones originales de conservación en poder de Ramon Xavier Cortada, el cual lo heredo de su padre quien a su vez lo recibió en donación de Don Armando Defino, albacea testamentario de Carlos Gardel y de su Sra. esposa Doña Adela Blasco de Defino. Esta transmisión puede verificarse en el libro de Armando Defino “Carlos Gardel, la verdad de una vida” publicado por Compañía Gral. Fabril Editora, S.A. y fue posteriormente ratificada por una carta manuscrita de Doña Adela Blasco de Defino que se reproduce más abajo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moncho42 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New photographs (2) taken by me available to update file. The old vandalised Control Tower is now a renovated and modernised farm house, but structurally 99% original. Prepared to upload, but unable to find how.
Stewart McLoughlin Stewart.mcloughlin (talk) 21:26, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, the only data we have about an IP address is what edits have been made from that IP address. Prior to the edit you just made, we had none from this address. - Jmabel ! talk00:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want to make a article on possible characteristics of a pre Greek substrate language. Only problem I cant confirm it will be super accurate. but I would like try to help spread some information on the subject. Should I add a a disclaimer. Or should i not do it entirely Storm9711 (talk) 04:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see some images in commons are from press information bureau site like this. now i want to use one of picture from press information bureau site to use in a wikipedia article about Kripanath Mallah on en wiki.will it be appropriate if i use similar copyright licence or description. link -- KEmel49talk,Uploads18:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Intent to use it in en-wiki is irrelevant. Similarly, the fact that it is a "press information bureau" is relevant. What is relevant is that it is an official site of the Indian government. If the pictures indeed originate with the Indian national government (as against being copies of someone else's images, used by the government) then it looks like the same license would apply. - Jmabel ! talk04:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Except press information bureau there are many govt channel or pages available on internet.Can i use pic from YouTube video published by govt of india regulated official channel under previous licence. --KEmel49talk,Uploads19:29, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have uploaded Shira Shaked's photo (which is signed under permission 4.0 by the photographer) to Wikipedia Commons. Now I want it to show on Shira Shaked's both Wikipedia pages - in Hebrew and in English. How do I do that? Shirashaked (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the future, if you use Special:UploadWizard, it will give you the code you need to insert it into a page. You can use the following to add the photo in general to a Wikipedia article:
Where "alt=" is alternative text and the word "caption" should be replaced by some wording that provides context like "Shaked in 2014". This is English-language code, but it will work on the Hebrew Wikipedia as well.
Note that Wikipedia articles can sometimes have templates that include photos, so if adding it is confusing to you, let me know and I can assist. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯21:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On a secondary issue, note that there are some conflict of interest guidelines on Wikipedia that generally discourage editing articles about yourself or topics that you are very closely connected to, but there is no rule against adding a photo of yourself. I'd recommend that if you do add a photo at the English Wikipedia that you then go to w:en:Talk:Shira Shaked and add "{{Connected|Shirashaked}} at the top. Again, if that's confusing, please let me know. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯21:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shirashaked. The copyright holder of a photo is generally considered to be the photographer who takes it, and only the copyright holder can release their work on the Creative Commons license you're using for the file. Did you take File:Shira Shaked - Pianist.jpg yourself? You've attributed the photo to someone named Jiyang Chen? Are you Jiyang Chen? If you're not, then Commons needs some way of formally verifying the Jiyang Chen has given their COM:CONSENT for the photo to be uploaded to Commons. You can find out more about that in COM:VRT#If you are NOT the copyright holder and COM:VRT#Licensing images: when do I contact VRT?. Now, if youre really Jiyang Chen, then you should probably change the file's description to clarify that it's your COM:Own work. In addition, I strongly suggest you take a careful look at en:Wikipedia:Username policy#Real names because you may need to change your username if you intend to edit English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:13, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Spraygal109: No, but you can simply download the highest resolution version of the image and take it anywhere that prints photographs. Note that if this is for anything other than your personal use (e.g. if you are giving it as a gift), there may be licensing requirements stated on the file page. They can trivially be met by printing out the file page and passing a copy of that along with the print of the image. - Jmabel ! talk04:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. That’s the perfect solution. The block print is for my personal use. I’ve been chasing this image for a while now. Stay safe. Wiki is needed now more than ever. Spraygal109 (talk) 15:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've uploaded a large .svg image (some 2 MBs), but I cannot preview it and it's not previewed at all on pages, either. What could be causing this behavior?
