User talk:JuTa/Archive 43

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

The question

Hello JuTa. Delete it. CalalC99 (talk) 16:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done --JuTa 16:55, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Sefer-Hamiddot-Haqazzar-MS-Warsaw-text.pdf

Hi, as per our previous conversation in July, please remove the license review tag from this file. Dovi (talk) 20:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Which conversation? I cant remember. --JuTa 22:39, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
See here. Dovi (talk) 02:58, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
OK, I changed the license to {{PD-old-100}} now for both files. --JuTa 03:03, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the tag. The license should, however, be CC-BY-SA, because my transcription of the manuscript with notes is scholarly work that involves a level of interpretation and creativity which makes in copyrightable. I will fix that on my own. Dovi (talk) 03:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

On second thought, since File:00 SMQ MS-Q Warsaw258 transcription.pdf is nothing more than a redundant and outdated copy of the updated File:Sefer-Hamiddot-Haqazzar-MS-Warsaw-text.pdf, could you simply delete the former for me (leaving a "redirect" tag)? Thanks, Dovi (talk) 03:28, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Then we need a license check or a verification through Commons:OTRS. Either the entire work id old enoght to be pblic domain, or not. And if not the external source needs to be verified. (A google link doesnt indicate own work normaly).--JuTa 03:32, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
We already went through this is July! This is my own work, based on a public domain work. There is no missing license. And it is from online material that already contains a clear CC license. Dovi (talk) 03:38, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
I cannot see the source, because there is a login-wall before. That is the reason why I set the license review template in first place. You dont liked it, So please confirm your ownerhip by Commons:OTRS. --JuTa 06:21, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Serbian Armed Forces

I already explained many times to other people in here. I got these pictures from vs.rs And I have approval, see here http://www.vs.rs/en/terms-conditions

Then please add the corresponding license template to the files description pages - compare Commons:Licensing and Commons:Copyright tags. --JuTa 17:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

The question

Hello JuTa. Delete it, it, it and it. CalalC99 (talk) 17:30, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, next time please just use template {{Speedy}} - see Commons:Deletion requests/Speedy deletion. --JuTa 17:34, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorting of new surname categories

Hi JuTa, follow-up on empty surname category discussion. I finally built this list of new surname cat requiring special categories. I would appreciate your comments, in particular regarding:

Any other comment is welcome.

On a separate topic, there is a need to clarify handling of nobiliary particles, such as (amongst others): 

Af	af	Al	Ben	Da	Dal	dal	de	De	Del	del	Della	Dello	den	Den	der	des	Di	di	dos	Du	du	El	La	la	Le	le	Mac	O	St	Van	van	Von	von

In some cases intermediate surname categories were created Category:St (surname) or Category:Van (surname)... IMO these are confusing more than helpful. Again, I would appreciate your opinion.

-- Laddo (talk) 00:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Laddo,
  1. Umlauts and other special characters should be sorted as their "normal" character. So your list looks fine.
  2. The Achútegui: The commons name of this person seemed to be without the special character. So I corrected that.
  3. Double names should be placed under their single names sorted with a space at the beginning: So the content of Category:Yrjö-Koskinen (surname) should be [[Category:Yrjö (surname)| Yrjo-Koskinen]] [[Category:Koskinen (surname)|| Yrjo-Koskinen]].
  4. Nobiliary particles should not be taken in account. If you find such, please correct the wikidata items. For the "Af" thing. It wasnt clear for me that this seems to be the swedish version of "of". I'll will correct them soon.
  5. About Category:Van (surname): There is minimum Lindey which just this name and its port of some vietnamese names not being a nobiliary particles.
  6. The "St" or the "La" or "Le" surname cats are a compromize solution to be able to follow "rule 3" even in those cases. These are surnames containing multiple words and any other got splitted . So I splitted these too.
regards --JuTa 05:07, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Noted, thanks. I'll add blanks to double name sorting.
However I'm afraid I don't agree with such "double name" handling for Category:Le (surname) and Category:La (surname). I know from experience that, in French, articles "Le" and "La" are actually part of the name and will often end up being merged with it (e.g. Category:Le Brun (surname) and Category:Lebrun (surname)); moreover, the common usage is to sort names as if the blank space was not there, such as: ... Lebeau, Lebec, Lebel, Le Bihan‎, Leblond... The same applies to other French particles: les, de, du, des, de la, d', l'...
Thus I suggest to
  • No longer consider Le and La as forming double names;
  • Rename "particle" categories into something clearer: Category:St (surname particle) instead of Category:St (surname) for example;
  • Fix sorting to ignore spaces that follow particles (example: [[Category:Le Bihan|LeBihan]]). I can do that part.
I will await your answer. Thanks -- Laddo (talk) 22:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Laddo, after some thinking this sounds OK for me. If you like please go ahead. regards. --JuTa 05:29, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
But pls. keep Category:Le Brun (surname) and Category:Lebrun (surname) 2 seperate categories. --JuTa 05:33, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
I finished processing "Le" and "La". You may delete Category:La (surname), it's now empty. I will resume fixing "double names". -- Laddo (talk) 03:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Please note that I created Category:Surname particles to group particles used in surnames. Comments welcome as usual ;) -- Laddo (talk) 23:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

ad-Din surname category

Hi JuTa, I suggest that you review your recent deletion of Category:Ad-Din (surname). You broke the connection to Wikidata for an item that constitutes an important component of people's names, see w:ad-Din.

