User talk:ShakespeareFan00/Sfan00 IMG/Archive 8

Archives

• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive 1
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive 2
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive 3
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive 4
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive 5
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive 6
• User talk:Sfan00 IMG/Archive7

Best For Film logo

Thanks for your message. The image in question was tagged in an article which I was in the process of writing when Marasmusine unjustifiably deleted it. I'm waiting for him to restore the article and thereby the image's lineage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmu2108 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Mad eraser man

I think this guy is nuts or just trying to reduce the quality of Wikipedia. Didn't your mother tell you that it's better to build than to destroy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Mephistopheles (talk • contribs) 15:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you nuts?

I removed the speedy from Media:GautamiPutraSatakarni.jpg. Are you serious? I'm astounded that you think that money that is hundreds of yeas old would be copyrighted. Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 22:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I think this user is a serious tool. --Cyberman (talk) 08:12, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Hammer-mme myou.jpg

Dude, I really don't understand what info you're looking for. The process is too complicated.

Essentially, the image is a screen cap I took from a DVD. My understanding is that there's no problem using a screen cap to illustrate the work profiled on the page. I don't know how to explain that. You realize that I uploaded it more than three years ago? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Mephistopheles (talk • contribs) 08:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright for really old coins

I don't understand. Please explain how coins that were used hundreds of years ago could still be copyright today and need a fair use rational? It makes no sense to me. Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 22:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

If it's that old, feel free to change the license Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

But why are you even tagging things for deletion in the first place? The coin template states very clearly that it may be copyrighted, not that it is, so blanket tagging of all coins without a FUR for deletion seems foolish to me. Theresa Knott | Hasten to trek 22:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not inconceivable that an image of coins a hundred years old could require a fair use rationale. For example, it appears that the Irish government claims a perpetual copyright on Irish currency, even for coins and notes issued before the copyright act went into effect. File:GautamiPutraSatakarni.jpg does not say how old the coins are and does not even say what country issued them, so it is entirely possible that it will need a fair use rationale. That said, I agree that tagging for deletion immediately is pretty hasty when the images may well be in the public domain. —Tim Pierce (talk) 14:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Past block, still the same problem

I'm concerned to find this: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive623#Bot_malfunction

Has your account's behaviour really improved since then? Andy Dingley (talk) 00:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Not much it seems, if anything it has gotten worse. For instance I wonder which part of Ansbachdragoner‎ has not edited in over a year, doesn't Sfan understand. At least malfunctioning bots can be shut off. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 11:46, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

You consider images without an FUR acceptable? If it bothers you so much that seemingly abbandoned accounts get agged,

get the FUR policy changed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:49, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I prefer old school WP:IAR to FUR. Besides, it takes too long to change policy. I'd rather see the likes of you banned first, THEN change it. Your sort uses policies as weapons rather than tools, and do more to destroy the encyclopedia than build it.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Depeche Mode samples tagged on my talk page

Please kill them all if you want. I don't care enough to waste my time arguing about this kind of thing anymore.

Enjoy your Wikipedia...

Epolk (talk) 06:21, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

File:DemetriusIElephant.jpg and old currency image deletions

Read the licence.

Now this isn't a great licence, I admit, but our convention seems to be to use it. The problem is that it's actually a multi-licence, with an implicit but unclear selection. The licence claims to be applicable to "old currency" (which is easy to check) and it makes no claims regarding such issues as the Irish perpetual copyright claim (so that's easy to "check" too, because we just don't bother). The drawback is that items licenced under it may be under _either_ PD _or_ fair use, and the licence as tagged just doesn't state which. Obviously if the item is under fair use, it needs FURing.

Now the problem is that this licence isn't automatically processable. A 'bot (or a robotnik like Sfan00 IMG) can't tell if it needs a FUR just by looking at it. At this point, it's necessary to play IP lawyer and judge which of the licence components it's being licensed under. This is a PITA for checking, but I can see how the situation arose, as it allowed a lot of currency images (Irish too) to be tagged easily and correctly with this licence tag.