The file is File:2024-odisha-legislative-by-constituency.svg
MapperGuy87 (talk) 22:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MapperGuy87: "error on line 20 at column 40: xmlns:ns0: '&ns_sfw;' is not a valid URI" I can't promise you there aren't other errors; you should completely check SVG syntax before uploading. - Jmabel ! talk04:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah thanks, I made it from two valid images, but apparently the result sucks. Thanks for your aid!
It might depend on whether there are any individual copyright elements also shown in your photo and whether the photo focuses on them as explained in COM:DW and COM:DM. For example, if your photo is just simply of the general structure of a ride taken from a far or maybe something like an action shot of the ride in operation, then such a photo is probably OK. If, however, your photo focuses in too much on or too prominently shows a copyrightable element (e.g. logo, display, design feature, mascot/character image) associated with the ride, then it might not be OK for Commons. There might also be some COM:NCR in place that aren't related to the copyright status of the photo you've taken but which might apply to you as an individual out in the real world. There's some general information listed here and you might also want to take a look at this Universal Studios Orlando page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So short answer is "probably" - You took the photo, so you have rights to license, and the USA is a country where such photos are usually ok. The reason why it's "probably" rather than "certainly" is derivative work concerns might come into play if significant copyrighted work by someone else were shown in the photo. For people who haven't had to deal with that last point, it sometimes takes some practice to recognize. Take a look at the linked page to get a general idea about it. Then I'd say go ahead and upload if you think the photo is in scope (potentially useful to illustrate the subject) and you don't think it violates anyone else's copyright. If there are problems, other users are likely to notify you. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This photo is incorrectly named. It's not a NonStop server. It's a rack of HPE Nimble arrays. If you look closely, you will see the words Nimble Storage through the grille. If you compare this photo with that photo, you will see they are the same. People have been adding it to various wikis incorrectly saying it's a NonStop server for some time now. Someone proposed deleting it back in 2022 due to copyright issues, but it was kept. If I file another deletion request, what do I name the page? I'm also OK with just renaming it so the title isn't false, anymore. How do we do that?—Kjsehyrt (talk) 03:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kjsehyrt: There should be a "move" option on the file page (probably on the top nav, but it depends on what skin you use). Given that you don't have filemover privileges, it will just let you make a request. Or you can directly use {{Rename}}, similarly. - Jmabel ! talk04:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have a question regarding image usage. Can I use pictures of public figures, such as celebrities (e.g., cricketers, artists, singers, etc.), that I find on social media platforms(Instagram)? Are these images considered public domain or fair use, or do I need to obtain permission or a license to use them? IamAnisurrahman (talk) 06:27, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi IamAnisurrahman. As explained in COM:CB#Internet images, you should pretty much assume that any image you find online is copyrighted unless it clearly states otherwise. You're going to need to be able to demonstrate per COM:EVID that any image you upload is licensed in a way that satisfies COM:L. As pointed out above, some copyright holders posting original content online do release them under licenses that are OK for Commons, but it needs to clearly state as much. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Am I allowed to use AI to make a photo look better?
