Ecritures

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Ecritures!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 11:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Johan van Mastenbroek.jpg

File:Johan van Mastenbroek.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!

Gouwenaar (talk) 16:47, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Ietske Richters.jpg

File:Ietske Richters.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!

Gouwenaar (talk) 10:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Herman Bieling.jpg

File:Herman Bieling.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!

Gouwenaar (talk) 10:22, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for my accidental rollback of your edit. DMacks (talk) 15:17, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons Newsletter - Summer 2018

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter and contribute to the next issue. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates

• Our dedicated IRC channel: wikimedia-commons-sd ^webchat
• Since our last newsletter, the Structured Data team has moved into designing and building prototypes for various features. The use of multilingual captions in the UploadWizard and on the file page has been researched, designed, discussed, and built out for use. Behind the scenes, back-end work on search is taking place and designs are being drawn up for the front-end. There will soon be specifications published for the use of the first Wikidata property on Commons, "Depicts," and a prototype is to be released to go along with that.

Things to do / input and feedback requests

• A workshop on what Wikidata properties Commons will need. This workshop will be open for the entire month of July 2018 at minimum.

• Join the community focus group!
• Do you want to help out translating messages about Structured Data on Commons from English to your own language? Sign up on the translators page.
• Contribute to the next newsletter.

Discussions held

• In late February there was a discussion around how Commons generally sees data being modeled.

• The first discussion on copyright and licensing with Commons was held in March. This was a "high level" discussion, there will be a consultation later this summer about the deeper mapping of copyright and licensing in a structured way.
• In April there was an exercise for GLAM partners in metadata and ontology mapping.
• A discussion about the design for Multilingual Captions on the file page took place in May. You can still review the designs and leave feedback.
• There was an IRC office hour in June to discuss progress so far and future plans.

Wikimania 2018

• Three sessions about Structured Commons are officially scheduled for Wikimania 2018 - Cape Town, South Africa - July 2018.
  • Wikimedia Commons and GLAM needs around the world (Friday 20 July, 10:30 local time)
  • Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons and knowledge equity (Friday 20 July, 14:00 local time)
  • Design challenge workshop: How can multilingual structured metadata bring knowledge equity to Commons? (Friday 20 July, 14:30 local time)
• Structured Data on Commons is also a focus area during the Wikimania 2018 Hackathon. We will, among other things, do 'live' modelling of Wikidata properties for Commons - an offline spin-off of the community consultation taking place on wiki.

Partners and allies

• We are still welcoming (more) staff from GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) to become part of our long-term focus group (phabricator task T174134). You will be kept in the loop of the project, and receive regular small surveys and requests for feedback. Get in touch with Sandra if you're interested - your input in helping to shape this project is highly valued!
• Structured Data on Commons was presented to GLAM audiences during EuropeanaTech 2018 in Rotterdam (15 May 2018) and at the Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek Forum in Berlin (4 June 2018).

Research

Two research projects about Wikimedia Commons are currently ongoing, or in the process of being finished:

1. Research:Curation workflows on Wikimedia Commons—a project that seeks to understand the current workflows of Commons contributors who curate media (categorize it, delete it, link to it from other projects, etc.).
2. Research:Technical needs of external re-users of Commons media—soliciting feedback from individuals and organizations that re-use Commons content outside of Wikimedia projects, in order to understand their current painpoints and unmet needs.

Development

• Prototypes will be available for Depicts soon.

Stay up to date!

• Follow the Structured Data on Commons project on Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/34/
• Subscribe to this newsletter to receive it on a talk page of your own choice.
• Join the next IRC office hour and ask questions to the team! The date for next quarter will be announced soon.

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 21:07, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data Newsletter - Research link fix

Greetings,

The newsletter omitted two interwiki prefixes, breaking the links on non-meta wikis as you might see above. Here are the correct links:

1. m:Research:Curation workflows on Wikimedia Commons—a project that seeks to understand the current workflows of Commons contributors who curate media (categorize it, delete it, link to it from other projects, etc.).
2. m:Research:Technical needs of external re-users of Commons media—soliciting feedback from individuals and organizations that re-use Commons content outside of Wikimedia projects, in order to understand their current painpoints and unmet needs.

My apologies, I hope you find the corrected links helpful.

- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:21, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Expiry of GWToolset user group memberships

There is a proposal on the Bureaucrat's noticeboard to automatically expire GWT memberships after one year unless the user requests an extension. Please add your views and suggestions to the discussion. The reasonably informal process for getting access to GWT access will remain as is.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Revi. 15:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Wiki techstorm infocards.jpg

File:Wiki techstorm infocards.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!

