User talk:Mavelus
Our first steps tour and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki—it is really easy. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing. |
| |
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?) |
--SieBot (talk) 23:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Image deletion warning | Image:Cher_billboard'02.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 image, 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. |
Rat at WikiFur (talk) 18:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
hola
[edit]Hola Mavelus. ¿Tu eres User:Tommy357, verdad que si? --Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 commons es 08:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
- Mira, en wikipedia se bloquea a las personas, no a las cuentas. No vale decir, como me han bloqueado esta cuenta, me hago una nueva. No. Y se te explicó muchas veces: No vuelvas a subir imágenes que no tengan un permiso bien claro.
- Lo peor de todo es que lo has vuelto a hacer: ésta está sacada de aqui o algún sitio similar.
- Según creo estás interesado en conseguir que el artículo de Cher llegue a artículo bueno. Un artículo que contenga imágenes dudosas jamás debería poder llegar a bueno, aunque un artículo sin imágenes sí que puede llegar incluso a destacado. Añadiendo imágenes de origen falsificado, además de ser algo prohibido por las normas de wikipedia y las leyes de los paises (se llama plagio, robo), empeoras y el prestigio de la calidad de wikipedia, puesto que deja de ser una fuente confiable de información. Por favor, indícame las imágenes que hayas subido mintiendo en el origen o tendré que pedir que te bloqueen de nuevo, además que vigilen para que no vuelvas a subir imágenes. ¿de acuerdo? lamento tener que ser tan brusco. --Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 commons es 15:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Image deletion warning | Image:CherAllnothing.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 image, 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. |
Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 commons es 10:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Please link images
[edit]
Hello Mavelus!
Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images uploaded to Commons should be useful to all users of Wikimedia projects. This is possible only if the images can be found by other people.
To allow others to find the images you uploaded here, the images should be in some place that can be found by navigating the category structure. This means that you should put the images into appropriate topic pages, categories, optionally galleries, or both of them (see Commons:Categories). To find good categories for your images, the CommonSense tool may help.
You can find a convenient overview of your uploaded files in this gallery.
The important point is that the images should be placed in the general structure somewhere. There are a large number of completely unsorted images on Commons right now. If you would like to help to place some of those images where they can be found, please do!
Thank you. BotMultichillT (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- Image:Sarah Brightman2008.jpg is uncategorized since 26 November 2008. BotMultichillT (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- Image:Sarah en concierto.JPG is uncategorized since 8 February 2009. BotMultichillT 06:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Pay attention to copyright | File:Cher at the colosseum.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. For images, you may find Commons:Image casebook useful. You can ask questions about Commons policies in Commons:Help desk.
The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the image description page.
|
-Túrelio (talk) 08:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
File:Dragóndorado.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. |
Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 commons es 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Critically evaluate Flickr licenses | File:The Jonas Brothers.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid.
Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters.
|
--Martin H. (talk) 20:15, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Also Jonas Brothers and Celine Dion, the Flickr user is not the author of the photos he uploaded, so the license is not valid. --Martin H. (talk) 20:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
File:Cher_en_2008.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. |
→Na·gy 16:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
File:Zacefron.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. |
Martin H. (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
File source is not properly indicated: File:CherDivas.jpg
[edit]This media was probably deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:CherDivas.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:CherDivas.jpg]] ).
If you created the content yourself, enter 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! |
Martin H. (talk) 19:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Critically evaluate Flickr licenses | File:JB inconcert.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid.
Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters.
|
--Martin H. (talk) 23:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Critically evaluate Flickr licenses
|
File:Cher rostro.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid.
Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters. See Commons:Questionable Flickr images for a list of known bad Flickr users.
|
We already had this photo of a poster at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cher en 2008.jpg. --Martin H. (talk) 23:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
File:Fox, Megan.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. |
203.96.218.197 07:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
File:Elizabeth_Taylor_sesion_fotografia_1948.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. |
Damiens.rf 06:55, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
File:Katharine_Hepburn.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. |
High on a tree (talk) 14:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Critically evaluate Flickr licenses
|
File:Halle Berry face.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. You may have preserved the information shown on Flickr correctly when transferring the image here, but the Flickr uploader is not the copyright holder of this image. Either the image was created by someone else, or it is a derivative of someone else's work. As stated in Commons:Licensing, only the copyright holder may issue a license, so the one shown on Flickr is invalid.
Always remember to critically evaluate Flickr licenses. Photostreams with professional-looking photographs, album covers, posters, and images in a wide range of styles or quality taken by many different cameras often indicate that the Flickr uploader either does not understand or does not care about copyright matters. See Commons:Questionable Flickr images for a list of known bad Flickr users.
|
Lobo (howl?) 23:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
File:Glenda Jackson face.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. |
HaeB (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Photoshop
[edit]Hi, I'm the one who makes the logos (if you don't remember me). I used Paint at first bun then I downloaded Photoshop. I search the original fonts and I try that it looks so similar to the cover. I make effects. I will upgrade Britney logos soon. Greetings! --Spieler mexikaner (talk) 01:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Katharine Face.PNG
[edit]This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Katharine Face.PNG. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 14:35, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Flickr2Commons
[edit]I have just come across a few images you have recently uploaded from Flickr. I would appreciate it if in the future, you used the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool allows images to be moved to Commons from Flickr without having to download the images to your own computer. It also brings in the largest resolution of the image, as well making sure to list the correct license and url, making it easy for the automated Flickr Review system. Also, it is fairly easy to categorize images with this tool. Elisfkc (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
File:Walter Matthau.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. |
Asclepias (talk) 22:15, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Cate Blanchett face 3.jpg
[edit]
Ronhjones (Talk) 19:50, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Nicole K Face.PNG
[edit]This file may be deleted. |
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Nicole K Face.PNG, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you! |
sourced to image that has since been deleted as copyvio BevinKacon (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Campaña Wikivacaciones
[edit]Hola Mavelus
Soy Sara, oficial de Comunidad para el Capítulo Wikimedia Colombia. Quisiera recordarte que aún puedes participar en el concurso Wikivacaciones 2023 (termina el 31 de enero, 2024). Con este concurso, buscamos enriquecer el registro de las regiones y la cultura de nuestro país. Puedes encontrar toda la información sobre el concurso aquí.
¡Anímate a subir tus fotos!
Cordialmente, Sara Idarraga (WMCO) (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)