Can I do this? And do I have to state that it was rendered using AI? I want to know because I am thinking of doing this to a few photos I found of low quality. ElMexicanotres (talk) 07:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ElMexicanotres. There's some general information on this at Commons:AI-generated media. However, in addition to copyright related concerns, some of the various language Wikipedias may have their own policies and guidelines in place related to encyclopedic concerns associated with using such images. So, you might find that even if an AI enhanced image is OK for Commons from a copyright standpoint, there's could be a consensus established on a local Wikipedia project not to use it for encyclopedic reasons. How an image is used encyclopedically isn't really of concern of Commons per se, and is often something that needs to be discussed on relevant talk pages of the local Wikipedia project where you want to use the image. English Wikipedia's en:Wikipedia:Artificial intelligence, for example, states: "the community consensus is to prefer human decisions over machine-generated outcomes until the implications are better understood." This seems to imply there's still a lot of uncertainty regarding the use of such images and also perhaps quite a bit of resistence to using them. You might ultimately have to resolve things on a per image basis until relevant policy becomes more settled. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Een door mij geüploade afbeelding is verwijderd. Toen ik het nog eens probeerde op te uploaden werd aangeraden het "verwijderingslogboek" te bestuderen. Ik kan het niet vinden. Waar is het? Stirclash (talk) 19:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For what usage do you need this file? Copyright is no problem here but the question is whether this is in scope or not. GPSLeo (talk) 05:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For profile picture in my userpage, it is a great picture so others can also use it for whatever purpose. And if it is against the guidelines, please let me know! ~redmyname31~💬09:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Redmyname31: You appear to be active enough to upload one image for personal use on your user page. Presuming the image doesn't violate someone's copyright, it should be fine. - Jmabel ! talk18:46, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want to add a version to this image which does not have so much whitespace. Silly question: how do I upload it so it becomes an alternative version of the original rather than creating a whole new entry. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alternative versions are not supported by the software, but you can upload a cropped version of the image under a different name and add a link in the description template with a new line |other_versions = [[the other version]]. Commons:CropTool was made specifically for this purpose and will losslessly crop a JPEG file. --rimshottalk21:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly correct, but rather than just [[the other version]]:
When I try to Publish Page, it tells me "Error: The text you have submitted is 2,331.298 kilobytes long, which is longer than the maximum of 2,048 kilobytes. It cannot be published."
I also found a bug ticket that the problem is caused when the geoJSON gets prettified during upload. It says you can upload by API, but I think this is beyond my skillset.
Hello, I'm looking for a specific picture of Hohenzollern Castle that I saw on wikimedia commons a long time ago. Back then there was a category "views of Hohenzollern Castle" which contained every photo of views of hohenzollern castle, whereas now there are many categories, one for each year (see here: Category:Remote views of Hohenzollern Castle by year) I am struggling to look through these. Then I tried to use the "incategory" search function:
"incategory:views_of_hohenzollern_castle"
But this returned only categories in this category and not files in every category in this category.
My first question: how do you search every file in every category in this category "views_of_hohenzollern_castle"
My second question:
I want to put every photo in both categories "remote views of hohenzollern castle in 20XX" and "remote views of hohenzollern castle" for others' convenience. is that the wrong way of categorization? what are wikimedia's rules for that? Henrysz (talk) 03:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Henrysz: for your first question, I've made a gallery page at User:Matrix/castlegallery for your convenience (feel free to move it into your userspace). For anyone looking, the method I used was what you can do is go to PetScan, click "Commons" at the top, change the depth to some very high number (like 1000000) then in the categories box enter "Views of Hohenzollern Castle" (w/o quotation marks). After that go to the "Page properties" column and only tick the "File" checkbox. Uncheck the blank checkbox. Then click "Do it!". If you want the thumbnails, you can check the thumbnails option.
Thznk you so much for the fast reply, this was very helpful. Petscan is so useful, especially considering that commons' search tool is pretty bad, and google (with appended site:commons.wikimedia.org) leaves out a lot of pictures. I found what I was looking for, thanks again. Henrysz (talk) 06:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Buongiorno, vorrei richiedere la cancellazione della foto corseavuoto.jpeg per possibile violazione copyright.
