This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:
How to use Commons
Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.
Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. The latest archive is Commons:Help desk/Archive/2024/07.
Latest comment: 5 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hei hei! Manually assigning initial subtitles is painfully tedious. 😥 Translating them is fine, as the times are already established. Are there any useful tools or ways that will make adding subtitles easier and/or faster? I couldn't really see anything of the sort on the subtitle information page, though maybe I simply didn't look closely enough! EdoAug (talk) 01:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Usually, yes. It depends on my workflow, where I publish it first, but the advantage is that YouTube has speak recognition and adds a (not perfect) transcription with rather accurate timestamps, so you only have to do smaller changes. Once published (video and subtitle), you can download the subtitle with online or offline software :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:17, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Good questions, this is very much needed and there probably already is a request / code issue for it somewhere. If you post it on Youtube you can indeed just use (download and copy) the generated srt subtitles (or time-matched subtitles if you provide the text but not the timestamps). Prototyperspective (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I get an 'innapropriate content' warning when trying to publish a translation of a medwiki article
Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I'm currently translating an article from MedWiki, but I've been unable to publish it. I keep getting a message warning me about inappropriate content. The warning reads, 'Automatic editing filters have identified problematic content in your translation. Details: Possible inappropriate content related to the human body'. I'd love to get this issue figured out, please advise. JennyLima (talk) 01:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Since Wikmedia Commons doesn't have "articles" other than our own policies, guidelines, help pages etc, pretty much any article would be out of scope for Commons. Is there a chance that you are asking this question on the wrong website? - Jmabel ! talk01:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Bigben1979: It normally means that when accounts were unified across the WMF wikis 15 or so years ago, someone didn't resolve a name conflict in a timely manner, so this was added to remove ambiguity. Of course, there is nothing stopping someone from just using it in an account name separately from that, but that's vanishingly rare. - Jmabel ! talk17:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
According to Microsoft Copilot:
“What does it mean when ’ ~commonswiki’ is attached after the username? What does it mean when ’ ~commonswiki’ is attached after the username in the ‘User’ of the ‘File History’ for the photos I posted over 10 years ago? Bigben1979 (talk) 17:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)” James StevensAnderson (talk) 02:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Abzeronow, I am curious where you found the "1989" cutoff year, because it is not in COM:L and seems quite arbitrary when copyright tends to rest on the date of death of the author/creator of a work. Does a 1989 cutoff apply to all countries, or one in particular, such as the US for the specific case of DeLizia and IMDb (Amazon)? Elizium23 (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
This was a question about an American actress and an American site, so yes, I was just discussing American copyright law in such all photographs (except for U.S. federal government works) are presumed to be copyrighted if published after March 1989. Of course, many American photographs from 1929 to 1989 are still copyrighted too, but because of formalities in copyright law in that period, research has to be done to determine copyright status. As you say, works from outside the U.S. would have different copyright rules, and life of the author plus 70 years is generally the rule of thumb but there are exceptions for simple photographs in some countries. Abzeronow (talk) 03:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Trade: it's almost too simple for a guide. Download the full resolution version of the photo. Open it in GIMP (or another image editor, but that one is free and powerful). Select the portion to be blurred, by whatever selection tool is most convenient. Select Filter | Blur | Gaussian blur... from the menu. Increase "Size X" until it looks sufficiently blurred ("Size Y" should also change unless you actively delink them). Save. Upload as an overwrite.
I figured it out. Unfortunately the default level of Gaussian blur is not enough to hide copyrighted elements. Could you tell me how to turn it up without having to redo the lines all over againTrade (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Is this Gaussian blurring intended as a courtesy to simply prevent innocent people from seeing a copyrighted image, or is it intended to prevent distribution of that copyrighted image by sites such as Commons? Because we should be mindful of the effects of en:Deconvolution and the ability to, perhaps with favorable circumstances, reconstruct whatever you've chosen to blur.
Perhaps a better choice would be simple erasure. Just black out the offending portions of the image, erase them completely, take them out of the equation. Then, you won't leave any opportunity for reconstruction. Elizium23 (talk) 00:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
We usually use a Gaussian blur for this purpose. It's pretty effective if done at a high enough level of blur (the default is a very slight blur, the user has to increase the area used in blurring from 1.5 pixels to usually 15 or more (Trade: you might want to look at the GIMP manual online for how to do that), even higher for a large portion of a high-res image). The advantage to a Gaussian blur over erasure is that it leaves the scene looking pretty "normal" at low-res but only very little more legible (or even less so) at high-res so it doesn't produce a "useful" copy of the copyrighted material. See File:Albanian President Bajram Begaj hosts Army Gen. Daniel Hokanson, chief of the National Guard Bureau, for a meeting at the Office of the President in Tirana, Albania on June 8, 2023 - 2.jpg for a good example.
I think the issue of deconvolution is a red herring. This overwhelmingly arises for third-party images where we always link back to the source image, so the full, infringing version could be found in any case. It's not about making that impossible to see/find/recreate, it's about keeping the would-be infringement de minimis. - Jmabel ! talk02:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Не розумію за що мене заблокували і чому моя стаття "Юрій Вольф-Вурдалак" була видалена? Поверніть будь ласка. Скоріш за все заблокували за те, що я натиснув декілька разів на кнопку "змінити", тому що думав що інформація не збереглася. Прошу вибачення та в майбутньму не буду робити подібне. Прошу розблокувати обліковий запис і тему "Юрій Вольф-Вурдалак" UARock (talk) 09:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@UARock: You have no deleted edits here on Wikimedia Commons.Is this about uk:Юрій Вольф-Вурдалак on the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia? If so, you'd have to take it up there, where it has not yet been deleted, but it has been nominated for deletion as "non-encyclopedic." - Jmabel ! talk17:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, I am planning to upload an image of the original painting for "Lobo #1" from 1990 by Simon Bisley to enhance the related article. Before proceeding, I want to ensure that my approach complies with Wikipedia's non-free content policy. Here's my plan:
Justification: The image showcases Simon Bisley's distinctive style that significantly transformed Lobo’s visual representation and popularity.
