User talk:Jameslwoodward

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

2009-10 2011 2012
2013 2014 2015
2016 2017 2018
2019 2020 2021 2022

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikimedia Commons, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Commons itself. The original talk page is located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jameslwoodward


My formal name is James L. Woodward, but I prefer to be called "Jim"




Request to associate category page and WIKIDATA[edit]

Hi Jim, You very helpful the other day. Thank you very much.

A new problem has arisen. Unable to associate category page with WIKIDATA.

wikidata:Q110321846
wikidata:Q110321848

I think there was a problem with the operation at the time of creation. Can you fix it? I'm sorry to have troubled you many times.--SetoMonamer (talk) 07:57, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry -- I have never done this and don't know anything about doing it. Try the Village Pump. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:31, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand it well, so I'll remove the infobox tag for now.
Thank you very much.--SetoMonamer (talk) 07:17, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've confirmed that the Bot has fixed the problem.
Thank you very much.--SetoMonamer (talk) 19:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users[edit]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Akureyri Cathedral windows[edit]

Through email correspondence with J. Wippell company, I have confirmed that the author of the stained glass windows discussed during the recent UDR was James A. Crombie (1913-2000) http://stainedglass.llgc.org.uk/person/640 2070s for restoration aligns with the URAA date. So should I put 2071 as the undeletion date on Commons:Deletion requests/Akureyri Cathedral windows?

Kinda humbling to consider that this is something that only future generations will see the benefit of. Abzeronow (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I like the fact that Commons take a very long view of things -- one of my kids might possibly live until 2071, but my grandkids could see it. Yes, 2071 seems like the right date -- PMA 70 in the UK and Iceland, while the URAA date would be 2069 assuming the 1973 date is correct. I'll reopen one of the files and add your information for the benefit of the person restoring it in 2071. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arnold Schönberg Variationen für Orchester op. 31 excerpt.mp3[edit]

Jim, you closed the undeletion request for File:Arnold Schönberg Variationen für Orchester op. 31 excerpt.mp3 as "Not done" but the file is still live. Is this an oversight and you intend to delete the file, or by "not done" do you mean you decided that the evidence that the US copyright to both the musical composition and the sound recording has not expired to be inadequate? —RP88 (talk) 16:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch, thank you. Oversight on my part -- usually, when an UnDR is closed as "not done" there is nothing further to do. so I didn't delete the file again. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:01, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Australian Aboriginal Flag.svg[edit]

It has been reuploaded again after you deleted it. Bidgee (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aerial of The Hill School Quad.jpg[edit]


File:Aerial of The Hill School Quad.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion. (Reason: Clear Copyvio from the website)

Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk.

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : MySmallPP.

And also:

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 14:57, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of 'Formula in Astrophysics'[edit]

Hallo!: sorry, I don't know how to write this as a mathematical formula, but I had someone making an slide of it, in the end, is same. You seem sharing the hebrew insanity of considering the best good they can do is attacking offenders, the worse they think offense is, and the harder the punishment they apply, the more saint they feel. Formula comes from the book by JJ Benítez, Spanish writer, specialist in UFO, published in his 1970s book '100.000 km tras los OVNI', '100 thousand km after UFO', and was reportedly being a communication from an alien, explaining the way they could make interstellar travel. For sure is intresting, and I have no other way to dd this. Please revert your hard decision. Blessings + — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caula (talk • contribs) 09:30, 3 February 2022‎ (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

First, I suggest you read Commons:Deletion requests/File:Formula in astrophysics.jpg as the formula is not correct in any case -- it has unbalanced parentheses. Second, if you don't know how to to something, ask for help at the Village Pump -- don't simply do something that is against the rules. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery page[edit]

Hi. I am sorry for creating gallery page for documents, I thought that it was routine because I saw Cheops (poem). HeminKurdistan (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm -- I think the difference is that the Poem is not simply plain type on a page -- it is elaborate typesetting and illumination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of the file or image File:Jorge Luis Diaz Granados Lugo.jpg and the gallery as Jorge Luis Diaz Granados Lugo[edit]

Hi @Jameslwoodward, I would like to request that you consider restoring the image that has been deleted. The image is registered in Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 by the same author and can be verified at the following link: https://www.safecreative.org/work/2103157180996-interior-exterior. Image link to restore https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jorge_Luis_Diaz_Granados_Lugo.jpg

It is not a copyright violation, no law is being violated and it is not taken from any social network as you indicate (Facebook). Therefore, cordially consider the restoration of the image, The image has been registered by the same author, however, it can be used freely under the terms of Creative Commons, therefore, the removal of the image has been a mistake. On the other hand I also ask you to consider the restoration of gallery wkimedia commos https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Luis_Diaz_Granados_Lugo Since it was not finished and another image was going to be added under the same rights as the previous image.

Greetings and kisses 😘 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichellDasilva (talk • contribs) 16:39, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MichellDasilva: Hello. Please note that Wikimedia Commons does not accept licenses with non-commercial and no-derivatives limitations. All uploads here need to be free for anyone to use for any purpose including commercial exploitation and modifying of the original work. That is why your image was deleted although it came with a Creative Commons licence. Please see also our licensing rules. That said, it does not make sense to restore the empty gallery. Regards, De728631 (talk) 18:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @De728631@Jameslwoodward, the image rights have been updated in the registry database, you can already use the image and restore, it has no restrictions of any kind, it can be remixed, transformed and built on top of the material for any purpose, including commercially.

MichellDasilva (talk) 18:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request or permission to create or re-upload File:Jorge Luis Diaz Granados Lugo.jpg as well as its category[edit]

Hello @Jameslwoodward, he cordially sent you this message to request to create or restore () that has been deleted by his person. The image and its registration of rights has been updated to be of free and commercial use without any restriction, and I request your permission if you do not have time to restore it, to re-upload the content again as to create its respective category. Of course, this time there will be at least two or three photos so that the notice of (GA1) is not placed again or it is wrongly indicated that it was taken from a Facebook social network (F1).