Me ne scuso, ma data l'inesperienza ho commesso questo errore. F.Bruno91 (talk) 06:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good afternoon, is it permitted for me to upload a screenshot of a RT.com live to Wikimedia Commons? It states at https://www.rt.com/terms-of-use/ that:
Use of Materials
We encourage free re-use of its materials for non-commercial purposes. All content published on the Site and/or in our Products, such as texts, articles, official publications, and other documents, with exceptions listed below, can be reused without any payment or written license, provided that:
- the source is indicated as rt.com and the hyperlink is provided;
- when re-use involves modifications to the content or text, this must be stated clearly to the end user of the information.N niyaz (talk) 07:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@N niyaz: The wording is ambiguous: they encourage re-use for non-commercial purposes, but nowhere do they forbid commercial re-use. The statement that the material "can be reused", given some specific requirements, isn't explicitly restricted to non-commercial purposes. They may or may not have intended the statement to include commercial purposes. We tend to interpret such statements very conservatively, erring on the side of caution. –LPfi (talk) 07:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a forum in the Village Pump, Help boards, etc., either here or on other Wikimedia sites, dedicated to requests for identification of photo subjects, in particular in service of structured data tagging? I'm trying to identify a piece of military equipment to tag in a historical photo, and I'm not sure if there's a particular place to ask. Nicknimh (talk) 02:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hola, buenas noches. Quisiera saber si es que puedo subir a Wiki Commons bajo la licencia CC-by-3.0 este archivo del escudo de la Municipalidad de Surquillo:
¿Donde indique que la licencia CC-by-3.0 aplica al escudo ese, y quién ofrece la licensia? Yo no lo veo en la página indicada. - Jmabel ! talk04:41, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: I think the reason why a simple intitle: search won't find slashes is that, like the body text search, title searches work on the text after it has been normalised by removing punctuation. mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Full text search has an immense amount of detail on this. The suggestion by Matrix above kind of works in that it finds over 1800 results before giving up, but mw:Help:CirrusSearch advises against doing this because of the load it causes on the Wikimedia servers.
For this kind of odd question about page titles, I usually turn to Quarry. It requires a bit of knowledge of SQL, but does allow for asking interesting questions of a copy of the database underlying Commons. For example, quarry:query/84375 gets the first ten categories with '/' in their names. There are apparently over 150,000 of them in total. --bjh21 (talk) 09:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the usage of materials from Ansar Allah (Houthi) Military Media website.
Hello, this has been really frustrating. The website https://mmy.ye/ is the official website for the Houthi (Ansar Allah) Military Media to upload speeches/announcements and operations. I've contacted the website administrator two times, one via Telegram and one via Twitter. They have stressed that the materials from https://mmy.ye/ and its affiliated accounts (X account, Telegram channel) is free to use, and explained that it's why they do not put a copyright notice on their footer. Unfortunately they aren't able to use emails under that domain due to fear of cyberattacks and phishing. So I want to ask people that are familiar with this matter, if the website admin (via X messages) said it is free to use with the website footer not mentioning anything whatsoever about copyright, will it be able to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? Thank you. N niyaz (talk) 08:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@N niyaz: Copyright notices aren't really required anymore under the copyright laws of most countries (I think); so, not having any such notice, might do the opposite of what the website admin thinks it's doing. It might be better for them to clearly state somewhere on their site that all the content or certain content is released under an acceptable COM:CC license as explained in creativecommonswiki:Marking your work with a CC license. As long as, a CC license that doesn't place any restrictions on commercial or derivative re-use is used, it should be OK for Commons. One important thing, though, is that the content has to be the originally created content of the Houthi Military Media; they can't takes someone else's creative work, add to their website and then claim it's released under a free license. They also need to be careful re-licensing any COM:DW they might have on their site since Commons would free all the elements of the work to be acceptably free. Now, something you might want to be careful with as the person uploading the content is COM:NCR. Such content may be OK from a copyright standpoint, but you should make sure uploading it doesn't violate any real world laws where you live. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why does Wikimedia reject material 95-and-a-quarter years old as "still in copyright"?
Today is 2024-07-25 and I am trying to upload a newspaper cutting from 1929-04-29. This is more than 95 years ago so out-of-copyringht and I was expecting that Wikimedia will accept it. However the latest date I can upload is 1928-12-31. Please, why does Wikimedia not accept it? - thanks in advance for your time! Best regards Jamie Jamie 20th C (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If a US work, see {{PD-US-expired}}. US publications through 1928 are expired; the 1929 works will become PD next 1 January. Some more recent US material might be public domain for other reasons (eg, didn't comply with copyright registration or renewal required decades ago), but specific info would be needed to show that. See Commons:Hirtle chart for more details about US copyrights. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
i'm a newer user here and yesterday i tried to upload myfirst foto ( i didn't know that i had to choose a free licence to do that.. i'm sorry).
Now the picture for my new profile was deleted from the administrator, may you please support me to recover the foto and help me to insert the correct "free licence" i have to use before publishing my firt photo please?