Educational Purpose: I aim to use the image for critical commentary on the artistic evolution of the character Lobo, demonstrating Bisley's impact on comic book artistry.
Copyright Info: The image is copyrighted by DC Comics, published in 1990. I intend to use it in low resolution to comply with fair use, discussing its significance in an educational context.
Relevance: The image is crucial for the readers to understand the specific aesthetic and cultural shift in the character portrayal introduced by Bisley.
Additionally, I have resized the original image to a resolution of 300x453 pixels to further comply with fair use guidelines. (300x
453 px).
My primary motivation is to present the most relevant and popular portrayal of Lobo. Could you please confirm if this approach is in line with the guidelines or suggest any modifications needed?
Edit summaries are immutable, and unless an oversighter redacts them, they will remain as-is. If you really need to place a comment in the article history, you can make some sort of inconsequential edit ("null edit") and supply the edit summary at that point. But typically, I would not recommend this. You could always place a comment on the File talk page, or some other appropriate talk page, as a more normal discussion. Elizium23 (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Lahsim Niasoh: In general, yes, if there is a pretty extensive talk page, some sections of which are genuinely "stale". On your own user talk page, you can be more aggessive than that, if you like. Don't mess with anyone else's user talk page in this respect, though. - Jmabel ! talk02:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
User:Commander Keane recently brought it to my attention that no one seems to be monitoring Category:User needing help. I took care of a few, but there is more there than I wish to take on right now. If anyone can help some of these users, great. Remember to mark the "Helpme" template with a {{Tl}} when the issue is sorted out, or if you have begun a dialogue and will be watching the page and taking care of the issue moving forward. When you do that to the template, you effectively remove the category so that no one else is redundantly drawn to the page. - Jmabel ! talk04:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello. If I personally received permission to publish a photo on Wikipedia from the person who owns the copyright, can I do so? Or should it not have copyright in the first place? Arsenysob (talk) 12:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I want to bring to Commons a image from the MRE (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) of Brazil, however they don't use an existing license but instead write that "The content available on our portal can be freely reproduced, as long as due reference is made to the source of the information (accompanied by the link to the publication page and date of access to the content) and credit is given to Itamaraty. The same applies to content published on our social networks.", this text can be read in it's original in portuguese at https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/perguntas-frequentes/outros-assuntos#portal. Otto Von Heim (talk) 15:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Redmyname31: If the "other link" is the updated url of the original source, you can update it in the "source" field of the file. If the "other link" is an alternate source, you cam add it in the "other versions" field, but without removing the mention of what was the actual source. You can indicate that the source link is dead. I added the link to an archived copy [1]. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:57, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Wanted to upload some files from mil.ru e. g. [2] by URL2Commons. The simulation works well, but when uploadin I just get an error without any further eror message. Avron (talk) 11:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
To confirm: can I upload an image which includes works released under cc by sa 3.0 and works that are cc by sa 4.0? Should I license the image under just 4.0 or both? Cremastra (talk) 11:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
BONJOUR je voudrais savoir comme est positionnait le moteur d'un Peugeot 103 de l'année 1973 parce que j'ai achetais un moteur très ancien avec le variateur fixe et je l'ai plaçais sur mon Peugeot 103 vogue de l'année 1988 et la courroie qui n'est pas tendu du tout pourquoi à votre avis est ce que il manque une pièce pour que la courroie reste tendu en vous remerciant John pages ! 2A01:E0A:9CE:87F0:4D79:B091:CDAE:BB4713:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
request for information
HELLO I would like to know how the engine of a Peugeot 103 of the year 1973 is positioned because I bought a very old engine with the fixed variator and I placed it on my Peugeot 103 vogue of the year 1988 and the belt which is not stretched at all why in your opinion is a piece missing so that the belt remains taut thanking you John enamel pages <redacted>@gmail.com
Bonjour et bienvenue. Cette question semble n'avoir rien à voir avec Commons, essayez un site d'aide automobile, à la recherche d'un tendeur de courroie. Essayez également de ne pas utiliser de doubles espaces dans les phrases.
Hi, and welcome. This question appears to have nothing to do with Commons, try an automotive help site, looking for a belt tensioner. Also, please try not using double spaces within sentences. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:56, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Updating map svg - file name could not be kept as account too new.
"Copyright" and "Trademark" are two different yet interesting things. A simple logo that doesn't pass TOO can be trademarked if functions as a unique identifier for a brand in the marketplace. -- Mrb Rafi (talk) 06:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Good day. I'm just trying to upload the photos. It is not possible to have more than 60. Is there a possibility, since I would like to apply for the category with the most photos. Also, when I drag the file, it says that there is a problem with the network, but there is no problem. Thank you for your time. Natalija Rosic (talk) 12:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Natalija Rosic: It looks like, in practice, you are uploading photos with no topical categories. Please do see Commons:Categories#Categorization tips. You would do well to go back and add appropriate categories to the photos you have already uploaded.
As for your technical question: what upload tool are you using (Special:UploadWizard or something else)? UploadWizard does, indeed, have a limit of 50 files at a time, and I doubt that will change in the near future. If you are replicating text content over even more files than that, you can always use a Notepad and copy-paste.