Links: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Luis_Diaz_Granados_Lugo https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jorge_Luis_Diaz_Granados_Lugo.jpg

Registration link and commons rights for public and commercial use and attribution: https://www.safecreative.org/work/2103157180996-interior-exterior

And I ask your permission in advance to avoid possible sanctions, blockages or misunderstandings. My apologies for the inconvenient. 😘 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichellDasilva (talk • contribs) 22:43, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Signing your posts is required on talk pages and Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

Apparently you are not aware that when an image is placed on Facebook, the EXIF has a distinctive Facebook ID number added, so that my statement that the image was taken from Facebook was entirely correct and easily proven. Since that is clearly the case, policy requires that either the actual photographer must send a free license using VRT, or a person who has the right to freely license the image send a similar message. In the latter case, that must be accompanied by a copy of the written license agreement from the photographer giving the sender the right to freely license it.

I am sorry that we must be so difficult about this, but we get many fans and others who make false claims in order to put photos on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Jameslwoodward, Reading about image rights and VRT, I must say to clarify that my person has the exclusive right and authorized by the author himself to use said deleted image. I already told the author to contact the wikimedia permission email to verify the use of the image and to verify my exclusive permission, by the author himself. On the other hand when it is possible to verify the authorization of my person. By what means do I again request the restoration of the deleted image? Will I reopen a topic or contact you by discussion or mail? And thus restore the image definitively, correctly. MichellDasilva (talk) 00:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: A related ticket exists: ticket:2022020910015235. But as of now this is not sufficient to restore the photo. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have contacted the author again, I suggested as commented by him to do it well this time so that they accepted his photos, he tells me that this time he did it correctly the ticket is 2022021010005814 MichellDasilva (talk) 10:09, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is recorded here on wikimedia that the real author of the photos had all the necessary means to contribute by providing their images for public use, updated the records of their works so that they are Creative Commons Attribution 4.0, provided metadata and EXIF ​​information, submitted a version of the final image with the same computer data, He contacted the people of VRT. but Wikimedia decided to reject the contribution of the author in question. It is worth mentioning that the same image was deleted by the administrator Jameslwoodward indicating in his first template that the photo was taken from a social network, in this case Facebook, Likewise, also indicated in his clarification that this photo did not have the right of public use. However, now that the photo has full public use rights the administrator AF Borchert - who has been in continuous contact with the real author of the images, Rejects the author's contribution because it is still not enough. It is confirmed here in wikimedia, the effort of the person who wants to contribute by contributing their works for public use, but Wikimedia does not agree to receive or restore in any way the deleted image in question De728631. MichellDasilva (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have no access to the email conversations between the author and AFBorchert. The latter being a trusted administrator and member of the Volunteer Email Team with years of experience, I have no doubt that he is able to handle this situation as is required to provide legal safety for both the author and subsequent users of the image. These email permission processes often several days to weeks, so it is no unusual for the image not being restored immediately after the licence was changed at the source website. Also per our rules for the volunteer email handler, AFBorchert may not disclose too many intricate details of the ongoing process. So all we can do is wait. De728631 (talk) 08:22, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Shared ticket by the author Ticket#2022021110010208, the last contact I had with the author of the images provided me with said ticket and informed me of the following. The author of the images got tired of trying in vain to want to provide his works to Wikimedia, due to lack of competition from wikimedia (conflict of interest of the VRT itself). The continuous objections, obstacles and setbacks exaggerated and exposed by the same VRT staff, have led the author of the works to decline his offer. He pointed out that he shared sensitive information to verify his identity, his identification number from his country, including a Screenshot of the Id of his verified account in safecreative, and the same administrator AFBorchert after receiving said information only responded by saying that it is not enough either and has left the benefit of doubt if the identity of the author is the real one or some impostor pretending to be him.
It is important to point out at this point that the author or any other person who has an account in safecreative, has the option to verify their real identity and to complete this process they will need their Personal Data such as identification data or passport from their country. This lack of competence and veracity of the Wikimedia itself has led the author to decline to contribute his works to it. The lousy management and the bad treatment received continuously towards his person have led him to make this decision. He specifically reported that they demanded one thing, then another, then another, and when there were no more objections, he was eventually denied his contribution to Wikimedia. To reaffirm the above, I provide screenshots or images of the author's safecreative account id, where it is clearly indicated that his identity is real, that is, that it is verified. And I also share the responses of the administrator AF Borchert who responded by refusing to accept the works despite all the effort Jameslwoodward De728631 Ontzak VRT.
Link to images https://1drv.ms/u/s!AszSNJVCO497cy8Do7Q7ORx_VWo?e=jG3OSM 😘 MichellDasilva (talk) 09:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don;t see what more I can do here. I am not a VRT agent. AF Borchert is a highly experienced Administrator and VRT agent. If he says that the artist has not properly identified, then there is nothing I can do. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Jameslwoodward, before starting I greatly appreciate your response for showing interest in this particular case.
Unfortunately, due to the inconsistency of the same or the matter itself, this case (Censorship) will be presented to the main headquarters of wikimedia with headquarters in San Francisco, California, by a deep intervention of the parties and resolve the rough edges or reach a mutual understanding.. What happens from then on will be the decision and rule of wikimedia itself from its main center. Thanks a lot. @AFBorchert @De728631 MichellDasilva (talk) 03:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bandeira Demirromantica.jpg[edit]

Haven't you deleted this flag before? --Trade (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's no record of a deletion under this file name and I certainly don't remember deleting it -- although that's not surprising since I've made 165,000 deletions. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]