Thanks a lot
BR
Carlo Neto Carlo Neto (talk) 12:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Carlo Neto: I assume this is about File:Carlo Neto.jpg. It wasn't deleted over a licensing issue. It was deleted because it was a personal file by someone with no significant prior contributions. Once you've made 50 or so other edits or uploads here (that aren't about yourself!), bring the matter to Commons:Undeletion requests and it will almost certainly be restored.
Again: please don't start by uploading a bunch of stuff about yourself. I'm going to have to delete File:My own Profile.jpg on the same basis. Genuinely sorry, and this can be restored once you show that you are an active contributor, if you then want to use it on your user page, but imagine what the site would be like if absolutely anyone could come along, upload their own picture, and then walk away. - Jmabel ! talk18:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello dear, sorry i'm very new here so i have to learn a lot about Wikipedia. If i good understtod i can upoload my "Own profile pitcure" only when i will become "Contributor" correct?
In the same time i would like to know when i will can do it? Ho much time it will occur? May i put in my sandbox page other photo that don't represent my self?
To switch from "Sandbox page" to a "real page" visible for everyone if i good understood i have to wait "7 days" and i have to make "50 changes"; it's correct?
Thank you so much and sorry for several questions i asked...
There is no firm rule here, but we allow a reasonable number of personal pictures (images that would not normally be in Commons' scope) from people who are active contributors, for use on their user pages here and/or on other WMF sites (the various Wikipedias, etc.). There is no hard-and-fast rule on what makes an active contributor, or what is a reasonable number, and we don't tend to be super-strict about it, but so far your only contributions have been to write about yourself and upload pictures of yourself. This is not a social networking site. You are very welcome to be here and make genuine contributions to the project, but if your main focus is yourself, there are other sites for that, such as Facebook. - Jmabel ! talk21:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Issues with attribution non-commercial share-alike license 2.0 generic
I wanted to upload this image of Titica, but when I put in the flickr link it said it doesn't accept that license. Why? The image isn't being used commercially and it's use on Wikipedia would not violate the terms of the CC license. I've had this issue with other images with that license too. Urchincrawler (talk) 16:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We want that our readers can use the Wikimedia Commons media files freely – even for commercial purposes. Freedom of knowledge is the essential principle this website is built upon. --Geohakkeri (talk) 16:37, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bertan Asllani adlı İngilizce sayfa düzeltme şansı ve uyarı verilmeden silindi. Nasıl geri getirebiliriz? Ayrıca sayfanın Türkçe alternatifi bir türlü kayda değerliliği karşılamıyor. Nasıl halledeceğim konusunda bilgisizim. Bağımsız ve güvenli kaynaklar ekledim fakat hâlâ sorun var. Ambriella (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've written a draft article on an artist and want to incorporate images of individual paintings. I have permission from the artist's wife to use images on their website. How do I do this? Evbless (talk) 20:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Evbless: "I have permission from the artist's wife to use images on their website." May I guess from your edits that this is about Peter Stilton? Is his wife the heir to his intellectual property? Does the permission she gave consist of a specific license explicitly allowing commercial use and derivative works, with her granting of the license publicly visible somewhere online? If so, could you please link it; if not, could you better explain what you've got? - Jmabel ! talk21:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Evbless. You might want to take a look at COM:L, COM:LRV, COM:REUSE and COM:ENFORCE for general reference because Commons (as posted above) requires licenses that place very few restrictions on re-use. The better you understand what this means, the better you'll be able to the artist's wife. Even better would be to ask her to consult with whoever's in charge of the artist's intellectual property rights to make sure releasing the content is such a way is the best thing to do. Once something has been uploaded to Commons under an acceptable license, it's hard to get it removed at a later date and it's hard to control how it's going to be reused by others. You might want to upload the images to use in some English Wikipedia article, but it will be very hard to stop others from using the images in other ways. So, you might want to make sure the artist's wife understands and is OK with this before uploading anything to Commons. An alternative to Commons would be to upload the images locally to English Wikipedia as en:Wikipedia:Non-free content. This won't guarantee someone won't still try to reuse the images, but a non-free license is way more restrictive and makes it much harder to do so. Anything you upload will need to comply with English Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, which can be tricky; for example, you may not use non-free content in drafts. Once the draft you're working on has been approved as an article, though, you should be able to upload one or two of the artist's more notable or criticaly acclaimed works as representative examples. You won't be able to upload the artist's entire catalog as non-free content, but one or two which might be OK. Finally, since you seem fairly new to English Wikipedia editing, you might want to ask for advice about your draft on the talk page for en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts. Images aren't a requirement for a Wikipedia article, but you will need to demonstrate that artist you're writing about meets en:Wikipedia:Notability (people). The members of that particular WikiProject might be able to help you with that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for showing me a way forward! I'll ask Stilton's wife about the license and try uploading as non-free content. You make the point that before adding images, I need to get this approved as an article. I'll ask for advice from the page you recommend. (I know I need to show where the resumes I've used are coming from.)
