Thomas Gun

Archives • Aug 2008 - Feb 2009

Re: English people

Hello there! I'll try and take a look at this tomorrow. As you probably know, I'm working on alot the UK and British people stuff at the moment. The British people page was dire, and most content about culture and society at a UK level seems to have been neglected or ripped apart. I'm not sure if this would be an area we could collaborate on as a way of making amends???? I'd like that if I'm honest - maybe the British people page itself - I don't know if that interests you tho, but eitherway I will take a look at the English people page.

In my research on the Brits, I found twice over that the national myth of the Anglo-Saxons being the English is just that- something of a myth. Genetic research attests that Germanic blood dominates the South East, and much of the east coast of "Britain" (not just England it seems), whilst Celtic genes are prevalent throughout the west (Cornwall, Wales, but also the West Midlands, NW England, Srathcylde etc). I didn't expect this, but it does dispell the user's gripe about the Britons not being English. Jza84 (talk) 03:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello again!

I'm really struggling for editting time at the moment so I haven't looked into this (I haven't even been on WP). I'm slowly trying to amass some books about the UK as a whole to try to build on areas of weakness in the project about the whole kingdom. But it also sounds like you're also onto the same kind of material as me. Infact, I especially like alot of the stuff at User:Thomas_Gun/sand. I think much of that, and some of the images are going to be also relevant to the Culture section of the British people article.

Of course the whole nationalist thing is going to have to get a mention, and that's fair enough, but alot of it that exists is very synthy, and Cornwall is probably the most horrific on WP, like you say! The genetic stuff sounds very interesting. It really dispells alot of myths about the British Isles.

I've managed to get hold of this, this, this and this, and hopefully after the weekend, I can start to share some ideas.

I may have some free time later this evening, or else tomorrow afternoon and evening. Jza84 (talk) 18:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Doomsday book is spelt Domesday Book Victuallers (talk) 18:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Franco

Well, the information about the copyrights in Spain is in the usual place (COM:L). I don't think it's necessary to provide a link to such page whenever I delete a file that does not comply with copyright legislation (but I can be wrong, of course). With regard to the second one, I don't think you're right since said the picture is not "American" (it's the cover of the Time magazine, that shows a photo of a picture; given the lack of notability of the future dictator outside Spain, it doesn't seem likely that a picture was made outside Spain; therefore Spanish law applies). However, I cannot see any problem in restoring and opening a regular nomination deletion. Best regards --Ecemaml ^{talk to me/habla conmigo} 21:40, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany.jpg

Hello Thomas Gun, could you please write what error is in that picture? Thanks and greetings -- Ra'ike T C 19:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Robin_Hood_(Theater_Schmeater,_Pt4).jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Robin_Hood_(Theater_Schmeater,_Pt4).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!

shizhao (talk) 16:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

File:N.C._Wyeth_-_The_Passing_of_Robin_Hood.jpg

File:N.C._Wyeth_-_The_Passing_of_Robin_Hood.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

shizhao (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

British people

Hello again,

I hope all is well. I've not had a great deal of time for Wikipedia or Wikicommons lately, but hope to pick things up by the end of the month. I was wondering if you'd had any further thoughts about rejoining WP, and also if you'd considered a collaboration on improving the main body of the British people article? The Tamil people is a featured article which uses this guideline, so I want to try and mimic the layout as much as possible - perhaps even improve upon it. I think this is an article that both warrents major attention, but also like we've discussed, could help us start on a fresh slate. :) Jza84 (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. With regards to Arbcom, I will most definately put it in writing my desire that you are de-banned and unblocked. Have you spoken with Alison since?

I agree too that the ancient Britons need a mention, and crutially like you say, the Stuarts effectively revived this. I have expanded the "Middle Ages" section slightly today with a little about the national myth of the Matter of Britain as well as how the term British was once synonymous with the Welsh.

I think James I/VI is a must have too, given his declaration of being "King of Great Britain, France, Ireland etc". I'll try to put something together in that respect.