SIryn (talk) 10:43, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons Newsletter - Fall 2018 edition

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates

• Multilingual Captions, the first feature release for Structured Data, is coming in January of 2019
  • Be on the lookout for the beta testing announcement
  • Help using captions has been set up, if you'd like to go ahead and see the workflow
• Two IRC office hours were held since the last newsletter
  • Log for 4 October
  • Log for 1 November
• Our dedicated IRC channel: wikimedia-commons-sd ^webchat

Things to do / input and feedback requests

Current:

• Help determine and propose properties on Wikidata for Commons
• Review designs for structured licensing and copyright
• Join the community focus group!

Since the last newsletter:

• Review a prototype for searching structured Commons (October 2018)
• "Good coverage" for depicts tagging (Sept. 2018)
• Review and discuss mockups for displaying the new metadata section of the file page (18 September - 9 October 2018)
• Depicts statements draft requirements (14 August - 31 August 2018)
• Identify Wikidata properties that Commons will need (26 June - 14 August 2018)

Presentations / Press / Events

• Presentation by Keegan on the first features to be released for Structured Data, presented at Wikiconference North America, Columbus, Ohio, October 2018.
• Sandra presented a project update at the GLAM-Wiki conference in Tel Aviv, Israel, November 2018, as part of an update and panel discussion.
• Structured Data on Commons was the subject of a keynote presentation by Sandra (see slides) at the Baltic Audiovisual Archives Council conference in Tallinn, Estonia, November 2018.

Partners and allies

• The info portal on Structured Commons now includes a section on GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums).
• We are currently planning the first GLAM pilot projects that will use structured data on Wikimedia Commons. One project has already started: the Swedish Heritage Board researches and develops a prototype tool to provide improved metadata (translations, data additions...) from Wikimedia Commons back to the source institution. Read the project brief.
• The documentation for batch uploads of files to Wikimedia Commons will be improved in 2019, as part of preparing for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons. To prepare, the GLAM team at the Wikimedia Foundation wants to understand better which types of documentation you already use, and how you like to learn new GLAM-Wiki skills and knowledge. Fill in a short survey to provide input!

Stay up to date!

• Follow the Structured Data on Commons project on Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/34/
• Subscribe to this newsletter to receive it on a talk page of your own choice.

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 17:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Captions in January

The previous message from today says captions will be released in November in the text. January is the correct month. My apologies for the potential confusion. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:43, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - file captions coming this week (January 2019)

My apologies if this is a duplicate message for you, it is being sent to multiple lists which you may be signed up for.

Hi all, following up on last month's announcement...

Multilingual file captions will be released this week, on either Wednesday, 9 January or Thursday, 10 January 2019. Captions are a feature to add short, translatable descriptions to files. Here's some links you might want to look follow before the release, if you haven't already:

1. Read over the help page for using captions - I wrote the page on mediawiki.org because captions are available for any MediaWiki user, feel free to host/modify a copy of the page here on Commons.
2. Test out using captions on Beta Commons.
3. Leave feedback about the test on the captions test talk page, if you have anything you'd like to say prior to release.

Additionally, there will be an IRC office hour on Thursday, 10 January with the Structured Data team to talk about file captions, as well as anything else the community may be interested in. Date/time conversion, as well as a link to join, are on Meta.

Thanks for your time, I look forward to seeing those who can make it to the IRC office hour on Thursday. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

François-Auguste Biard

coucou, j'ai annulé tes ajouts de la catégorie "François-Auguste Biard" car il y avait déjà des catégories plus précises comme "Magdalena Bay - François-Auguste Biard - INV 2578". a+ --Chatsam (talk) 22:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

hey there @Chatsam: , I am actually busy reorganising the briard category so his work can indeed be relocated to the more precise categories. (Forgive me my English for tonight; I understand French perfectly well, mais je suis trop fatiguée pour vous répondre en Français). Salut, Danielle - Wikimedia NL/WGC (talk) 22:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, the previous message was written with the wrong account (It is me also, but my work account) Told you I was tired... Ecritures (talk) 22:30, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Warning

Hi, Do not create deletion requests without a valid reason. Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:31, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Yann, this was actually the first time i used the Commons app on my mobile to do a 'review'. I was shocked to find out what it did when I pressed a certain button. I didn't see a way to correct the request. I know better know. Thanks for your message, Ecritures (talk) 17:44, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - blogs posted in Wikimedia Space

There are two separate blog entries for Structured Data on Commons posted to Wikimedia Space that are of interest:

• Working with Structured Data on Commons: A Status Report, by Lucas Werkmeister, discusses some ways that editors can work with structured data. Topics include tools that have been written or modified for structured data, in addition to future plans for tools and querying services.
• Structured Data on Commons - A Blog Series, written by me, is a five-part posting that covers the basics of the software and features that were built to make structured data happen. The series is meant to be friendly to those who may have some knowledge of Commons, but may not know much about the structured data project.