Also, to ease the update of pages recently connected to Wikidata (and their infobox), you might elect to use a nice interface gadget from the Preferences that is called UTCLiveClock (or LocalLiveClock) that supplies a handy purge link at the top right of each page.

Cheers -- Laddo (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, nobody linkted on wikidata to it is (mainly) called Ad-Din but Uddin see here. An no people using it has a commons cat. If we create it somebody called i.e. Keith Uddin would get sorted under "A" and into the cat "A-Din". I dont think thats good. Abut the clock gadget: I allready use it on commons and on wikidate I dont see any purge button coming up. regards --JuTa 04:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I am surprised that none of the 60 names listed in w:ad-Din has a Commons category! I will double-check. Regarding the gadget, clicking anywhere on the clock label "00:45:29" triggers the purge of the current page. Cheers -- Laddo (talk) 00:47, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Most of them are called Uddin not Ad-Din, which we handle diffently here on commons. Somebody had reddirected the 2 items on wikidata. --JuTa 02:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Deleting linked categories

Hi, me again. You recently deleted Category:Anitschkow (surname) and Category:Antoschkin (surname). Yet both cases were needed:

I would like to emphasize that I very carefully build up the list of 37000 surname entries - they are ALL necessary for existing Commons pages, and they are ALL linked to Wikidata items. The background process that updates categories is excruciatingly slow and it seems to take days before pages appear in proper surname categories (because it's a template that does the categorization). Yet, please, do not delete surnames categories that I created, or that SteinsplitterBot created at my request, even if they are empty, since they should not be empty.

I much appreciate your maintenance effort; we can set up a procedure to investigate together empty surname categories:

  1. Of course, check first the "What links here" tool on the left side of the suspect page
  2. Ensure that the Wikidata infobox displays information and shows the small wikidata logo and Qid (ex:  : Q655048). If not, purge the page, it should be filled
  3. Click on the WD logo or its Qid to go to the Wikidata surname item and check if an English label exists. If not, enter one (I normally use "What links here" tool on that WD surname page to see the English labels of all the persons using that surname). It takes a few days before the label reaches all WD and Commons pages using that surname, unless you manually purge them (WD pages first, then Commons ones)
  4. If there was no issue with the English WD item, then let me know and I will investigate that issue. I propose that you copy that surname category on that page: User:Laddo/surname categories to check. I would check them shortly.

Finally, be aware that I am still in the process of fixing "double surname" cases (about 450 categories), and that I will immediately after undertake fixing the sorting of names with umlauts and other special characters (about 3000). I intend to correctly finalize every surname category that was created from my initiative.

Please restore Category:Anitschkow (surname) and Category:Antoschkin (surname), along with their Wikidata item links.

Thanks again for your maintenance efforts. Laddo (talk) 13:22, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I currently will not restore these cats, because Anitschkow is not Anitshkov and Antoschkin is not Antoshkin. The commons categories are running under their english names and the wikidata items are linked to their german variant. That should be corrected on wikidata or the commons cats should be moved to the german variation. And yes, I allways check "what links here" on commons and wikidata. I also search for the surname on commons if I find no "what links here". --JuTa 14:35, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Laddo, inbetween I investigated the things further:
If you speak german we could continue talking in german. Perhaps you should change the interface language on commons and wikidata to english, then you see the always correct (english) names for wikidata infobox cases. regards --JuTa 18:20, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Wow, great fixes. I use English as default for both WD and Commons, along with it, fr and es. Sadly I don't speak German, and was unaware of the "tsch" vs "ch" distinction with English. Now I will do better.
I would suggest 2 improvements when moving/renaming a surname page:
Thanks -- Laddo (talk) 23:13, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
But in these cases there is no other qid on commons. They are just different spelling of the same qid in different languages - see Antoshkin and Anichkov. There is no different Antoschkin nor Anitschkow as family name on wikidata see here and here --JuTa 02:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I mean to add said to be the same as (P460) only when there is another Wikidata item for the misspelled label. -- Laddo (talk) 11:55, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
PS: Dont forget the ending english 'ov' againt german 'ow' for translitarated kyrillic names and other differences. --JuTa 02:45, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
I will also be careful with that. From now on, I will copy the English spelling to fr/it/is when applicable, these languages typically match "en" rather than "de". I will leave the incorrect spelling as aliases, though. Laddo (talk) 11:55, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Please restore

This cat:

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:26, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. --JuTa 17:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Also, Category:Number 9049 on vehicles is suddenly showing in my watchlist as newly created by someone else, meaning that it was deleted before. Can you please undelete its previous revisions? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 10:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