Not sure what you mean by "drag the file" (from where to where). "it says that there is a problem with the network": what is the referent of "it" here? And what exactly does the error message say? - Jmabel ! talk18:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 days ago9 comments6 people in discussion
The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
I need the names and contact information for these two administrators. They have both been asked multiple times through talk and direct email and have not only declined to state but have interfered with the legal process and my legal rights. @Bbb23 @331dot
This is Wikimedia Commons. Please do not bring your problems from English Wikipedia (this user was blocked there for undisclosed paid editing) here as we are a separate project. Abzeronow (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Please be very careful with what you post here. This is legal process and any attempt to block, discourage or intervene is obstruction of justice and illegal. Alexismeshi (talk) 21:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Please be very careful with what you post here. This is legal process and any attempt to block, discourage or intervene is obstruction of justice and illegal. Alexismeshi (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Alexismeshi: Please take a close look at COM:NLT and en:WP:NLT, and be very careful about what you post here on Commons moving forward. Being blocked on one Wikipedia project doesn't automatically mean you're blocked on them all, but you're likely going to end up blocked here if you continue to try to use Commons to further some dispute you're having on English Wikipedia. Moreover, if you take things too far, you could end up with a global ban with respect to all Wikimedia Foundation projects. You're going to need to resolve your Englist Wikipedia block-related issues on English Wikipedia. You should carefully read en:WP:UNBLOCK and en:WP:NOTTHEM, and then use en:WP:UTRS to request your account be unblocked. Since your user talk page access has already been taken away because your comments weren't in accordance with relevant English Wikipedia policies and guidelines, I don't suggest you try using UTRS to do the same because you'll only lose your ability to use that and move yourself one step closer to a global ban. I also suggest to take a very careful look at en:WP:OUTING and en:WP:OWH because actively seeking out personally identifying about another person to post on any Wikimedia Foundtion project page won't help you get your English Wikipedia account unblocked and isn't deemed acceptable behavior. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Bbb23 and @331dot are being sued in small claims court. This is legal process and any attempt to dissuade or discourage it is obstruction of justice and illegal. Be very careful what you post here. Alexismeshi (talk) 21:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Making legal threats toward other users (and, certainly, filing a lawsuit is beyond just a "legal threat") is sufficient grounds for a block. You basically have a choice: stay here as part of the community, and settle your issues within the community or seek remedies in a court. - Jmabel ! talk18:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hello ,
I am making edits to a page to improve the quaility and knowledge of said page. it consist of many outdated photos, If i upload pictures from my business that I own to this will other companys in the same industry be able to use these photo and say it is there work? I want to use my photos as examples for people to learn but not for others to advertize their business falsely Ronnie2871 (talk) 06:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi Ronnie2871. You might want to take a look at COM:L because only content which meets the licensing requirements set out in that policy page is going to be OK to upload to Commons. You might also want to take a look at COM:Own work, COM:LRV and COM:ENFORCE before uploading any ways and makes sure you understand what it means to do so. Finally, another thing to understand is that Commmons is mainly concerned with the licensing of the content its hosts and whether it falls with COM:SCOPE; it's not too concerned with how such content is being used by the various Wikimedia Foundation projects like English Wikipedia. Whether an image is ultimately considered OK to use often depends on the policies of the project where you want to use it; for example, English Wikipedia's image use policy. There might be some who disagree with replacing what you consider to be "outdated" photo with ones from your own business; so, if you find that to be the case, you might have to establish a consensus in favor of a such a change. Since you appear to be asking about adding images to the English Wikipedia article "en:Sandblasting", the best place for you to discuss changing the images would be at en:Talk:Sandblasting. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Will other companies be able to say it is their work? No, they won’t. For example, CC BY license explicitly requires that appropriate credit is given. If others claim your photos as theirs, it’s a copyright violation. --Geohakkeri (talk) 08:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Enrisilve: Si desea eliminar los archivos suyos, debe pedir la solicitud lo antes posible. Por lo general, aceptaremos que un usuario cambie de opinión sobre una carga dentro de los siete días; después de eso, generalmente no. - Jmabel ! talk18:54, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Muchas gracias! Hay alguna forma de saber en donde se encuentran los archivos que ya subí? Hay alguna especie de sección, directorio o algo? Soy nuevo editando aquí... gracias desde ya por cualquier ayuda! Enrisilve (talk) 12:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Music presents some interesting copyright challenges, because there are multiple creative works involved:
The notes, melody, harmony, instrumentation and arragement of the music itself, which may be written down as sheet music
The lyrics/words, which may also be recorded along with the sheet music
The actual performance of the piece, whether it's a public concert, a recording session, a video up on YouTube, etc.
Plus, any derivative work that's present, especially sampling or "snippets" of someone else's creative work.
All these separate items can fall under copyright and licensing umbrellas, and even different ones at that. If an artist performs a work that's in the Public Domain, they can still hold a copyright on their performance and recording of it. Likewise, the owner or copyright holder of a work (such as what's on your sheet music) may restrict or license public performances of it.
Anyone releasing or performing an original piece may still face lawsuits over plagiarism or sampling.
You can often pick up sheet music of popular tunes in a store that sells musical instruments or pianos. That music's almost always copyrighted, with restrictions on public performance. Likewise, you can pick up a hymnal in any church, but if your choir wants to sing those songs, licensing may be necessary.
In a nutshell, sheet music is a simpler representation than a performance or recording, and its copyright/licensing issues are likewise simpler, but they still exist, just as any creative work. Elizium23 (talk) 23:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
This is the Wikimedia Commons. It is a sister site to Wikipedia that hosts freely-licensed and public domain media. We have nothing to do here with opening or closing versions of Wikipedia. Please see m:Langcom. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯19:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 day ago12 comments4 people in discussion
Since I'm not a content creator or author, most of my work here on Commons involves finding files to delete/report and filing those reports on them. However, I'm encountering an uphill struggle in finding automated tools that ease those reporting methods. Awhile ago I found several hundred files that needed to be processed, and this could be partially automated with a generalized tool, but not fully automated, much to my dismay.