I hope these are informative and useful, comments and questions are welcome. All the blogs offer a comment feature, and you can log in with your Wikimedia account using oAuth. I look forward to seeing some posts over there. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at Wikimedia Commons.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Physiologus - Morgan museum & library.jpg

Copyright status: File:Physiologus - Morgan museum & library.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Physiologus - Morgan museum & library.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.

Yours sincerely, JuTa 01:37, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

{{CC-BY-SA}}

I noticed that you uploaded several files using {{CC-BY-SA}} as license. This is not a correct license, as CC licenses always need a version number. Please correct the license tag, otherwise the files need to be deleted. Thanks! Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Seittau, thank you for letting me know this :) I am busy correcting all the licenses. Ecritures (talk) 12:49, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Filemover!

---

Hi Ecritures, you're now a filemover. When moving files please respect the following advice:

• Use the CommonsDelinker link in the {{Rename}} template to order a bot to replace all ocurrences of the old title with the new one. Or, if there was no rename-request, please use the Move & Replace-tab.
• Please leave a redirect behind unless you have a valid reason not to do so. Other projects, including those using InstantCommons, might be using the file even though they don't show up in the global usage. Deleting the redirects would break their file references. Please see this section of the file rename guideline for more information.
• Please know and follow the file rename guidelines.

-- ~riley (talk) 14:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Structured data

I'm not a big fan of structured data on Commons, but for https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:I-90_Lake_Washington_Bridge_01.jpg&curid=2335729&action=history and a bunch of edits around that time: wouldn't it make more sense to use something like Interstate 90 floating bridges (Q6056998) rather than the generic pontoon bridge (Q2104072)? - Jmabel ! talk 19:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

That could indeed be a better (more detailed) WD item to use. Don't let me stop you :) Ecritures (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

If there were a tool like VFC that I could use to mass-edit these, I would. But given that all of my suggestions 3 years ago for how this could be done in a way that was compatible with our existing wikitext-based tools were ultimately completely ignored, and no comparable toolset has been provided, sorry, I'm not working on this. - Jmabel ! talk 00:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I will quickly mass edit them with AC/DC, Ecritures (talk) 22:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Matchbox caravan.jpg

Hoi Ecritures, vijf jaar terug heb je met Commons:Deletion requests/File:Matchbox caravan.jpg naar ik meen deze afbeelding van Museum Rotterdam genomineerd voor verwijdering. Nu lijkt het erop dat deze file in 2020 wederom is geupload als File:Speelgoed caravan met oranje afneembaar dak van “MATCHBOX”, objectnr 61468.JPG. Kun je in verband met verdere bespreking bevestigen of dit klopt. Mvg, -- Mdd (talk) 09:47, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Of wat klopt? Ecritures (talk) 10:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Biedt de File:Speelgoed caravan met oranje afneembaar dak van “MATCHBOX”, objectnr 61468.JPG dezelfde afbeelding, die je vijf jaar terug voor verwijdering heb voorgedragen? -- Mdd (talk) 11:56, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Massanominatie van Museum Rotterdam nogmaals bezien

Hoi Ecritures, afgelopen jaar heb ik je op diverse plaatsen gevraagd, hoe je komt aan je opvatting dat Museum Rotterdam op grote schaal copyright schendt. Hierover heb ik toen hier op Meta mijn zorgen uitgesproken. In al deze discussie is me niet duidelijk geworden, dat jij in 2016 de volgende massanominatie had ingediend, en dat daar een eerdere massanominatie aan vooraf ging. Nu zal ik ten eerste eens een recapitulatie geven van deze gang van zaken terug in de tijd:

12:41, 5 June 2016 diff hist +276‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Etiket Giraf jonge graanjenever.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:41, 5 June 2016 diff hist +275‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Etiket van Giraf bessenjenever.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:41, 5 June 2016 diff hist +278‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Exportkist Distilleerderij Henkes.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +271‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Etiket Giraf jonge jenever.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +262‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jenever dobbeltol.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +263‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jeneverglas Henkes.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +262‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jeneverfles Bokma.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +267‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jeneverfles JTBeukers2.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +267‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jeneverfles JT Beukers.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +259‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jeneverglaasje.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +255‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jenevervat.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +277‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kruik bessenjenever Hellebrekers.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +265‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maquette molendehoop.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +263‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Reclamebord Henkes.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:40, 5 June 2016 diff hist +260‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Klikklak kikker.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:39, 5 June 2016 diff hist +253‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Klikklak.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:39, 5 June 2016 diff hist +261‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Matchbox caravan.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:39, 5 June 2016 diff hist +251‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ruiter.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:39, 5 June 2016 diff hist +264‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:VanNelle koffieblik.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:39, 5 June 2016 diff hist +262‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:VanNelle shagblik.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

In drie minuten tijd heb je hier twintig verwijderverzoeken ingediend met de volgende tekst:

Because CC-BY-SA apparently means nothing for this museum (see my other uploads) Ecritures (talk) 10:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Zo te zien heeft niemand je hier verder over tegengesproken en alle 20 files zijn verwijderd.

Direct voorafgaande aan de nominatieronde was een serienominatie van @Gouwenaar:

12:22, 5 June 2016 diff hist +495‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Herman Bieling.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

12:20, 5 June 2016 diff hist +497‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ietske Richters.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

18:47, 4 June 2016 diff hist +621‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Johan van Mastenbroek.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

Drie maanden eerder heeft @Gouwenaar: al eens in zeven minuten tijd 15 afbeeldingen van Museum Rotterdam voorgesteld voor verwijder.ing:

21:36, 26 February 2016 diff hist +326‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van mr. Frederik Jacobus Brevet (1893-1983).jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:36, 26 February 2016 diff hist +313‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Louise Sanders (1907-1995).jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:35, 26 February 2016 diff hist +314‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Karel Wijlacker (1893-1981).jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:35, 26 February 2016 diff hist +331‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Hendrik Willem Adriaan van Oordt (1888-1975).jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:35, 26 February 2016 diff hist +313‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Theo Wijlacker (1867-1937).jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:30, 26 February 2016 diff hist +312‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Professor Mr. Dr. HR Ribbius.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:29, 26 February 2016 diff hist +330‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Ko Arnoldi (1883-1964) ofwel Eltjo Heiko, 1953.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:22, 26 February 2016 diff hist +319‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Johan Hendrik van Mastenbroek, 1944.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:21, 26 February 2016 diff hist +316‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Henricus Nijgh (1873-1948), 1945.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:21, 26 February 2016 diff hist +315‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Henri Dekking (1871-1939), 1932.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:20, 26 February 2016 diff hist +334‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Hendrik Willem Adriaan van Oordt (1888-1975), 1959.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:20, 26 February 2016 diff hist +313‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van Elisabeth Marijke Staab, 1931.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:20, 26 February 2016 diff hist +307‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portret van 'De Maalmeesters', 1948.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:19, 26 February 2016 diff hist +320‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Naaiatelier van mevrouw Van Rijsoort 1930 - 1940.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

21:19, 26 February 2016 diff hist +310‎ N Commons:Deletion requests/File:Zelfportret van Herman Mees, 1900-1920.jpg ‎ Starting deletion request

De situatie is nu dat al deze veertig afbeeldingen nog steeds op Museum Rotterdam worden vrijgegeven onder een CC-licentie. Alle veertig zijn in 2016 van Commons verwijderd, maar de batch van twintig lijkt allemaal weer terug op Commons met nog honderden vergelijkbare gevallen. Al deze nominaties zijn over een kam geschoren, dat het Museum Rotterdam niet weet wat het deed (en doet)...!?