OK --JuTa 10:16, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't know how ths should happen. PS: There are thousends of red categories - see here. --JuTa 20:40, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
What did you ment? I thought you were asking for automatic restore of not anymore empty cats. --JuTa 13:00, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I mean that previous history upon recreation of a category (not of a file) should be dully restored, either automaticly or manually (for which it would need to show up in a special hidden category or maintanance list). Past deletions and undeletions should also be visible in the file history of all categories and files: Looking at the history of Category:Number 9049 on vehicles, f.i., nobody could tell that it hasn’t been in unbroken existence since its 1st creation. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 10:19, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
You can se that when you click on the revision history on View log for this page.There might be vandal verions deleted. Well, that happens rearly but its possible. You might like to raise something like a feature request for this likely anywhere on meta:. regards. --JuTa 12:38, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
OK --JuTa 12:59, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PEGI Discrimination old.svg

File:PEGI Discrimination old.svg 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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Niridya (talk) 19:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PEGI Drugs old.svg

File:PEGI Drugs old.svg 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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Niridya (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PEGI Gambling old.svg

File:PEGI Gambling old.svg 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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Niridya (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete file

Hello JuTa. File ←→ File. Delete → [1] CalalC99 (talk) 12:42, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Done, but next time please use template {{Duplicate}}. --JuTa 13:05, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PicnicAreaChippokes (6071133837) (2).jpg

Hello,

I wanted to ask. This is the first file and the other duplicate is without the "(2)". Would it be better if the file was moved over the other one? The other be deleted and this (2) one be renamed over it? Tyler de Noche (talk) 16:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Normaly the older file is kept and the younger redirected. With or wthout the (2), I wouldnt matter and just mark the younger as dupe. --JuTa 18:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Datei bitte entfernen Delete file/copyright

Das Copyright folgender Datei ist relativ problematisch (zwar nur ein Teil einer Seite, aber immerhin). Ich bitte daher darum, sie zu entfernen Danke! (war lediglich Objekt für eine Disukssison bei Wikipedia Auskunft). --Karlo van Basten (talk) 06:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Datei_Kurrent.pdf

OK, obwohl sie doch recht alt aus sieht un somit wohl gemeinfrei sein dürfte. --JuTa 06:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Remove protection

I would also like to add a {{Documentation}} to it as I have translated {{PD-SpanishGov-money}} into Spanish Template:PD-SpanishGov-money/es. Thank you! Maybe you can do it directly? Triplecaña (talk) 14:24, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Triplecaña, I changed the protectrion to "semi". Now you should be able to change it. --JuTa 15:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Treaty of Amsterdam Ratification Map.svg

Hi! You removed File:Treaty of Amsterdam Ratification Map.svg and replaced it by File:Treaty of Nice Ratification Map.svg. It is a bit strange to have a map showing the ratification process of the Nice treaty in an article about the Amsterdam treaty. The maps just happen to be identical, but it is not certain that they will be identical in the future. Therefore I would like to ask you to put back the Amsterdam ratification map. Thanks --Glentamara (talk) 19:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I renamed it to File:Treaty of Amsterdam and Nice Ratification Map.svg. Hope this is OK now. --JuTa 22:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
No, it's not. There is no "Treaty of Amsterdam and Nice". There is one "Treaty of Amsterdam" and one "Treaty of Nice". They are two separate treaties and they have their own contracting parties, they just happen to be the same. --Glentamara (talk) 07:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
OK renamed again - see now File:Treaties of Amsterdam and Nice Ratification Map.svg. --JuTa 08:17, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Redirect

Hi,

Can you help redirect these as well? I tried but doesn't look like it works. Redirect: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

To: Main

Thanks.Terrorist96 (talk) 16:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, no because they are nor binary identical. I also so some graphical differences. You might try to mark them as {{Duplicate}}s, but there is no guarantee that the working on admin will agree with you. --JuTa 16:42, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
They are outdated versions, which have been uploaded and are viewable in the version history of the main link I posted. Can you check again? Thanks.Terrorist96 (talk) 18:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Might be, then nominate them for deletion. --JuTa 21:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Low Bros - Wild Cats - XIX (7700742116).jpg

Hi,

Would this be copyrighted per artwork? It is street art in Lisbon, Portugal and Tm is uploading an album with 4840 files in them. Tyler de Noche (talk) 23:27, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

If it is an outsite mural or similar, then it should be OK - see Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Portugal. You should put {{{FoP-Portugal}} to its description page then. --JuTa 06:43, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

File:ꯆꯤꯡꯁꯨꯕꯝ ꯑꯀꯥꯕ.jpg

How to used this image under public domain. Awangba Mangang (talk) 00:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Well, thats hard. YOu should find out the photographer of the depicted photo and ask him if he is willing to publish under a free license. If he agrees he has to send an email to the commons support team - for details see Commons:OTRS. Once thi is done you should put {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page. regards. --JuTa 06:45, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Category:الطرة

Hello, I wish you're good. I just wanna ask you what was the main reason to delete the category. I'm not experienced in commons; so I want to learn more and more. Thank you in advance. هارون الرشيد العربي (talk) 18:31, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi هارون الرشيد العربي, category names on commons should be in english, so you should translate it. And you should categorize the new category as well. The only description of it was its arabian name, which didn't helped me to find a suitable translation myself. regards --JuTa 18:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Diagrams

Hello JuTa!