Now I've got @Yann admonishing me for filing unnecessary deletion requests. I didn't want to file those requests! I only wanted to report licensing errors! But the buttons in your Commons UI forced me to open DRs rather than "report" or merely "fix" the licensing defects.
The "Tools" menu as found in Vector 2022 on Wikimedia Commons
As you can see, Vector 2022 presents plenty of tools for dealing with files, such as "Nominate for deletion, report copyvio, no source, no permission, no license". But Yann doesn't like the way I used them. Should these tools be avoided? Do I need to fall back on manual filing for every task? Because if I need to manually add templates just to report a licensing issue, I'm just gonna stop reporting them altogether.
These tools are evidently optional "Gadgets" which I've enabled in my preferences. If Gadgets here are a bad idea, perhaps that should be addressed before exposing them to ordinary editors.
If you want help patrolling, if you want to reduce backlogs, and if you want editors to do the right thing, you'll need to ensure that ordinary tasks are automated, and that the automation can do the right thing without me having to worry about pissing off admins just because I pressed a button which I assumed was appropriate for the situation. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 09:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
For starters, "no source/permission/license" should be smarter about fixes and repairing license rather than blindly starting a DR. Any automated process that's going to annoy an admin or work against the accepted processes should not be allowed and shouldn't be condensed to a tempting button.
For a full-blown DR there are several actions which need to be taken: the placing of the template, notifying uploaders and other stakeholders, creating a DR page itself, and transcluding that into the daily log. When I was nominating hundreds of bulk deletions, it seemed that some of the tagging and listing them on the DR page couldn't be automated at all. Elizium23 (talk) 16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Elizium23: Please see Help:VFC. There are also several other gadgets which help creating DRs with minimal work. And please do not create a speedy deletion for a work which is most probably in the public domain. That's what I told you on your talk page. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Look I'm not a license or copyright expert. I hit buttons that said "No permission/no license" with no expectation that they would malfunction.
I don't know what I'm supposed to do. If there's no license or permission then I should not add the appropriate templates?
If I suspect that an incorrect license is supplied, I will not take initiative to "fix it" because this is a legal issue. I will tag it and defer to a copyright expert in that regard. That is part of the deletion process, I had assumed. Or if you want it instead sent to a License Review rather than a deletion discussion? Is a deletion discussion an improper venue to work out licensing issues? Because this is always how I approached it in the past and nobody's got on my case about it before. I'm sort of surprised that it is now an issue and I have been doing the wrong thing for decades??? Elizium23 (talk) 07:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
See Commons:Deletion policy. {{subst:nsd}} if there is no sensible information about the source, {{subst:nld}} if there is no license template, {{subst:npd}} if it isn’t clear that the stated license was actually granted by someone who had the legal right to do so, or {{subst:dw-nsd}} if the file is a derivative work without clear information about the original works. Finally, {{LicenseReview}} is pretty much a routine thing to do when the file is from an external source which might quite well disappear (from internet) any day. --Geohakkeri (talk) 08:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Okay I figured out those templates, but that makes no sense if Yann forbids deletion requests, because all of those constitute deletions as a time bomb, so what gives here? Elizium23 (talk) 08:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Alright, well the PD image in question was probably the lunar map one.
The license was already PD but the uploader had claimed authorship and hadn't credited the real author.
Once again: I'm not a legal expert. I'm not going to presume to know copyright or be able to actually figure out an author just by looking at an image, okay? I don't want to be the guy who adjusts ownership on an image from one claim to another, only to find that the claimed owner really did create it. That's, again, a legal issue I'm not qualified to get into.
{{Copyvio}} was perhaps the wrong template, but again, I'm just a carpetbagger here from enwiki, and on enwiki, if someone claimed ownership of PD materials, that'd be a clear copyvio that would call for cleanup. Sue me? Elizium23 (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
And if you're specifically referring to File:Nasa--methalox-rocket-launch.jpg (although I have no User talk page record about any comment you've made), this file is emphatically NOT PD and you appear to have erred when you twice declined to delete it and restored its PD status. It was a NASA APOD contribution and we've located the originals and the licensing terms from the authors. And I must say, I'm a bit offended that I've got the reprimand for this issue when the license was clearly falsified by someone you just warned about an indef block for the very issue??? Elizium23 (talk) 07:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Having trouble to create categories for different projects on Commons
Latest comment: 1 day ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hi thereǃ I am a Project Manager working with the Wikimedians of Albanian Language User Group. We are running some projects with the community on Wikimedia Commons. We would like to collect contributors' pictures on different categories, but we are having trouble creating categories on Commons as it considers their creation as articles. Can anyone help us how to resolve it? Thanks in advance. Vyolltsa (talk) 13:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Vyolltsa: Hi!, Please explain your problem better. You created a number of categories [3], so obviously your problem is not about how to create categories. What do you mean by "it considers their creation as articles"? -- Asclepias (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Vyolltsa: Hi, and welcome. You have the wrong character in use, it needs to be a punctuation colon, ":" (U+003A, ASCII 58 decimal, Alt+58), just like in the beginnings of these replies, not a letter colon. Our systems are seeing that you are trying to create this in the gallery namespace. Categoryː... is incorrect, it should be Category:... — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jeff G. Thank you for you help. My keyboard was not working right. Now that I fixed it, I managed to create a category.