Om verschillende redenen ben ik zelf erg ongelukkig met deze situatie. De eerste batch van schilderijen van 26.0.2.2016 was deel van de Europeana toestand, dat er zonder inachtneming van copyright in heel Nederland en daarbuiten een hele toestand was ontstaan. Dit valt Museum Rotterdam niet persoonlijk aan te rekenen... Er was en is hier sprake van een bewustwordingsproces. Dit houdt in m'n ogen ook in, dat elke organisatie z'n eigen copyright beleid dient uit te stippelen. Wikipedia dient dat te respecterend, vind ik. Wat betreft die laatste batch van juni 2016, dat zijn uiteenlopende zaken: ouder en nieuwer industrieel ontwerp, reclameboorden, schaalmodellen, verpakking, grafische vormgeving, en combinaties daarvan. Al deze zaken zijn voor mij geen uitgemaakte zaak...!? -- 15:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC) / 10:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Wat is dit nu weer voor onzin. Ik heb nooit, maar dan ook nooit enige afbeelding van WikimediaCommons verwijderd. Zelfs al zou ik dat willen dan zou ik dat nog niet kunnen, want ik beschik eenvoudigweg niet over de bevoegdheid om dat te doen. Wat ik heb gedaan is, na voorafgaand overleg met het Museum Rotterdam (de mailwisseling is geregistreerd onder Ticket#2016022610010184), de genoemde afbeeldingen genomineerd voor verwijdering. De nominaties zijn volgens de gebruikelijke procedure behandeld (zie hier en hier). Na toetsing van de nominatiereden aan de richtlijnen van WikimediaCommons zijn de afbeeldingen verwijderd door degenen, die bevoegd zijn dit te doen. Als je het niet eens bent met het verwijderbeleid van WikimediaCommons dan moet je dat aan de orde stellen en niet een gebruiker beschuldigen van zaken die hij eenvoudigweg niet gedaan kan hebben. Gouwenaar (talk) 16:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Er was hier een stukje tekst voorgesteld voor weggevallen. -- Mdd (talk) 16:54, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Wat wil je precies met deze tekst? De verschillende vage aantijgingen en insinuaties in de lap tekst maken het niet erg duidelijk wel doel je beoogt. Met andere woorden: waarom schrijf je dit allemaal aan mij? Dit houdt in m'n ogen ook in, dat elke organisatie z'n eigen copyright beleid dient uit te stippelen. Wikipedia dient dat te respecterend, vind ik.: we zitten hier op Wikimedia Commons, niet op Wikipedia. En als ik heel eerlijk ben, staan jouw ideeën over het respecteren van auteursrechten mijlenver af van wat ik denk over het respecteren van auteursrechten. Ik vind dat afbeeldingen die naar naar Commons worden geüpload (of dat nou door een wikimediaan, een erfgoedinstelling of andere vrijwilliger, organisatie of bedrijf is) moeten voldoen aan de regels die op Wikimedia Commons gelden en dus aantoonbaar en duidelijk auteursrechtenvrij moeten zijn.

Verder wil ik heel duidelijk maken zo lang jij berichten schrijft (op Commons, op Wikipedia, op Flickr of enige andere site) die (o.a. mijn) privacy schenden én die volstaan met waanzinnige verwijten, vage insinuaties, vreemde gedachtenkronkels, stupide aantijgingen en ander getrol voel ik er niet voor om steeds in te gaan op je berichten hier en ook elders. Hierbij dus mijn verzoek aan jou om *alleen* nog maar inhoudelijk te discussiëren, of vragen te stellen zonder op voortdurend alleen maar kritiek op *personen* te hebben. Het lijkt er heel erg op dat je problemen aan het zoeken bent om wiki-collega's te beschadigen. We zijn hier met z'n allen voor de inhoud, niet voor op de persoon gerichte aanvallen, aantijgingen en insinuaties. Is dat helder genoeg? Ecritures (talk) 20:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Photograph of the main dining room on the salon deck of White Star Liner "Olympic" ... LCCN96503966.tiff

I may be missing something, but this file seems to have been moved in order to change ".tif" to ".tiff". If that is the case, then it should be moved back to stay in harmonization with the rest of the uploads which are part of User:Fæ/LOC. Thanks Fæ (talk) 16:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Fæ: , someone requested the file to be renamed because in the original title it was mentioned the ship was the Titanic while it is supposedly Titanics sistership the Olympic. Greetings, Ecritures (talk) 18:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Groei collecties Rijks Etnografisch Museum.jpg

Hoi Ecritures, heb je je gerealiseerd dat de afbeelding File:Groei collecties Rijks Etnografisch Museum.jpg van een vergelijkbare orde is, als van het werk momenteel hier op m'n OP besproken? Dit komt ook uit een werk op Deplher aangegeven als nog onder copyright. Het lijkt me sterk, dat de {{pd-old-70}} licentie daar klopt!? -- Mdd (talk) 16:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hoi Mdd, dank voor je berichtje. Ecritures (talk) 17:27, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Aanvulling: Het is je - neem ik aan - bekend hoe auteursrecht werkt als een werk is gemaakt als werknemer van een organisatie? Op basis van die gedachtegang heb ik de afbeelding geüpload. Ik ben het dan ook oneens met de stelling dat het 'van een vergelijkbare orde is'. Groet, Ecritures (talk) 18:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Het werk is geschreven door nl:Willem Rassers wat niet is vermeld, en in dit geval kan hij de gegevens verzameld hebben waarop het lijndiagram is gebaseerd. Om deze reden kan hij ook als de auteur van dit diagram worden aangemerkt, tenzij dit anders is vermeld. -- Mdd (talk) 18:59, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Het is je - neem ik aan - bekend hoe auteursrecht werkt als een werk is gemaakt als werknemer van een organisatie? Ecritures (talk) 19:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