One more question: it appears that to save changes, I click "Publish." What is the difference between this and the draft being an article?
@Evbless: "What is the difference between this and the draft being an article?" Barely related. You'll notice that on this page, when you make a comment, the label is "publish changes". "Publish" in this case just mean "write to the wiki." When the draft is published (yup, same word) as an article, that is really a matter of moving it from the "Draft" namespace to mainspace. - Jmabel ! talk
Hi Grojasp44. File:Deutsches_Apotheken-Logo_mit_Lebensrune.jpg looks like it would fall under COM:CB#Noticeboards and signs. It's also looks unlikely to entirely be the original work of the person who uploaded the file; in other words, the uploader owns the copyright on the photo, but they don't necessarily own the copyright on what they photographed. So, if the sign itself is something that is either no longer eligible or never was eleigble for copyright, you shouldn't really need to attribute the person who took the photo at all. In the English Wikipedia article en:Algiz#Modern usage where the file is being used, there's a link to this website which discusses the history of the sign/symbol. If the symbol is now considered to be in the public domain (sorry I don't read German), then you should be able create a SVG tracing of it yourself. Now, you may have to provide two copyright licenses (one for the original symbol and one for the tracing) if you upload it to Commons in a way similar to what those who create SVG emblazons of COM:COA do. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:42, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have uploaded my first file and I am having trouble properly editing its metadata.
In particular, I would like to move the phrase "For further information on copyright, see IETF website." into the Licensing section or an appropriate parameter in the summary box - additionally, I am having trouble getting the {Created with Inkscape} template to put the information into the appropriate place (was I supposed to use it during file creation, not after?).
Looking more closely, though, I think you are wrong about the permission here. At your linked IETF website "Am I allowed to reproduce extracts from RFCs? … It is common to use extracts from RFCs that are in the form of computer code by incorporating them in software. This is the only usage formally allowed by the current IETF rules (RFC 5378). Generally speaking the IETF Trust will tolerate fair use of other extracts, but you must indicate the source of the extract and you must mention the original copyright statement if present."
While the website has the information for all RFCs, RFC 2828 (see pg. 211) has the relevant statement. I altered to use {attribution} and include the required excerpt.
We don't really have much of a standard for where a "Created with …" template goes. I usually just make it part of the description; see File:Gas Works pano 01.jpg for an example. If you want to do it with "other fields" in {{Information}} there are a few ways to do it; a typical syntax would be Other fields= {{ InFi | Row caption of your choosing |{{Created with Inkscape}} }}. - Jmabel ! talk00:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tule-hog: no idea what you mean by "auto-sorting feature" but, much more importantly, I don't see how the permission statement you quote allows us to keep this file. It allows only "derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation". That is not much beyond "fair use", though it is a bit more capacius. It does not allow arbitrary derivative works, so I believe it does not qualify for Commons.
That would be more than sufficient to upload it to en-wiki for use in an article there under the policy explained at en:Wikipedia:Non-free content, but not for uploading to Commons. Possibly you could argue that this diagram is so simple as to be below the threshold of originality and is therefore in the public domain and we can keep it on that basis, but if we are accepting the copyright as accurate (and it seems you do), it does not have a license that is useful to us. - Jmabel ! talk15:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to reach out as I am having trouble with an item I would like to add for a school project. It is an image I took from two items at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame of a purple floppy disc with the Artist Formerly Known as Prince symbol on it and a letter from Paisley Park enterprises explaining what is on the floppy disc.