I'm still hoping to get more about the Napoleonic War and Victorian idea of Britishness. Although painfully cliched, I think the stiff upper lip, bowler hat etc are going to need mention and explanation. What do you think?

I have put a few pictures together on my Wikicommons user page, which could be used. If you could look at that and the British people article I would be grateful. I'm not entirely happy with the image of Britannia on the British people article too - do you know of a better one? Jza84 (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Henry, 3rd Duke of Buccleuch and 5th Duke of Queensberry Please note that the photo of the Gainsborough painting you uploaded is the wrong way round!

Melaoel

File:AbpCosmoLang.jpg

File:AbpCosmoLang.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!

Jappalang (talk) 03:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

England (gallery)

The improvements to the header (with the addition of the info box) have made a big difference. Nice work. oneblackline (talk) 15:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

image:Holy European Empire.png

Hi!
First - I wanted to compliment you on the flag that u made. It's very nice and i like the use of the Fleur de Lys.

And Second - I believe some attribution is needed, as the Name, Idea, description page, and the general design were taken from my original flag file:Flag of Holy European Empire.svg. SO if u'll agree to attribute your work to mine, I'll be very thankful. --Oren neu dag (talk) 03:39, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Order a Flickrreview for flickr images

If you source an image from flickr with a free license like this: File:Our Lady of Fatima tribute.jpg don't forget to order a {{Flickrreview}} for it like I did for it here. If the flickr owner changes the license before the image can be reviewed by the flickrbot or an Admin/trusted user, it will be deleted on WikiCommons. In contrast, flickr images which pass flickr review are non-revocable like this photo:

• File:Ricky Nelson free.jpg Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

File tagging File:Our_Lady_of_Fatima.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Our_Lady_of_Fatima.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

MGA73 (talk) 08:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Ripon Cathedral, Yorkshire.jpg

File:Ripon Cathedral, Yorkshire.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Captain-tucker (talk) 16:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Note

Those two images were deleted above likely because you did not type in a {{Flickrreview}} for them. The Flickrreview bot or an Admin/trusted user checks the license of a flickr image at upload. In this case, the flickrowners changed the flickr license to 'All rights reserved' and so they get deleted. If they had passed flickrreview, then they are non-revocable amd cannot be deleted.

As an aside, I have placed a rename request here and changed the image description. The flickr source likely made a mistake in describing it as the National Museum of Ireland. Here is the message I received from it who seems very familiar with the actual building. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Studley Royal, Ripon.jpg

File:Studley Royal, Ripon.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!

I'm sorry about this...but this is what can happen if you don't order a {{Flickrreview}} for images you upload from flickr. I am asking for the community's input to decide to keep or delete it. People on flickr change licenses or delete images all the time. I have done this too (from cc by to cc by sa) on my flickr account. But this case is quite different since there are no other images by silver doctor here. So, he could claim that this image is a copy vio and sue Commons since the image never passed flickrreview (neither the Flickrbot nor an Admin or trusted user marked it on a free license) But please feel free to make a comment in the DR.

PS: 99% of uploaders upload flickr images with no problem. I just did one today here Since the flickr bot passed the image, it is non-revocable. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment

Thanks for ordering {{Flickrreview}} on your most recent uploads from flickr. As for the DR, I don't know if the copyright owner is telling the truth or not. Some people lie to get images deleted. Of course, if there had been a flickrreview done at upload, we would know the flickr license for sure. But you haven't made a comment in the DR as yet. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Men of the West.jpg

File:Men of the West.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Túrelio (talk) 20:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

File:William Cosgrave by John Lavery.jpg

File:William Cosgrave by John Lavery.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!

--Guliolopez (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Life of artist plus 70 years

Hi. "Life of artist plus 70 years" is only a valid PD claim for artists that are dead more than 70 years. The clue is right there in the label. Margaret Clarke, John Lavery, and Seán Keating all died less than 70 years ago. So you need to stop uploading their works with claims that they are out of copyright. They are not. Guliolopez (talk) 15:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

File:La Guerra Ha Terminado - Paco Ibera.jpg

File:La Guerra Ha Terminado - Paco Ibera.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!