De verwijzing naar art. 7, 8 en 9 van de Nederlandse auteurswet is correct. (Ook door moderatoren op Commons worden deze artikelen regelmatig over het hoofd gezien.) Uiteraard zijn er heel soms uitzonderingen, maar dat lijkt me hier niet het geval. Vysotsky (talk) 09:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Dank @Vysotsky, mijn geduld met collega @Mdd is beperkt (als gevolg van eindeloze, andere discussies). Volgens AGF ging ik er vanuit dat bovenstaande kennis aanwezig was bij Mdd; maar ik had (met jouw reactie als voorbeeld) beter direct (en rustig) naar de juiste artikelen kunnen verwijzen. Ecritures (talk) 11:39, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Dat is een behoorlijk vals dilemma dat jouw geduld op raakt door "eindeloze, andere discussies." De laatste stand van zaken was, dat jij een nieuw gespreksonderwerp opende op m'n OP, dat jij je elders mengde in een oudere discussie, en jij je aldaar bovendien mengde in een second opinion verzoek. Jij bent hier op Wikipedia actief als vrijwilliger in een maatschappelijke organisatie, waar je bovendien bestuurlijke functies verricht, en waar je ook nog eens door de aanverwante Wikimedia organisatie bent gedetacheerd elders. In al die drie hoedanigheden heb ik met jou te maken, en dat initiatief is elders vaker veelal van jou uitgegaan.

Twee weken terug heb ik je een redelijk eenvoudige vraag gesteld, en ben ik eens begonnen om een stukje geschiedenis op te halen waar je eerder in de mist lijkt te zijn gegaan. Dat werd toen bestempeld als "...verschillende vage aantijgingen en insinuaties in de lap tekst." Het is mijn intentie om jou persoonlijk ter verantwoording te roepen omtrent vermoedelijke misstanden, die er door je optreden worden gegenereerd. Daar wens ik een normale discussie over, waarin je of anderen me van het tegendeel mogen overtuigen. Wat je hier en eerder weer hebt gezegd vind ik echter niet acceptabel. -- Mdd (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2021 (UTC) / Drie links toegevoegd Mdd (talk) 20:48, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Mdd Zorg je wel dat je deze keer je feiten goed op een rijtje hebt? Deze twee beweringen kloppen al niet namelijk: waar je bovendien bestuurlijke functies verricht, en waar je ook nog eens door de aanverwante Wikimedia organisatie bent gedetacheerd elders. Om jouw speurwerk naar je feitenvrije gebazel te vergemakkelijken: ik heb nooit bestuurlijke functies bekleed (in/bij de maatschappelijke organisatie waar ik ook als vrijwilliger actief ben) en ook ben ik niet door een aanverwante Wikimedia organisatie (elders) gedetacheerd. Je hebt dus maar in een vorm met mij te maken: en dat is als vrijwilliger op met name drie platformen: Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons en Wikipedia. Dus als jij een normale discussie ergens over wenst, wil je dan niet komen met allerlei onzin? Een normale discussie met iemand die voornamelijk onzin loopt te verkondingen is namelijk echt te moeilijk voor mij; dat is energie die ik liever in positieve samenwerkingen steek. (Een laatste tip: zorg ervoor dat je zaken aankaart op het platform waar ze thuishoren!) Ecritures (talk) 20:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Een vriendelijk, maar dringend verzoek aan Mdd om te stoppen met het grossieren in valse verdachtmakingen. Dit begint zo langzamerhand de spuigaten uit te lopen. En voor de goede orde ik ken Ecritures niet persoonlijk. Ik heb wel in de loop der tijd steeds meer waardering voor haar bijdragen gekregen, dat laatste kan ik helaas van jouw bijdragen niet zeggen. Gouwenaar (talk) 21:26, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Dank Gouwenaar voor deze woorden. Mdd Nog enigszins nadenkend over wat ik inderdaad ook 'valse verdachtmakingen' zou willen noemen: dit heeft toch helemaal niets te maken met de inhoud hier op Commons (of wikidata, wikipedia)? Dit lijkt eerder volledig te gaan om het beschadigen van een persoon die als vrijwilliger bijdraagt aan dit samenwerkingsproject. Ik leg je nota bene voortdurend uit hoe het in elkaar zit met auteursrecht: o.a. dát is inhoudelijk werken aan Commons. Met dit soort op de persoon gerichte verdachtmakingen en insinuaties speel je allang niet meer op de bal. Ecritures (talk) 21:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

File:1979-Upstream by Roswell Weidner, Collection of the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts.jpg

Background

This is my first page for WikiPedia and my first contributions to WikiMedia - so I am still learning.