Regarding this and this topic about diagrams of route signs which was actual few months ago, I drew route signs of highways in Serbia which are actually different (similar, but not same) from Croatian ones, as you can see (the first picture is my prototipe for Serbian signs):

Serbian A1 (should be A1-SRB.svg)
Croatian A1 (should be Autocesta A1.svg)

Regarding this, I please you to be so kind and revert merging of files Autocesta A1.svg and A1-SRB.svg etc. so I could upload Serbian signs. This is list of all files that should be disjuncted, respectively returned.
1) Current version of File:Motorway-A1-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A1.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A1-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A1-SRB.svg)
2) Current version of File:Motorway-A2-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A2.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A2-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A2-SRB.svg)
3) Current version of File:Motorway-A3-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A3.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A3-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A3-SRB.svg)
4) Current version of File:Motorway-A4-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A4.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A4-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A4-SRB.svg)
5) Current version of File:Motorway-A5-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A5.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A5-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A5-SRB.svg)
6) Current version of File:Motorway-A6-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A6.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A6-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A6-SRB.svg)
7) Current version of File:Motorway-A7-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A7.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A7-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A7-SRB.svg)
8) Current version of File:Motorway-A8-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A8.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A8-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A8-SRB.svg)
9) Current version of File:Motorway-A9-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A9.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A9-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A9-SRB.svg)
10) Current version of File:Motorway-A10-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A10.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A10-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A10-SRB.svg)
11) Current version of File:Motorway-A11-Hex-Green.svg return to its original title File:Autocesta A11.svg, so I could upload my (Serbian) version to File:Motorway-A11-Hex-Green.svg (ex. File:A11-SRB.svg)
Thank you in advance, --Bytens (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I cant realy follow your request. It seems you allready uploaded the files under a different name. So: Just categorize them as serbian signs (and decategorize the others) and use them in the corresponding wikipedia pages. If needed you could change the redirects like A1-SRB.svg to your new versions. There is no admin task required. You have my OK to do so if you asking for it. regards --JuTa 22:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, seems like you didn't understand me. As I wrote, my first file you saw (File:A1-p.png) is just a PNG prototype of Serbian highways signs. I uploaded it only for testing and showing that Serbian and Croatian signs are not equal. I still haven't uploaded SVG files because there are some small fixes I am finishing (A1-s.svg was wrong file, that's reason I deleted it). However, I noticed that Croatian users were angry (they discussed about it even on Croatian-language-Wikipedia) when Ђидо took their picture without permission and you renamed it to new, neutral name. I understand the anger of Croatian colleagues (even I would be angry if someone took my file and renamed it) and that is reason I want to restore their files under their, Croatian names and our files under our, Serbian names. In that name I please you to restore Croatian files to their original titles and Serbian to their original titles. Thanks, --Bytens (talk) 10:02, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
no, Please upload your new files under new names of your choice and if desired update the serbian redirects afterwards.--JuTa 11:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Question About a Deleted File / Possible Page Restoration

Hey JuTa!

Please take a look at this file:
[of Congregation Habonim building improvement]

It appears that you've deleted the file.

03:28, 25 April 2018 JuTa (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Sketch of Congregation Habonim building improvement.jpg (No permission since 17 April 2018) (thank) (global usage; delinker log)

We got a permission from the copyright holder. He sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

Title:

[Ticket#2018041910013661] File:Sketch of Congregation Habonim building improvement.jpg

This is what copyright holder sent:

Hi Eli, Will this email suffice?

We, A R K - give permission to use the work that we own - Sketch of Congregation Habonim building improvement.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sketch_of_Congregation_Habonim_building_improvement.jpg. - under the Creative Commons open license Attribution-Share Alike.

Guela Solow
Partner

Please

a) comment on reasons for deletion
b) will following a form of email template sent from copyright holder will suffice for undeletion?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates

Thank you very much! Looking forward to positive dialogue!