--Elsa Baye (talk) 04:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Help~~

Hello,i saw you uploaded a picture of Pope Alexander VI. (Rodrigo Borgia)(a Fresco of the Resurrection, painted in 1492 - 1495 by Pinturicchio). And i am just editing a book about the Borgia Famlily in Chinese.I think the picutre you uploaded is one of the most beautiful and proper pictures for the cover(since it has been in the public domain, the copyright is not a problem). Yet to make it a cover i'll need one of higher-quality, i've been to libraries and bookstores and searched online for many times, and i just couldn't found it. So i can only write to you, can you help me out? Thanks a lotSuzyscichen (talk) 03:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Henry II of England.png

File:Henry II of England.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!

--Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

File:William Joyce (politician).jpg

File:William Joyce (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!

--78.55.104.83 23:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Stars_&_Stripes_&_Hitler_Dead2.jpg

File:Stars_&_Stripes_&_Hitler_Dead2.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!

SchuminWeb (Talk) 12:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Flag of Portugal.svg

While I did upload the version with pantone colors, the website that was used stated that RGB colors should be used for screens and websites. I agree that the color should be using RGB. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 04:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Michael_Drayton.jpg

File:Michael_Drayton.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!

Blurpeace 20:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

file:Munster - Synod of Rathbreasail (circa 1111).png

Hi, I noticed this map when working on a section on the 12th century church reforms for en:Ireland_800–1169. This map is great, but it would be extremely useful to have a map over the diocesan structure of all of Ireland following Rathbreasail (either the divisions as made at the synod, or the actual divisions following the local synods immediately after Rathb.). That you should have such a map on your harddrive might be overly optimistic on my part, but if you could tell me how you made this map (source for boundaries etc) I'd might be able to make a crude svg map or something (unless you would be willing to make a similar all-Ireland map...). Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 16:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Maurice Barrès by Jacques-Emile Blanche.png

File:Maurice Barrès by Jacques-Emile Blanche.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Kåre-Olav (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Edward VIII (United Kingdom).jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Edward VIII (United Kingdom).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:Edward VIII (United Kingdom).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!

DrKiernan (talk) 07:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Resolution

Hi Thomas, I noticed your excellent composite image File:English people.png. I just wanted to remind you when creating this type of composite in the future to please do at the highest resolution you feasibly can - higher resolution images are useful for printed versions of Wikipedia, and many other purposes. Thanks! Dcoetzee (talk) 23:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Franco_as_a_child.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Franco_as_a_child.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:Franco_as_a_child.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!

Ecemaml ^{talk to me/habla conmigo} 20:27, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Well. I can see a source. But I do not think it is clear why the photo is PD. I changed the "No source" to a Deletion Request (see below). Please comment. --MGA73 (talk) 20:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Franco_as_a_child.jpg

File:Franco_as_a_child.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!

MGA73 (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Edward_VIII_(face).jpg

File:Edward_VIII_(face).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!

howcheng {chat} 05:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

File:King_George_VI_(face).png

File:King_George_VI_(face).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!

DrKiernan (talk) 20:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

File:King_George_VI_(United_Kingdom).png

File:King_George_VI_(United_Kingdom).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!

DrKiernan (talk) 20:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Elizabeth II (head, young).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Elizabeth II (head, young).jpg. 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.

Vanjagenije (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Wilfrid_and_coat_of_arms.png

File:Wilfrid_and_coat_of_arms.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!

Rosenzweig δ 17:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Riders_of_the_Sidhe.jpg

File:Riders_of_the_Sidhe.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!

84user (talk) 18:36, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Province of Liverpool.png ... spelling of Middlesbrough

Hi Thomas - I've just posted this message and wondered if you could do something about it.

Middlesbrough spelling

It's an old chestnut. Everyone can spell Leicester and and London (not Lester and Lundan), but nobody thinks to check the spelling of Middlesbrough. In fact, a lot of people think that their spelling is correct. Well, your - otherwise perfect - map has got it wrong and it's really not acceptable.