Latest comment: 4 days ago9 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, I have been recently cropping pictures I find on Commons to serve as images for the embassies of Brazil in Wikipedia, however it has come to my attention that freedom of panorama is something that exists, and that it is something not every country adopts. I frankly have no clue if what I did goes against the censorship in South Africa, R. Congo and Slovenia (the countries I cropped images from, I did it for Australia as well but they have freedom there). I ask that if someone informed about copyright and freedom of panorama in those countries is reading this that the croppings be promptly deleted in case they are actually against the principles of commons. Best regards, Otto Von Heim (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes, but the countries I cited don't have this exemption, so I don't know if the croppings I did, that focus on a specific building, are copyright free. Otto Von Heim (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I think all 3 are too recent to be public domain buildings. First looks like a 1960s building to me so the earliest possible date would be in the 2030s. Abzeronow (talk) 18:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Re: File:Touchstone House.jpg, per this site (which does not seem to be of help): The original building on the site was built in 1895 as a warehouse and although this was substantially damaged in a fire the original façade was preserved and has been incorporated into the new building.
Some background: copyright exists even in works of architecture (like embassy buildings) and sculptural monuments, nd the copyright holders are usually the designers (architects or sculptors) who authored those works or their heirs if they are already dead. Sometimes, like Korea's King Sejong Monument, the copyright was transferred to the State, and so the Government holds the copyright (SoKor's Ministry of Culture in this case). Usually, these holders have the exclusive right to control any instance of sharing, publication, or distribution of the works' images or appearances in visual media (inclusive of videos and other audio-visual media). Copyrights expire around 50-70-80-95-100 years after the authors' deaths, with the posthumous terms varying by country.
In around 80+ countries, there are copyright limitations that state reproduction of images of architectural works is not an infringement of copyright, and in around 70+ countries this copyright limitation extends to sculptural works permanently found in public spaces (usually outdoors). That is the essence of FoP: the freedom to share, publish, and/or distribute images of such copyrighted works in public spaces without the need of permission or payment of royalties to the work authors or their heirs/copyright holders.
And if you are curious, South Korea is not one of those countries, disallowing commercial uses of copies of such public landmarks (so no commercial FoP = Not OK for Commons). The only permitted licenses here – CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, CC-zero, and PD-user – mandate unrestricted commercial reuses.
Note that in a no-FoP country like South Korea, once a work fell into public domain, it can be freely licensed under the said commercial licenses even without permissions from the heirs of authors or copyright holder. JWilz12345(Talk|Contrib's.)18:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
So it appears those 3 images I made via cropping should be deleted after all, I'll have to pay attention to the FoP for future croppings I try to do. Otto Von Heim (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Now, what my template edit should have done is changing the hardcoded category it gives the 1707 one from Category:Gambia in the 1700s (old category) to Category:The Gambia in the 1700s (new category). It also does show me the new category at the bottom of the page, see fig. 1
However, in cat tree, it is not a subcategory of that new category (see fig. 2), but still filed under the old category (see fig. 3). What needs to be done?
You can open the edit view and immediately save it without changes. That way the page categories are refreshed. What is nice is that the edit doesn’t even get recorded so the histories don’t get cluttered with null edits. In fact, I already did so for a couple of categories. --Geohakkeri (talk) 19:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oh, great, yippieh! This was another thought I had, that maybe it would only be a cache problem. If this is correct, it should sort itself out in a matter of (if even) days, no? I was really looking for a way without too many manual edits. Thank you, for your help, too. Greatly appreciated :) Fallen Sheep (talk) 19:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 hours ago8 comments4 people in discussion
I have uploaded the image from the original author however the images are not getting uploaded ... is there any way you could help me ASAP. Rashm771 (talk) 23:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Rashm771: I assume that last response was from you. Please log in when carrying on a conversation such as this, because at least in theory User:2600:1003:B022:CE4A:F117:BBEA:BCAF:B04A could be anyone, and it makes it potentially unclear if that statement came from you.
You still haven't said whether you are talking about these files or other files.
Please do not upload files as "own work" unless they are actually your own work. If you do this repeatedly, your account will probably be blocked. Attribute the author accurately. (This isn't intended as a threat, it's a simple statement of fact.)
If these files are the (copyrighted) work of Debra L. Zynger, we need an actual license from her. Saying "she has given permission" does not amount to a license: we need a license such as {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} or {{Cc-by-4.0}} that explicitly allows anyone to reuse the file, including commercially, and to make derivative works. If she has posted her online with such a license indicated, you can just refer to that online post as the source. If not, then we need her (not you) to go through the process outlined at COM:VRT to provide such permission by email; probably best to have her cc you so you can keep track of what is happening.
Sure, how do I remove these uploaded files, I will get the required information from the person before uploading and submitting the draft! Thank you for your help. I am new to wikipedia and must have committed some mistakes. Rashm771 (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Rashm771: if you want to delete your own recent uploads, just follow the usage instructions at {{My bad upload}} to tag the file pages. However, if you think permission via VRT is forthcoming, that's fine; get hold of Debra, get her to send the email, and then follow the process described at {{Permission pending}} to tag the file page. - Jmabel ! talk01:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hello I have used the template however the images have not been deleted is there anyway the images can be deleted speedy. I want to submit an article to wikiepdia and I do not want to be blacklisted because of this error. Would you please let me know, thank you !! Rashm771 (talk) 14:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Picture A
Picture B
There is an outdoor platform with flat roof on almost every campus in Taiwan, but it looks like a platform for overlooking military parades. As shown Picture B, a platform was built in the school yard and served as a podium for teachers to speak to students during morning assembly. And Picture A is a platform for military parades in the military base. From my perspective, they look very similar, with almost no differences in the architectural design. However, I have never been living in English speaking country, so I don't know what you would call the former (which mean the platform shown in the Picture B). Military parade platform? Command platform? Military parade podium? Command podium?--125.230.82.12801:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Ədliyyə Nazirinin müavini Vilayət Zahirovun bir neçə il bundan qabaq formada şəklini yükləmişdik. indi adını yazanda şəkli çıxmır. xahiş edirəm bunu bərpa edəsiniz. Aftandil Quliyev (talk) 05:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I want to post a picture
A few years ago, we uploaded the photo of Deputy Minister of Justice Vilayat Zahirov in uniform. Now when I write his name, his picture doesn't appear. please restore it.
Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, this is Jessica from Google DeepMind. As per Wikipedia’s policies, I recognize that I have a conflict of interest, so I would like to ask that the community review and consider a few minor changes to this page. My reason for requesting this is to highlight some factual inaccuracies and out-of-date information that I would suggest should now be edited for accuracy and to ensure this page remains up to date.
Please consider making the following edits:
Please check the consistency of the use of ‘Google DeepMind’ instead of ‘DeepMind” throughout the article.
If possible, remove personal information - reference to twin daughters.
Image:
Please re-upload the Biography Image that was taken down again (2nd time )
In introductory section:
Add ‘President and Chief Operations Officer at Coursera.’ Source: Welcoming Lila Ibrahim to Coursera - Coursera Blog
In Early Life and education section:
Lila is no longer on the board of advisors at Purdue University. Please add this under the Career Section.
In Career section:
Replace: “where she is responsible for managing the company's growth” And replace with “oversees operations, responsibility and governance, and external work.” Source: Lila Ibrahim: The 100 Most Influential People in AI 2023 | TIME
With:"In April 2018 Ibrahim was hired as the first Chief Operating Officer of DeepMind [12][13][1][7] (now Google DeepMind), where she oversees operations, responsibility and governance, and external work." Source: https://time.com/collection/time100-ai/6308968/lila-ibrahim/
In Accolades section please add the following accolades:
“In 2021, she was named a Distinguished Engineering Alumnae by Purdue University” Source: 2021 Distinguished Engineering Alumni/Alumnae - Our People - Purdue Engineering
“Member of Council of Foreign Affairs” Source: Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)
@Bops184: Not sure where you meant to write this, but this is the help page for Wikimedia Commons. You don't link to any particular page above, but Commons doesn't have articles, so without even looking any further I'll make a strong guess you posted this in the wrong place. Perhaps you meant to post this on the talk page of an article in the English-lanuage Wikipedia. - Jmabel ! talk17:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
where is a safe place to ask about the policy on porn without getting sanctioned?
A helpful admin pointed me to a big red box I've ignored every time I posted to COM:ANU:
Do not report depictions of child sexual abuse or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.
I have concluded that since this is a radioactive topic, we need to be discreet as possible. It's like when we see some edit that needs oversighting/revdel, not to go posting it on a public noticeboard and draw attention to it, per en:WP:BEANS and whatnot. Elizium23 (talk) 05:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Elizium23: What about how to handle the more borderline cases that aren't obviously "porn" but would still none the less probably be illigal in the United States where the servers are? Because I don't think it's worth contacting legal for every single image of a naked child that's been hosted on here for years but that doesn't neccessarily mean they aren't probablematic and/or shouldn't be deleted as such either. But it seems like there's no way to deal with those instances because people can just go off about how the platform isn't censored and/or say we should contact legal if it's actually an issue. We obviously should and do have the ability to regulate our own content without the only two options being either we contact the WMF foundation or nothing happens because people are to busy bitching about censorship. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think the answer is that it is less about where you discuss it and more about what you say. Speculating about someone's off-wiki activities is certainly not productive. As much as possible, the discussion should focus on what content is acceptable, not on who uploaded it.
On the other hand:
Where there is a single-purpose account that repeatedly uploads material that is deleted for more or less the same reason, we almost always block that account. If you think that has failed to happen in some case, absolutely bring the matter to COM:AN/U but, please, focus on the user's behavior, not their character.
Similarly, where there is a pattern of an account whose contributions are broad uploading a large volume of material that is deleted for a single reason, it is usually appropriate for an admin to warn them that they would do well to stay away from uploading material that is even adjacent to that area, because further uploads deleted for the same reason are likely to result in sanctions up to and including a ban. And a non-admin can certainly come to COM:AN/U to raise the issue.
Further: if your question is a more abstract one about policy, I don't see any problem about raising it in COM:VP, etc., but again, try to keep it focused on content, and possibly if necessary behavior, but not on character, speculation, etc. - Jmabel ! talk17:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@ALVIO HURTADO HERNANDEZ: Antes de hacer eso: ¿está Vd. seguro de que comprende las políticas de Commons sobre licencias, incluida la licencia correcta de cualquier material de terceros que aparezca en el video? Y ¿ha leído Commons:Video/es?
Veo que esto es su primer edición en Commons. Si entiendo correctamente, pasarán cuatro días hasta que obtenga el estado "autoconfirmed" y pueda subir un vídeo.- Jmabel ! talk01:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Men monografiya yuklamoqchi edim, lekin docx fayl yuklanmayapti nimaga?