Best,
Arvids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyms01 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Please ask on Commons:OTRS noticeboard for your case, as I cannot see those mails. --JuTa 14:09, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Is it possible that I ask them to send permission email to you directly to ease the process? Your email? -gyms01
Sorry, no. I'm not a member of the Commons:OTRS team, and not allowed to do that. regards --JuTa 18:07, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Redirect löschen

Hallo JuTa, warum muss das so schwer sein? Es ist die falsche Hausnummer angegeben. Kannst Du den Redirect nicht einfach bitte löschen? Danke und Gruß,  — Elvaube ?! 14:48, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, (äletere) redirects werden nicht gelöscht, da externe links darauf verweisen können. Ich sehe aber, dieser Upload ist recht neu (hatte ich bisher übersen, sorry). Aber ich habe jetzt Deinen Löschantrag vervollständigt, siehe hier und hier. Am einfachsten geht das, wenn Du in Deinen Einstellungen die Helferlein AjaxQuickDelete und/oder Quick Delete aktivierst. Gruß --JuTa 18:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Crop

Hello.You can crop yourself using CropTool.Thank you ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 15:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I know, but I have other tasks/priorities. regards. --JuTa 16:34, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#Unprotect Template:PD-PhilippinesGov/doc. This is in relation to an issue with which you have been involved. An administrative action of yours has been questioned.

 — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  04:53, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Nichalp upload script icon.svg

Hallo!

Aber das Gesammtbild hat keine Lizenz und ist somit nicht auf Wikipedia zugelassen! Es sind nur die Lizenzen der einzelnen Teilbilder aufgelistet, aber das Gesammtwerk könnte man vermutlich unter GLPL oder unter GPLv3 veröffentlichen siehe de:Wikipedia:Urheberrechtsfragen#unterschiedliche_Teile_eines_Bildes_sind_mit_unterschiedlichen_(inkompatiblen)_Lizenzen_lizensiert sofern die Zusammensetzung von Nichalp unter der Schöpferhöhe ist (mMn ist es darunter), andernfalls müsste das Bild gelöscht werden.

 — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 07:55, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, das no license führt zu einer Löschung nach 7 Tagen. Wenn Du der Meinung bist, das Bild ist so nicht in Ordnung, dann stell bitte einen regulären Löchantrag. Gruß --JuTa 08:43, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Ich habe jetzt eine kompatible Lizens eingefügt, hätte ich ohnehin vor den 7Tagen gemacht, wenn keine Rückmeldung gekommen wäre. Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 11:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)}}

File:Aerial SUGBK (cropped) (cropped).jpg

Will you please delete this file? I doubled it by mistake, should have been overwrite instead. Thanks. – Flix11 (talk); 15:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done but next time please use {{Duplicate}} please. --JuTa 16:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

File tagging File:Parkingi podziemne i poziomowe w Śródmieściu w Warszawie na tle wybranych miast.png

http://miastojestnasze.org/zdjecia/: This website’s content has been published under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 license. What more permission information evidence do you need? Niegodzisie (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Correct, sorry I missed that. I'ved changed it now to {{Licensereview}}. --JuTa 09:59, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Santa Ana Volcano.USAF.C-130.3.jpg

Hi JuTa!

Can you undelete the above file for a brief period so that I can import it to Wikiversity for fair use? Thank you in advance for your kind consideration! --Marshallsumter (talk) 01:58, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Done. --JuTa 06:24, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
@JuTa: Transfer process complete! Thank you! --Marshallsumter (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

File:Montage Projet Pyrénées.jpg

Hello, for File:Montage Projet Pyrénées.jpg, it's me who took the pictures, it's me who made the montage, and it's me who uploaded the pictures. I hope i gave now the proper license (actually i gave already a license while uploading the picture...). --Guérin Nicolas (messages) 10:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Yep, its OK now, but it wasnt at upload time. cheers. --JuTa 11:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Help with licensing a file

Hi JuTa. You left a warning on my discussion page about problems with licensing on certain files I've uploaded. I have stated the source and the license, and it seems to me they fell under the Pexels-CFU license. Was I incorrect in assuming that? IIRC according to the Pexels website the images are freely distributed unless otherwise stated on the image page. Saturnalia0 (talk) 12:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, that license got deleted because it not commons compatible - see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 70#uploads from_pexels.com really o.k.?. regards. --JuTa 13:10, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Regarding file deletion

Hi sir, Myself maverick Indian, I have uploaded this logo in meta-wiki. Hope, I have followed wiki guidelines. but if I have violated any guideline as per the senior Wikipedians. Please do let me know, where I missed the guideline and do guide me. So, that I can make my write-ups better and can contribute my best to Wikipedia.

By the way, I love Wikipedia writing. So, if there are any forums or any senior Wikipedians available who check my drafts before getting published, will be of great help. Thanking you.----Maverickindian (talk) 09:53, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Maverickindian, The logo you uploaded is likely not your own work, which means designed by you. This means the under the cuurent license {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}, we would need a written agreement by the real designer and copyright holder by mail to the commons support team as documented under Commons:OTRS. Otherwise you could try to change the description of the file. The source shouldbe likely a web-page where it is visible. The author should be the real deigner and the license could be i.e. {{PD-textlogo}}. regards --JuTa 18:16, 29 October 2018 (UTC).

