User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2019 02

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TUSC token 70dfd90b6e52c9080a8e30c0dd592336

[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! 70dfd90b6e52c9080a8e30c0dd592336 Geo Swan (talk) 01:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Political world3.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!

Cherkash (talk) 21:56, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Political world2.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!

Cherkash (talk) 22:00, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cherkash, I am sure certain mistakes you recently made were made in good faith.
When you find an image that is a genuine duplicate, you don't need to call for a discussion for its deletion. Just put a {{Duplicate}} tag on the image description page. If the copy you think we should delete is a member of categories that make sense, you can copy them to the image you think should be kept.
However, once the duplicate has been deleted, and redirected, we keep the redirect, unless the deleted image was only here for a short time, for the reasons I explained elsewhere. Geo Swan (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Geo Swan Thanks for pointing out the {{Duplicate}} tag, I wasn't aware of all it's supposed to help with. So will keep in mind for any future cases like this.
As for the redirects being kept, not sure what are the "reasons explained elsewhere". Would you mind pointing to the elsewhere? Or just copy/paste here for all to see. Cherkash (talk) 13:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

[edit]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner), if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --MifterBot (TalkContribsOwner) 02:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Benjamin Bottoms -a.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!

World's Lamest Critic (talk) 04:32, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Picture stolen by wiki leaks of confidential USA government data

[edit]

Pictures stolen by wiki leaks of confidential USA government data, sharing or even possession is that crime in the USA?--138.206.258.237 08:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nope!
  • Years ago some elements of the DoD threatened that those who had a clearance to read classified documents were putting their security clearances at risk, if downloaded classified documents leaked to WikiLeaks. Those making this claim said that individuals with security clearances were allowed to view only those classified documents that were related to their jobs, or something like that. Viewing WikiLeaks documents wasn't related to their jobs. It didn't matter that the rest of the world was reading them. Professors with security clearances were warned that they might never get anohter government grant. Students who were planning to go into Government Service were warned that their reading of documents from WIkiLeaks could limit their career because they would then never qualify for a security clearance.

    I haven't heard this claim, since 2012.

    I work on some non-WMF wikis. At two of them I initiated discussions as to whether we should or shouldn't allow the use wikileaked documents. One of those wikis was directly funded by DARPA. I was told there that I could not upload any wikileaked documents, and that I shouldn't link directly to the WikiLeaks site, but that quoting or linking to third party sites was completely okay.

    If simply possession was a crime I think we would know that.

    Note, the strictures that site asked me to observe were only due to their funding. The WMF is a non-profit, supported by donors, so those strictures wouldn't apply here. Geo Swan (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lesley Barber at the 2017 Slaight Music Residency Showcase (34730771094).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!

Crispybcritters (talk) 00:56, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sexy librarian look (15022862928).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!

E4024 (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sexy librarian (481593155).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!

E4024 (talk) 04:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Sexy Librarian Look (3902980364).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!

E4024 (talk) 14:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]