Midd-les-brough ...

Middlesbrough (/[unsupported input][unsupported input]ˈmɪdəlzbrə/ Template:Respell) is a large town situated on the south bank of the River Tees in North East England, that sits within the ceremonial county of North Yorkshire. The local authority is Middlesbrough Borough Council.

I'd be very grateful if you could change it.

Could you please put it right?

Best wishes Francis Hannaway (talk)Francis Hannaway (talk) 20:59, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

File:AbpRandallDavidson.jpg

File:AbpRandallDavidson.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!

Rrius (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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!

Affected:

• File:Our Lady of La Vang.jpg

Yours sincerely MorganKevinJ^(talk) 18:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Sowood

Category:Sowood has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Auntof6 (talk) 06:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Louis14-8.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Louis14-8.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:Louis14-8.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!

Asclepias (talk) 16:14, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Marsal Tito.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Marsal Tito.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:Marsal Tito.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!

Eleassar ^(t/p) 13:36, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

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!

Affected:

• File:Kevin O'Higgins by John Lavery.jpg

And also:

• File:William Cosgrave by John Lavery.jpg

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Glyn Warren Philpot - Sir Oswald Mosley, 6th Bt.jpg

File:Glyn Warren Philpot - Sir Oswald Mosley, 6th Bt.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!

Pullus In Fabula (talk) 05:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Emily Davison.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Emily Davison.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:Emily Davison.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!

—howcheng {chat} 05:19, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

File:English people.png

File:English people.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!

Denniss (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Elizabeth II during a visit to Yugoslavia - 197210.jpg

File:Elizabeth II during a visit to Yugoslavia - 197210.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!

Vanja / Вања (talk) 23:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Portrait john calvin (flipped).jpg

File:Portrait john calvin (flipped).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!

Jfhutson (talk) 18:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Edward VIII (face).jpg

File:Edward VIII (face).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!

January (talk) 17:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Edward II of England.png

File:Edward II of England.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!

Hchc2009 (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Catherine Willoughby.jpg

File:Catherine Willoughby.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!

Sir Gawain (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Sanmichele satana raffaello.jpg

File:Sanmichele satana raffaello.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!

Oursana (talk) 08:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Berry_Brow

Berry Brow has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

86.155.226.6 12:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Britain-Norway.png

File:Britain-Norway.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!

Keφr (keep talk here) 13:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not after deleting this, but could you please fix it? The UK flag is upside down. Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 19:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Holy European Empire.png

File:Holy European Empire.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!

Keφr (keep talk here) 09:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Incroyable.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Incroyable.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!

Yours sincerely,   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 04:58, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Howell Arthur Gwynne.jpg

File:Howell Arthur Gwynne.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!

--Animalparty (talk) 02:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Holy Island Map.png

File:Holy Island Map.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!

MPF (talk) 00:36, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Portrait of John II of Portugal.jpg

File:Portrait of John II of Portugal.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!

RickMorais (talk) 01:12, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Order of Saint Augustine.png

File:Order of Saint Augustine.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: source=https://www.augustinian.org/news/letter-to-thenbsporder-ofnbspsaint-augustine-regardingnbspthenbsppreventionnbspofnbspabuse-andnbspthenbspprotection-of-minors Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Nominated for deletion by Elizium23. I am a software, please do not ask me questions but the user who nominated your file for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 10:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Ferdinand IV, King of Naples.jpg

File:Ferdinand IV, King of Naples.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!

Ecummenic (talk) 21:24, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Britain-Norway.png

File:Britain-Norway.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!

GPinkerton (talk) 18:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Category:Archbishops_of_Canterbury_(Roman_Catholic)

Archbishops of Canterbury (Roman Catholic) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Lobsterthermidor (talk) 12:14, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Category:Archbishops_of_Canterbury_(Anglican)

Archbishops of Canterbury (Anglican) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Lobsterthermidor (talk) 12:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Portrait of Hilaire Belloc.jpg

File:Portrait of Hilaire Belloc.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!

Hekerui (talk) 21:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)