Oh Ok sir, now I understood in that case you can delete the file sir, As I don't know the guy or owner of the school. I thought of writing about the school as it was famous in Hyderabad area. Thank you, sir and sir, can you please teach me how to clear my sandbox area? ---Maverickindian (talk) 07:18, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

If you talk about en:User:Maverickindian/sandbox, you should use en:Template:Db. But thats not on commons. --JuTa 16:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Please undelete

the following:

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇

✓ Done --JuTa 22:00, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

the following:

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇

✓ Done --JuTa 07:54, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Hakea archaeoides

Hello JuTa,

I want to clean up the Hakea page. Can you explain why you (or somebody) deleted the Hakea archaeoides page please? (I don't use Wikimedia Commons a lot - maybe I should be able to answer the question myself.) Gderrin (talk) 09:50, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Oh, thats 4 years ago. It was because it contained only one image. At that gallery should contain as minimum 2 images. But the rules have changed inbetween I think. regards. --JuTa 10:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Gallery updated. Soon I will fix the red links. Gderrin (talk) 11:34, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Protection of multi/lang templates

Hi, I just noticed you protected {{PD-USGov-DEA/lang}} and I wonder why. How can someone add a translation if the template is protected? I was trying to translate it, as I have done a lot of times with other templates of the same kind, I don't believe there are guidelines that allow to protect templates/lang. --Phyrexian ɸ 17:34, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

They could get vandalized with great impact, but I reduced it to semi-protection for it now. regards. --JuTa 17:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Dupe complaint

07:45, 6 November 2018 JuTa (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Bremen Markt Westseite 903.jpg (Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:Bremen Makt Westseite 903.jpg) (thank) (global usage; delinker log) Du hast die Datei unter dem korrektgeschriebenen Filename gelöscht, so dass sie jetzt nur noch unter dem erkennbar (Makt statt Markrt) falschgeschriebenen Filename verfügbar ist. Bitte beende dieses destruktive Verhalten!--Ulamm (talk) 09:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Normalerweise werden die älteren Kopien behalten. Ich hab' das ganze jetzt umgdedreht. Das nächste Mal wenn Du Tippfehler hochlädst, einfach eine Umbenennung beantragen, statt ein zweites mal hochladen. Und falls das doch passiert, die Dir ungenehme Version mit {{Duplicate}} markieren, dann passiert so was nicht mehr. --JuTa 11:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Que pasa

Hola no se porque has borrado fotos y texto del Ducado de Osuna. Si fueses tan amable de darme una explicación. Muchas Gracias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepón (talk • contribs) 20:35, 6 November 2018 (UTC) Pepón — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepón (talk • contribs) 20:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I could find images deleted by me, all I checked where deleted by other admins. They got deleted, because you copied images from other sources and partly declared them as your own work. This is violating copyright laws. --JuTa 23:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Empty uncategorized categories

Hello.Please delete what's left of Special:UncategorizedCategories:

  1. Belgisch-Preußische Grenzsteine
  2. Cohors I Germanorum
  3. Feira do Livro de Porto Alegre 2012
  4. General (uniform)
  5. General armii (uniform)
  6. Mendenhall Valley
  7. Montrichard)
  8. Monuents of Mikhail Bulgakov
  9. Nachalnik divisi
  10. Rouhollah Bagheri
  11. Russell (Dyrham) arms
  12. Ryadovoy (uniform)
  13. Serzhant (uniform)
  14. Silicon groups
  15. Sky plc
  16. Slums in Anakaputhur town
  17. Starshy leytenant (uniform)
  18. Stationlaan, Breda
  19. Storfjellet (Rennebu)
  20. Svartvatnet (Rennebu)
  21. Tintoretto
  22. Tom Spilman

In addition to

  1. Category:Norwegian_resistance
  2. Category:Shooting_at_the_2018_Mediterranean_Games
  3. Category:Carmen_Suleiman (contains only a non-free file)

Thanks ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, thx. --JuTa 19:23, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

You applied no license to File:The Queen's Hotel in Toronto.jpg .

  1. This image would have been in the public domain, even if the flickr uploader had put an "all rights reserved" license on it. We can and do ignore bogus "all rights reserved" licenses on images which are obviously public domain.
  2. In this particular case the flickr uploader explicitly acknowledged they had scanned a public domain image, and their flickr image description explicitly says:
"Although I've listed this as Creative Commons Attribution (CC0 is not offered as an option here) this image is in fact a Public Domain image to which I have done some digital restoration."

So, did you read the flickr uploader's explicit comments? Geo Swan (talk) 15:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

The flickr public domain mark is not accepted on commons. If the image is indeed in public domain please change it to a suitable one. regards --JuTa 19:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Sanity checking

You applied some sanity checking to a permissions challenge from Dman41689 to File:Supercute Rachel Julia Talent Show Littlefields 053012.jpg.

I looked at the contribution history of Chillbedextous today, because they uploaded a very fine image of new Congressional Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, where someone has requested OTRS confirmation that Chillbedextous actually took the image. What I found was that over half the images they uploaded include Julia Cumming, including images of her when she was just a teenager. This suggests to me that it is very likely Chillbedextous is a family member of Ms Cumming, or a long-term friend, or, at least a very long-term fan. And this makes it seem very credible that the 2017 image of Ms Cumming interviewing a then unknown Ms Ocasio-Cortez was actually their own work.