I think this is a copyright red flag, but I really want to submit this for a project, so I thought I would double check before moving onto something new entirely.
If it is relevant for your school project, it is probably fair use there (especially so if your school project is not online), but that has nothing to do with Wikimedia Commons. Please don't upload it here. - Jmabel ! talk17:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello everyone. I am a beginner in using Wikipedia Commons. I've never uploaded files to Wikipedia Commons before. I edited this [4] map using Inkscape but having trouble uploading a new version of this file. The problem is "Source URL:". I tried pasting [5] and [6]. But it's not working. I thought one of these two is the source. I can't find the "source". So maybe I'm not understanding something here? What exactly should I write there? Can anyone teach me to correctly fill in that "Source URL"?
Two questions: (1) are you trying to overwrite the file, upload a new version under a different name, or do something else entirely? (2) when you say "fill in that 'Source URL'?" are you talking about doing something in Inkscape, in some particular (unspecified) context on Commons (maybe in the UploadWizard?) or somewhere else?
@Denzilhan: I assume you mean File:ÜMİT PAMUKÇU.jpg. When you upload a photo, you normally have only 7 days to change your mind, but I see that this is nearly identical to File:Ümit Pamukçu.jpg, which you also uploaded (it looks like probably a lightened version of the same image). Neither is in use, and there is really no reason to have two versions of this. So are you saying you'd like the former deleted, but the latter should remain? I think that would be easy to do on a courtesy basis (I'd just turn the former into a redirect to the latter). - Jmabel ! talk18:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I am the owner of https://www.bomengids.nl/ a website on trees. I have about 15000 botany photos I would like to donate, but I cannot do that by hand of course.
Is there a script or something So I can automate uploading, adding the right license and making sure the image is filed under the right species and subject.
please contact me at hanscees [at] hanscees.com if this is possible. 213.233.217.13808:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a database describing the content (and, in particular, listing the species) or does this have to be done by site-scraping?
Please set up an account here and use it when communicating. It makes it much easier for people to notify you; also to know that they are consistently communicating with the same person. Given that you want people to email you, add an email address to your account. It is not our normal practice to email users outside of our regular system. - Jmabel ! talk15:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. What do we do with images that are uploaded as own work and has a license template, but are clearly not own work? I was going to tag it with {{Nsd}}, but I thought own work images don't have to have a source. The image in question is File:Lombok abad 19.jpg, thanks. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs)12:25, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: Bring it into the graphics program of your choice (I use GIMP, but for this even Microsoft Paint will do, as of course will GraphicsMagic and ImageMagic from the command line). Save as a PNG. - Jmabel ! talk16:32, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above might sound simple enough, but it is not and very frustrating when there is nothing telling me what the 4 errors are and I have spend the last hour trying to go back and double check and figure it out but I still can't work out what the error message is and hence I cannot submit and finalise my work. I am hoping that you can advise what the typical "errors" that lead to this message are so that I can double check? Rabbitoh101 (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Screenshots from audiovisual works (such as films, television broadcasts, video clips) are often the property of its producer or creator and they may not be uploaded to Commons unless the work itself is in the public domain or released under a free license or unless the copyright holder is willing to release the screenshot under a free license. But if you got that cleared and the screenshot will be educationally useful, you’re good to go. Always remember to credit the author, provide the source and state the granted license. --Geohakkeri (talk) 22:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to upload this image of illegal graffiti on the Planned Parenthood in Anchorage, but for some reason the Upload Wizard won't accept the {{ Non-free graffiti }} template. (I didn't put the spaces between the brackets and words while typing it in the upload.)