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Recently i have Been disqualified from Wiki Loves Earth Tunisia with no valid reason while i have uploaded plenty of photos in the photo competetition(more than 30 photos) , because the local organizers say that i'm using an other wiki account in order to cheat in the competition of , while the case of checkuser of my account was taged as (Resolved/Inconclusive) , so there's no evidence that i,'m using another account (check this) , so is it fair and correct to be excluded from the photo competition (Wiki loves earth Tunisia)? Marwenwafi (talk) 14:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Does anyone know what it means when I get the following error message sometimes when trying to upload YouTube videos to Commons through video2commons: "An exception occurred: DownloadError: b'ERROR: unable to download video data: HTTP Error 403: Forbidden'" ? These videos which fail to upload are marked CreativeCommons just like other videos which I have had no problems uploading. Thismess (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 day ago4 comments4 people in discussion
Hi, I have been given permission to upload this file to Thomas Skinners wikipedia page by him on X (formerly twitter), how would I go about getting this done
"I give you permission to put up the picture" is not sufficient for Commons. We need an explicit free license for the photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 23:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 58 minutes ago6 comments3 people in discussion
I have a large series of photos I want to upload, mostly of Shinto Shrines in Japan. I would like to mass upload them with similar names (say Immanuelle 2024 Japan trip photo x.jpg) and then rename them en masse after.
The reasoning behind this is that the folder I have is currently rather disorganized, and the tools provided here on wikimedia commons are very helpful for figuring out where the photo was actually taken. Because I can see the metadata pretty well here and look at the coordinates on the map provided to identify which shrine the photo was of, or similar.
If you're using Upload Wizard, it will use the file name it obtained from your source device, then present the opportunity for you to give the files another name during that process. Is that what you're looking for, or were you trying to rename them after they were uploaded? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@RadioKAOS renaming them after they were uploaded. My files are all named like this, and the upload wizard does not allow me to view the metadata. I need to upload the file and then look at the stuff in the description. The upload wizard also is too unstable to upload any amount of files and fill in the information properly. Some of them are ones I can easily identify the location like IMG_3274 is at Mount Omuro but others are impossible without looking at the map linked in the description. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me)19:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 59 minutes ago7 comments3 people in discussion
could we upload scanned texts or screenshotted texts ? The material is original (we own it) and are just available free of any charge also elsewhere. The digitized texts are a series of spin-offs of a still unpublished and very long fantasy/Sci-Fi saga, in the form of critical comparative analysis of the six main books.
We are asking here since we saw that wikisource lets upload only just published materials (which is not our case : the contents are available on the internet but not published on paper and are not planned to be any time soon).
Thanks in advance for any reply SGRPB7 (talk) 00:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@SGRPB7: That's terribly abstract. Any reason you are not describing this more specifically? Normally, Commons is not a repository for texts. Could you explain whey this would be in Commons' scope? - Jmabel ! talk03:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Unsure we got the point right, but we'll try to re-explain better.
First some introduction : despite asking in this English (general ?) section, all the contents are in ITALIAN language only (as is the Saga itself, btw).
We don't particularly precisely imagine what is "Common's scope" (and we believed we had just been referring to common'scope in our initial question ...).
Anyway, let's start over again
There exist a Sci-Fi/Fantasy Saga called : PluriLogia - Una Famiglia di Libri Paralleli, consisting of 6 eBooks called "Branche" (twigs). They are parallel polybooks or role books. They are not free at all (we own all the rights), and are distributed in self-publishing on different stores around, but we don't want to link them or promote here. They are not "edited" in classic sense in that they are just for sale but have no ISBN (they are protected by hashing on blockchains and also timestamped on some third-party clouds and partly on the Internet Archive and FB groups, Odysee, Telegram, Mastodon, etc) and so are not published "legally".
Then, a lot of spin-offs had spawn from this main works.
There are : short and very long detailed synopses, structural indexes (lists of chapter's titles) and mainly comparative critical analyses.
The concept of parallel books or role books is the recombination of Leitmotivs (like in Wagner's or Bruckner's music or role game thematic cards), specialization of templates, so the critical analyses focus on just one or a few themes (Leitmotivs) at a time, or otherwise focus on comparisons among "homologous" characters' features.
As of now, there are some 15 spin-offs, roughly in the range of ten pages each, but the detailed synopses are upwards of 100 pages overall. The number might possibly grow, slowly, in the future, but the most themes and aspects have just been discussed.
All this material is also just available elsewhere (from much more numerous sources than the main eBooks themselves), but this time free of any charge (the license is : free for personal use, share-alike without any modification, possibly mentioning SGRPB7, which stands for Studio Giochi di Ruolo Poly Books 7, as there are 7 ghost writers behind the Saga).
A point we strongly believe in : these contents we'd like to share ARE NOT PROMOTIONAL in any common accepted sense.
They don't even mention the stores, inside, but above all they are full-fledged critical analyses and delve deeply in the heart of inspiring principles of the project of parallel books.
Now initially we had thought to share them on WIKISOURCE, but there we discovered an explicit veto for NON-PUBLISHED / EDITED (possibly PAPER) books. And we strictly interpreted this required feature as "legally" published, not just self-published.
Here on WIKIMEDIA, instead, the rule seemed to only require original and personal work. The only doubt was : here the hype was not on TEXTS, but other forms of communication.
In the absence of some really certain indication (all what is not explicitly forbidden may be considered allowed, isn't it ?), we could consider to try to upload and see what happens. In case some admin would take down the content, he/she would eventually mention some form of violation, if any.
(Final note : the spin-offs are not planned to be translated in English, since the Saga in itself won't and it is absurd to decouple them).
@SGRPB7: It's a bit hard to work out what some of what you are saying here, because there are some terms that you've used in English that make little or no sense. In some cases, I think it's a matter of false cognates from Italian, but it's hard to be sure. (By the way, nothing wrong with it being in Italian, Commons is largely language-neutral. For certain community purposes English is preferred, but not for content.)
"We don't particularly precisely imagine": I think you just mean "we are not familiar with". That is why I linked it. Let me link it again: Commons' scope.