Why tell you? Well, Dman41689 challenged three other images of Ms Cumming at the same time they challenged File:Supercute Rachel Julia Talent Show Littlefields 053012.jpg -- File:Supercute March 2013.jpg, File:Supercute Austin March 2011.jpg and File:Supercute Governors Island 2009.JPG. It seemed likely to me that Dman was as reckless with those three images as he was with the one you noticed...

I took a brief look at Dman's contribution history. From a brief look it seems that about half of their edits, prior to their retirement, may have been similar challenges to images, including a large fraction were justified simply based on gut-feelings that the uploaders {{Self}} claims were authentic. Here, for instance, Dman seems to have simply ignored polite requests from individuals whose claims of authorship he had simply discounted...

So, would you mind looking at File:Supercute March 2013.jpg, File:Supercute Austin March 2011.jpg and File:Supercute Governors Island 2009.JPG, and refuting or confirming my gut feeling that they too bore credible claims of authorship?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 01:57, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, the first kept one is a confirmed flickr image (maybe a flickr washed one). The 3 deleted images were declared as own work of the uploader which is in my impression very unlikely, but more likely cipied from whereever in the internet. If you think the files should be undeleted you might raise a Commons:Undeletion reqquest, but I would not expect a graat chance of success. regards --JuTa 02:08, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Okay. Thanks for the quick response.

    I left a note on User talk:Chillbedextous, (1) encouraging them to reply to the OTRS team, substantiating they took the image of Cumming and Ocasio-Cortez; (2) once they have done that, substantiate they took those deleted images, and get them restored.

    Since I can't see the images, for myself, I won't request a deletion review. If I could see them myself I too might doubt their authorship.

    Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 02:22, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

This is the new Newman University logo: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/8/88/20181019181844%21Newman_University%2C_Birmingham%2C_Logo_2016.jpg

Why was the old logo added back on https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/8/88/20181019181844%21Newman_University%2C_Birmingham%2C_Logo_2016.jpg

Related Wiki page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Newman_University,_Birmingham,_Logo_2016.jpg


This is the related website: https://www.newman.ac.uk/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newman University Birmingham (talk • contribs) 09:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, if you wanna use the other image in an articel please modify the article and dont overwrite historical images. They are usefull as they are to document the hostory (i.e.). --JuTa 13:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
OK thanks for the explanation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newman University Birmingham (talk • contribs) 11:36, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Flucht- und Rettungsplan DIN ISO 23601 Muster

Hallo JuTa, mein Bild https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flucht-_und_Rettungsplan_DIN_ISO_23601_Muster.png wurde gelöscht aufgrund von unvollständigen Angaben. Das Bild und die zugrunde liegende Zeichnung wurde von mir selbst erstellt, dass hatte ich auch so angegeben. Kann die Löschung rückgängig gemacht werden oder muss ich die Datei neu hochladen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jantar18 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Weder noch. Bitte stell einen Commons:Undeletion request (geht auch auf deutsch). Gut möglich, dass dort eine Verifikation via Commons:OTRS verlangt wird. Also eine Mail von Urheber an das Commons Support-Team mit bestätigung dass er Urheber ist und dass der die Datei unter einer (und welcher) freien Lizenz veröffentlichen möchste, denn es ist, um ehrlich zu sein, schwer zu glauben, dass Du diesen Plan selbst erstellt hast. In den meisten ähnlichen Fällen, sind solche Pläne einfach von "irgenwoher" kopiert und nur als eigenes Werk ausgegeben. Das kommt hier leider recht häufig vor. Gruß --JuTa 14:34, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Ich mache das hauptberuflich, deshalb hat es mich gestört, dass die Bilder und Links im Artikel Flucht- und Rettungsplan Werbung in Form des Planerstellers enthalten. Deshalb habe ich diesen Plan als Muster erstellt ohne solche Angaben einzutragen. Oder ist diese Werbung, auch wenn sehr unauffällig gestattet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jantar18 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi, ich hab' die Datei nun wieder hergestellt und einen regulären Löschantrag drauf gestellt - siehe Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flucht- und Rettungsplan DIN ISO 23601 Muster.png, am besten bringst Du dort nochmals Deine Argumente vor und beobachtest die Seite auch. Falls Commons:OTRS verlangt wird, musst Du eine Mail and Commons Support Team schreiben. Dann addiere bitte auch die Vorlage {{OTRS pending}} auf die Bildbeschreibungsseite, am besten mit {{subst:OP}}, dann sind auch die Parameter der Vorlage gleich riecht gesetzt. Gruß --JuTa 15:04, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Mein Körper, Meine Identität, Mein Leben!