I marked 7 files for deletion (the file listed here is one of the seven). Your response was:

You are clearly not the maker of this art work: the artist died in 1999. So it unclear to me why you would be the copyright owner. Contemporary artist (death in 1999) = artwork still under copyright. Photo should be removed from Commons. Ecritures (talk) 20:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I am the daughter of the artist (Roswell Weidner) and the 'heir' of the estate/copyright. I have a COI statement in my WikiPedia user page. Do I need a COI in WikiMedia, too?

I asked a question about this in the Teahouse.

My concern with the images was that the photographs of the artwork were taken by others. After I submitted these 7 photographs for deletion from WikiMedia, the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts (copyright for 6 of the 7 photographs) replied back to me that I could use these low resolution photographs. There are actually lots of photographs of artwork attributed to PAFA - they have their own category (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Paintings_in_the_Pennsylvania_Academy_of_the_Fine_Arts).

Should I re-add these photographs in as new images? Or request they not be deleted?

Thank you for your help. ArtLover113 (talk) 19:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Je mag niet citeren uit werk dat niet gepubliceerd is

Voor het geval dat je het nog niet weet : "Je mag niet citeren uit werk dat niet gepubliceerd is." In dit geval geldt een oude versie die bewust geredigeerd wordt als een kladversie, en daar worden bewust zaken uit gehaald. -- Mdd (talk) 02:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Ik had niet gezien, dat je dit zelfs een tweede keer gedaan heb op de Commons:Deletion requests. Ik ben daar echt niet van gediend. -- Mdd (talk) 02:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hoe bedoel je 'niet gepubliceerd'? Je hebt zelf op 'Publish changes' geklikt en het gepubliceerd: je weet toch dat dat gewoon altijd op wikiplatformen zichtbaar en traceerbaar is? Als je iets niet wilt 'publiceren' moet je het niet publiceren; of begrijp ik je verkeerd? Ecritures (talk) 02:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Uncategorized

Beste Ecritures, Ik zie dat je regelmatig "Leiden uncategorized" weghaalt. Dat vind ik jammer, want ik ben van plan diverse Leidse collecties na te lopen op zowel de afbeeltenis als op de maker als op eventuele andere categorieën. Ik haal zelf pas het "uncategorized" weg als ik beide categorieën (of meer) heb toegevoegd. Als ik bij een portret van Cobet de categorie Carel Gabriel Cobet toevoeg, maar de maker Neuman nog niet (want het gaat sneller met vier Cobetten tegelijk), haal ik "uncategorized" nog niet weg -want het werk is nog niet klaar. Als je jouw methode blijft volgen, kom ik bijvoorbeeld Deterding niet meer tegen, terwijl die afbeelding zeer relevant is voor zijn categorie. Dat vind ik niet erg, maar dan ga ik een heleboel minder afbeeldingen categoriseren. Wat denk jij? Vysotsky (talk) 16:52, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Hoi Vysotsky, ik haal inderdaad die categorie met uncategorized weg omdat het inmiddels al een berg van 40.000 items zijn. Omdat Mr.Nostalgic ook categoriseert op de afdeling loop ik liever de beelden door per afdeling. Ook bij mij is het in principe de bedoeling om zowel bv afgebeelde als maker te vermelden (waarbij de maker mijns inziens het belangrijkste is). Toen ik bij het doorlopen van de uncategorized categorie echt honderden foto's tegenkwam over bv Minerva, de sterrenwacht, brieven en ander materiaal van/aan Snouck Hurgronje, de Huizinga-papers enzo heb inderdaad die uncategorized categorie verwijderd bij die foto's. En ook nu doe ik dat nog, vooral omdat die stapel zo groot is geworden en het steeds moeilijker zoeken is in die berg beelden... Ik categoriseer nu voornamelijk vanuit wat kleinere verzamelingen als KITLV, de fotocollectie, handschriften enzo. Maar als jij liever hebt dat ook die uncategorized categorie blijft staan tot er twee categorieën in verwerkt zijn, dan zal ik de volgende keren op het plusje en niet het pijltje in cat-a-lot klikken zodat ook uncategorized nog aan de afbeeldingen verbonden blijft. Laat het me weten :) Hartelijke groet, Ecritures (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