And it looks pretty clear to me that what you are describing is out of scope (see below), so the rest of this is probably moot.
"They are not 'edited' in classic sense in that they are just for sale but have no ISBN" just makes no sense. "To edit" in English means to go through a document making corrections and revisions. I'm guessing you mean "published", but that is also a pretty ambiguous word, which can simply mean "making something available to a reasonably broad public" and can also mean formal publication (as you allude to with ISBNs).
"not published 'legally'": I'm really uncertain what you mean here. Presumably not that they have been published in an illegal manner, which would be the normal sense of this in English, so I'm guessing you are saying that the way they have been made available does not legally constitute publication, but you don't say with respect to what law. What you've described sounds like it constitutes publication as understood by U.S. copyright law, which is the relevant law for Commons, since we are legally based in the U.S. I'm pretty sure the same is true of Italian copyright law, but since it is probably the most unique body of copyright law in the world, I could be wrong.
From COM:SCOPE: "Excluded educational content: … Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text. Purely textual material such as plain-text versions of recipes, lists of instructions, poetry, fiction, quotations, dictionary definitions, lesson plans or classroom material, and the like are better hosted elsewhere, for example at Wikibooks, Wikiquote, Wiktionary, Wikiversity or Wikisource."
So what it comes down to: how is this educational in a manner that goes beyond text? From what you've written, my suspicion is: "not at all." Jmabel ! talk16:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
sorry, we missed the link. We will now commit to study such Commons' scope.
But let us just reply to other remarks.
Yes, we used EDITED as an alias for PUBLISHED, as you understood. And we also agree with you on some ambiguity of the term. That's why we put some emphasis in contrasting "classic" publishing with SELF-publishing. And you also got it right about the adjective LEGALLY. We just meant the material does not seem to be classified as published under Italian Law, since it does not use classic mainstream channel of distribution or 3rd-party publishers. We did not mean we are publishing the stuff ILLEGALLY in the sense we are infringing copyright ! The books are our own, as are the spin-offs. Under Italian Law a book needs an ISBN to be published classically, so ours are ebooks in substance but not formally / legally, lacking that imprimatur from external authorities. As for US law, we don't know much about. We guess ISBN is required too, to be considered a publication. We are unsure about the legal status of our books. The only thing sure is : they belong to us, and are for sell somewhere as just FILES (regardless they are legally books or some undefined digital asset of some sort).
Wikiquote, Wiktionary, Wikiversity or Wikisource.
Here we had just examined WIKISOURCE terms, but as said they would only accept published materials.
Wikiquote, Wikitionary or Wikiversity would seem even less suitable, but we won't miss to examine their prescriptions too (BTW tnx for signalling).
We would need to understand better the sentence : ARE BETTER HOSTED ELSEWHERE.
Here some legal English is required for us to understand the actual nature of the phrase.
It seems, but we might be wrong, that it is AN ADVICE, not an actual COMPULSORY restraint. That is, scanned text is not the best here, but it would not necessarily violate terms. In the other targets (i.g. WIKISOURCE) it would explicitly violate the requirement of "official" published status, which we lack, and are unsure the self-publishing is acceptable (we deem not).
No we will submit the Commons' scope to some AI to get help in translation :D
BTW : we also own a huge load of abstract 3D GRAPHICS (generated by means of StructureSynth constructive geometry software).
Would you thing that BUNDLING together the texts with this graphics, in containers like PDF or even animated gifs or MJPEG, would add sufficient non-pure-text content and make all the bundle more acceptable here ? SGRPB7 (talk) 19:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Rajasthanroyal123, is it something promotional? Remember this is a help page where you can get answer of your question about wikimedia commons, it's not a personal notebook or article page. Wikimedia commons is a free media repository where you can also contribute by uploading media file.see Welcome, Get started and First steps. --KEmel49talk,Uploads06:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 hours ago3 comments2 people in discussion
In Commons:Mobile app there is a section where anybody can review images uploaded by others and also thanks the uploader if its worthy or propose that file to be deleted if not appropriate.is it only in-app feature or available in website also? --KEmel49talk,Uploads06:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
To thank someone for an upload (or any other edit) you can go into the history of the file in question, and there is a "Thank" button. I would strongly recommend against using this feature too much. Commons is not mainly a social network and I, for one, would be annoyed to get a lot of "thanks" notifications in my feed. - Jmabel ! talk16:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
By mentioning about Thanks in mobile app, my intention was about positivity and to counter of ...propose that file to be deleted... please don't get me wrong. BTW,Thanks for providing link for reviewing files.i am a newbie though, just roaming here.You can visit My Uploads and see if anything wrong or need improvement (only if you're free).
Latest comment: 4 hours ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I wanted to add two short clips of music for a composer's page who has none of their music on there. Is there anything I can do in this regards? The music and recording is in the public domain, and can be freely accessed. 1unit55Apple10 (talk) 14:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 hour ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, can someone give a second review on the licensing of the file? It is a Yemeni Armed Forces handout to Al-Masirah TV (also keep in mind that Al-Masirah is a Ansar Allah linked media,) the use of the picture in Wikimedia Commons is via IRNA (irna.ir) which already stated that the picture is from Al-Masirah TV. The licensing seems complete so please I need a second review from an independent reviewer since the current reviewer is from the Middle East and might have COI. N niyaz (talk) 16:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Not OK for Commons). The only permitted licenses here – CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, CC-zero, and PD-user – mandate unrestricted commercial reuses.
_(53837901483)_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:City_Lights_2012_-_Flat_map.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=897597635){kind=link}
![[2]](https://function.mil.ru/images/upload/2019/min1-120124-1200.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