Hallo,

Du kannst Dir sicher vorstellen, dass ich mit der Löschung der Seite nicht einverstanden bin. Insbesondere nicht mit der unveränderten Übernahme der Löschantragsbegründung (die ich schon in der Wortwahl daneben finde) als Löschbegründung, und dem Nicht-Eingehen auf meine Gegenrede. Ich habe nicht die Absicht, eine Löschprüfung zu beantragen (Windmühlenflügel und so), ich empfinde das ganze aber als aktive Behinderung meiner Arbeit hier (fur die ich nicht bezahlt werde, sondern im Gegenteil Zeit, Engagement und Geld reinstecke) und wüsste zumindest gern, was das soll? --C.Suthorn (talk) 11:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi C.Suthorn, wenn Du möchtet kann ich Dir das auf eine Unterseite in Deinem Benutzernamensraum verschieben, aber als normale Galerie-Seite war sie wirklich fehl am Platze. --JuTa 11:25, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Wikidata person

Hi JuTa. I don't understand why you closed this with keep and "still heavily in use." The aim of the deletion debate was to figure out what we want to do with the template, and I can migrate the existing uses over to {{Wikidata Infobox}} very quickly (using Pi bot), so the number of current uses isn't really relevant. I think the consensus was to migrate the uses over (7 !votes for delete, only 1 !vote for keep), so should I just go ahead and do the migration, if you're willing to revisit your closure? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:30, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

A discussion about migration of the template is running on Template talk:Wikidata person#Migrate uses to Wikidata Infobox?. If there is a consensus, feel free to go ahead with it. But as long as it is in use, we should *not* delete it. --JuTa 11:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know - I started that discussion, and as you can see by my last comment on it, it led to the deletion request to try to reach a consensus (at which point that discussion essentially stopped). So going back to that discussion is a bit circular ... It looks like it's best if I just go ahead here. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:40, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, and restart the request as soon the template is not used anymore. Then it should be a clear case for delete or minimum for a redirect. --JuTa 11:46, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
OK, pi bot's running through the current uses now. Depending on how many then need manually sorting out, I hope that this can be completed today. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:15, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
All done, do you want me to start a new request or could you have another look at the last one? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:40, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done. You might like to fix/remove links i.e. from other templates to it - see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Wikidata_person. regards. --JuTa 23:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

in case the clubs have been extinct for a long time PedroConstantinescu (talk) 18:16, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Then please find and add a valid license template at Commons:Copyright tags. regards --JuTa 18:17, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Masz nowe wiadomości - nowe powiadomienia (2).png

Hi. I intended to submit a deletion request of this file, but I saw that the duplicate file has been used in many sites (pl.wikipedia), so I waited a while thinking that the long list will disappear (because of system delay). But later I realised that the Commons system, considering both files as one, displays full "file using" list in both files' sites (even though only one has been used). That was a kind of wikisystem trick to inform others that the same graphic is used in such sites, so my reasoning was proper? You've just reenter the site only as a redirection. In future can I make a deletion request with such duplicated files? With Regards. --Pit rock (talk) 01:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

HI, please just mark them as {{Duplicate}}, then normaly a redirect will be left behind. --JuTa 02:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Beverley Shenstone

Added additional information to photo file noting that the Shenstone Family provided the photo file Beverley Shenstone.png for inclusion in his Wikipedia biographical page. The image is used only to provide visual identification of one specific individual. Thanks for your help. Kllwiki (talk) 16:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

== File:Girton College, Cambridge, England, 1890s - Original.tif and File:Girton College, Cambridge, England-LCCN2002696455.tif ==

For naming consistency with File:Girton College, Cambridge, England, 1890s.jpg and File:Girton College, Cambridge, England, 1890s.png, can you please restore File:Girton College, Cambridge, England, 1890s - Original.tif and instead delete File:Girton College, Cambridge, England-LCCN2002696455.tif? Thanks!

(If you're not aware as regards the other two files, JPEGs display better, but PNGs are lossless, hence both are needed.) Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:57, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

The other one is much much older, which takes priority in this case. I'm not willing to switch the 2 files here. sorry. --JuTa 02:00, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Well, it means that instead of a properly crosslinked set, you keep creating files that have to have their descriptions gutted and replaced with the crosslinking, especially as the ones you're keeping, as far as I can tell, are completely unused. It's fixable, don't get me wrong, but it's only fixable if it's caught. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I dont see anything wrong with the current file name. The fact that this one is called Original and its partner files LCCN.. doesnt hurt or causes any problem. regards. --JuTa 03:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but the version you did delete also linked to the restored versions in the other versions= section of the information template, meaning that the linkage between them hasd to be recreated. The one you deleted had an information template that carefullyt linked everything together; the one you kept had none of that. And, yes, I can fix that, but only if I see that the deletion happened. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, then I must have missed that cross-linking when I processed that image, sorry for that. I'll try to get that in future cases. --JuTa 17:56, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Don't worry about it, I'm a little obsessive with organisation of file groupings, I think, but... y'know, it probably is good practice, so... Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:36, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JuTa/Archive_43&oldid=331813156"