40.000 is niet heel veel in Commons. Bij Anefo ben ik langs veel meer afbeeldingen gelopen, en pak ik er wekelijks nog een paar dozijn mee. Grappig hoe verschillend we in Commons tegen zaken aankijken: ik vind de maker lang niet altijd het belangrijkst, al ben ik bij foto's juist wél erg gespitst op vermelding en categorisering van de fotograaf. Vergeet niet: namen van schilders etc. zijn nog vindbaar via de metadata, terwijl wat in beeld te zien is, niet altijd vertaald is in tekst. "Uncategorized" zorgt dat er ooit nog eens iemand naar gaat kijken, en ik kan me voorstellen dat dan juist bij foto's uit Indonesië etc. zaken of personen opvallen die nu niet bijzonder lijken. Dus: als je de categorie wilt laten staan, doe je me inderdaad een plezier. Anders even goede vrienden. Vysotsky (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Geen probleem natuurlijk! Ik laat de categorie staan, fijne avond. Ecritures (talk) 22:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Exit 1, Nanmen Station 20210323.jpg

File:Exit 1, Nanmen Station 20210323.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!

Taivo (talk) 11:10, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

OpenRefine starts SDC development! 💎

Hello Ecritures! I hope all is well, and that this communication channel is more convenient than Telegram :-) As you may be aware, OpenRefine has started development of features for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons. Would you like to be informed about ongoing work? You can sign up here to receive occasional updates on a Wikimedia talk page of your choice. Also, feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions!

Specifically, I'm curious to hear if you'd be willing to help us test new features as they are released. Perhaps you would be interested in running tests with some of the materials you work with at Koninklijke Bibliotheek? If you are interested in providing feedback and early testing, you can fill in this form to indicate your interests and availability.

Many greetings! SFauconnier (talk) 13:45, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Sake Elzinga

Ecritures, zou je hier nog kunnen aangeven of je contact met het Drents Archief al dan niet resultaat heeft opgeleverd. Met vr. groet, Gouwenaar (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Ik zie je bericht nu pas (2.5 maand later); ik moet er weer even induiken wat de conversatie is geweest. Ik kijk het na. Excuses, Ecritures (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Excuses zijn niet nodig hoor. Inmiddels is er een nieuwe beeldbank. Ik noemde indertijd nog 60 auteursrechtelijk beschermde foto's van Sake Elzinga. Kennelijk is dat teruggebracht tot 46 (zie hier, de indertijd hier gegeven link naar de 60 foto's werkt niet meer). Dat is maar een fractie van de niet-beschermde foto's t.w. 8.758. Vermoedelijk heeft dat te maken met de herkomst van foto's. De vrijgegeven foto's behoren tot de collectie van het Drents Archief zelf. De nog beschermde foto's behoren tot de collectie van de gemeente Assen. Wat de foto's van het Drents Archief zelf betreft bestaat er inderdaad een discrepantie tussen de verklaring dat het materiaal vrij van auteursrecht zou zijn en de bepaling in hun disclaimer, dat het materiaal slechts voor non-commerciële doeleinden gebruikt mag worden. Met vr. groet, Gouwenaar (talk) 20:43, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Vincenzo Campi, Fishmongers

Hi! I hope I am at the right place, but when Wiki links your account to two reproductions of details of Campi's painting 'Fishmongers'in the Pinacoteca di Brera. I am currently writing my thesis on Campi, and unfortunately struggling with finding high-res images of this painting. Since you have really big photos of this details, I wondered: do you happen to also have a high-res image of the whole painting? If you do, I'd be so grateful if you could share. It is strictly for my research, of course. Thank you so much for your time! Best, B. Babi.santo (talk) 08:29, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I will have a look: I might have taken just the detail of that painting. I will get back to you about it. Ecritures (talk) 15:11, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Saint John Church of Sohrol in Iran.

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) and Gadwall (Mareca strepera) in Nepal.

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2023 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighteenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 14 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2022 Picture of the Year contest.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at 28 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Repeated unexplained content deletion

Please explain your repeated deletion at [1] and your deletions at [2] and [3]. Please go through your recent edits and restore any content you might have inadvertently or intentionally deleted.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 08:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)