The graffiti itself is clearly {{PD-text}} – there’s nothing original to it really. But did you notice that the website doesn’t grant any free license for the photograph? For that reason the photo cannot be uploaded, unfortunately. --Geohakkeri (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Urchincrawler: What Geohakkeri said. The graffiti would be no problem if you took a photo of it yourself. But this is a photo by someone else, and there's no indication that the photographer released the photo under a free license. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Need senior wikipedian to review my latest image upload and article edit
The source site for the file does not state the claimed free license you placed on the file. Do not assume something you find on the web is free licensed unless that is specifically stated. It seems over COM:TOO India, too complex to be PD. As to the article, ask on en:Wikipedia. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wolfpack1999. Do you want to upload a crest or a logo? They might seem similar, but they're treated differently. If you're asking about a logo, you can only upload it to Commons if its licensing complies with COM:L. Commons doesn't accept fair use content of any type per COM:FAIR so anything you upload will either need to be too old or too simple to be eligible for copyright protect, or will need to be released by its copyrigh holder under a free license that Commons accpets. Anything else should probably be uploaded to English Wikipedia as non-free content, but only if its uses satisfy English Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. If, on the other hand you're asking about a crest, then things get a bit more complicated. Images of crests are quite similar to images of coats-of-arms in that they're visual representations of written definitions. As explained in COM:COA, this written defintion (referred to as the "blazon") is almost never considered eligible for copyright protection, but correspoinding visual representations (referred to as "emblazons") almost always are. So, you can't upload a crest you find on the school's website to Commons unless the school gives their consent to do so, and this usually means someone at the school emails Wikipedia VRT and verifies they've given their consent. Uploading such a file to English Wikipedia is almost never allowed because anyone can create their own visual representation of a crest based on its defintion, and they could then upload a freely licensed version of their representation to Commons or English Wikipedia to use instead of any non-free one found online. You could try and get the school to give its consent by following the guidance at en:WP:PERMISSION if you want; or, you could ask someone at en:WP:HERALDRY or COM:GL/ILL to try a create a freely licensed visual representation for you to use. Either of those could be uploaded to Commons and would be preferrable any non-free version of the crest you find online. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it seem complicated to have an image upload on wikimedia due to strict license unless it is your own creation. Thank you for clarification. Wolfpack1999 (talk) 05:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ich möchte ein Bild hochladen bzw. speichern, habe dies vor 4 Monaten bereits versucht, klappt aber nicht, es wird das Bild nicht angezeigt, was kann ich tun? Was mach ich falsch? Was muss ich beachten? Status19a (talk) 10:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was meinst du mit „es wird das Bild nicht angezeigt“? Du hast exakt eine Datei hochgeladen, und die zweimal: am 12. April und nochmals heute. Das ist File:Harald Koschik.png. Diese Datei wird in meinem Browser ohne Probleme angezeigt. Gruß --Rosenzweigτ12:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just created an account in attempts to get registered as a 3rd party so that my company can add people to Wikipedia. Please advise on how to get started.
I need to insert an image into a first column that is in the middle of a long chart with many others. Image was successfully uploaded onto via upload wizard. Help needed! TheBaronezz (talk) 17:45, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBaronezz: It would help a lot if you linked the page you want to edit. It's not obvious what would be even slightly difficult about this, so it's not obvious what help you need. - Jmabel ! talk23:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nbadraan. Only a Commons administrator can delete a file, but you can request deletion as explained in Commons:Deletion policy if certain criteria are met. What files are you referring to? Why do you think they need to be deleted? Are these files you uploaded yourself? Were they uploaded by someone else? If you can provide some more information about these file, someone might be able to give you a more specific answer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trouble with upload form, for a non-copyrightable image
(Which is true: I read online that images generated with the help of AI are not subject to copyright, which I assume is the same as "public domain". Maybe that doesn't apply here because the AI only helped with the technical details of implementing my precisely worded design as an SVG?)
Also I had trouble figuring out what to put in the author field.
Anyway, the ideal license for this would be CC0. Is that a possibility?
And I'd love it if you fixed your form to not force me to put an incorrect date.
@Jruderman: Hi. I have corrected the date manually. And I think this file could fall within the public domain of simple geometry even though it is created with the help of AI. I have updated the file descriptions which is likely to make it better. Cheers. Cypp0847 (talk) 05:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. ~redmyname31~💬 19:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
.jpg)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:1979_De_Polder_Oostzaan.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ACorseavuoto.jpg&diff=902699425&oldid=902691382){kind=link}
,_2024)_09.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asia_homosexuality_laws.svg#mw-jump-to-license){kind=link}
![[5]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Asia_homosexuality_laws.svg){kind=link}