If you want to check for FURs on things that need FURs (and you don't want to perform disruptive edits), then it's then up to you to determine which of the mutli-licence terms is being applied here. It is wrong to request FURs (on pain of deletion) for those which are legitimately using the PD expression within this licence. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

RFC/U

Has anyone got the time (I seriously don't) to haul this whole sorry mess off to RFC/U ? (re Commons edits too) It needs doing, we're going to be losing legitimate content before long. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Another dud tagging for deletion this morning. I don't know about you guys, but I can't keep up with this. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:36, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

That one is noted as a mistag, It was resolved in the edit subsequent to the one you note above, but why let the facts get in the way of a complaint? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

There are loads of mistags. Thanks for fixing this one, but each one you tag still creates work for others to have to check it - even if you then change it afterwards. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:27, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

If you'd also like to provide a detailed list of specfic media you think may have been 'mistagged', I'm more than prepared to give them a second look Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Der Diktator.png

Hi,

Do rationales have to be put in a special field? I'd appeciate any guidance and have raised questions at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#sheet_music_examples. Sparafucil (talk) 01:02, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Hb 42.50.8.jpg

I believe that I uploaded that from a public use source about 3 years back. I haven't a clue nor do I care in the least if you delete it.Tirronan (talk) 03:15, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmm

I don't much mind if you and Andy Dingley edit was over tags. However, when you leave three messages about the same file on someone else's talk page as a result of edit-warring, that's not acceptable. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:16, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Noted, That seems to be a side effect of using TWINKLE to tag (which is NO excuse), Thanks for letting me know :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Wikipedia approx total edit count over time graph 3.png

I uploaded this file on enwiki deliberately, rather than Commons, because it was enwiki-specific, for use in a Village Pump discussion. (Not that I particularly mind it being moved to Commons; it just seems more appropriate on enwiki). You should probably tag the two older statistics images for moving too, if you think it's a good idea to move them. (I'd be interested to hear your reasons for the move, incidentally; not annoyed, just curious.) --ais523 19:40, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Diane-Arbus-1949.jpg fair use rationale

Would you mind suggesting exactly how you would want to see this rationale expanded? It says pretty much everything the guidelines ask for - the original author of the work, the copyright information, why this is claimed as fair use, etc. --Jashiin (talk) 20:08, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Since apparently you're either unable or unwilling to explain your edits (you have blatantly ignored my query and then continued to tag files I uploaded with "short rationale" notices - how am I supposed to fix the files if you, the person who had a problem with them, refuse to explain the problem?), I'm going to remove the notices you put, until you can provide a rationale for your edits. If you continue adding those things without explaining your edits, I will report your actions as disruptive behaviour. --Jashiin (talk) 11:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, firstly, an apology for not responding more quickly. What you need to do is epxand the rationale so that each point of WP:NFCC is covered. If that's already done then by all means change the {{Short-Rationale}} to a {{Standard-Rationale}}.

Please note {{Short-Rationale}} isn't a deletion notice, and that was for a specific reason, namely that to tag it as a DFU would have been even more 'disruptive'. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for replying and for looking at those images. I'm sorry if my reaction was over the top, it's just that I've seen some tag conflicts before that weren't pretty, and the delay kind of made me assume this was going the same way. I'll see what I can do about satisfying the standardized rationale format requirements. Thanks again! --Jashiin (talk) 17:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

BTW On a side issue, It's a shame mediawiki can't typset musical notation directly like some other systems (for example TeX)

as it would be invaluable for music related articles. It would also be very useful in transcribing some musical works on Wikisource. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:DressLooksNice.jpg rationale

You do realise that it probably took you as much time to nominate File:DressLooksNice.jpg for deletion as it would have done to put a rationale? Non-free artwork for a music release has a very well established history on wikipedia. You can actually save yourself time by using a simple Audio cover rationale, instead of spending a few minutes of your life creating a nomination and deletion discussion which will also use up others time for a slight of policy which presents zero threat to anyone. SFB 23:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that, but thanks for the reminder. BTW it's not actually used for the main infobox but a subsiduary one.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:03, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Skyscraperman

Thank you for your comments regarding the image now up on the Skyscraperman Wikipedia page. The copyright holder has attempted without success to send the appropriate email to: permissions-en‐at‐wikimedia.org For whatever reason, the email does not go through to that address. Please advise. Thank you.

Mimiken (talk) 01:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

You need to ask an administrator, issues with OTRS mail are beyond my control Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Notifying redirects

FYI, when you edit User talk:DYKHousekeepingBot or User talk:DYKUpdateBot, you're editing a redirect. It would make more sense to follow the redirect to my talk page. Shubinator (talk) 16:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I tag with TWINKLE, SO I don't understand why it's not following the talk page redirect... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, weird. Shubinator (talk) 16:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

File:NA_2007_Hyundai_Elantra.jpg

Hello Sfan00, thanks for contact me regarding the copyrights on this picture. this picture was originated from wiki file:2007_Hyundai_Elantra.jpg, and edited to remove the front plate. the copyrights of that picture is none; however, as a new user of wiki, i might have done the process incorrectly. thank you Shimman (talk) 16:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Images (missing description details)

Kindly help me to add descriptions for all these already uploaded images. I unknowingly missed adding description. I'm not aware how to add descriptions for already uploaded images. Plz help. Thanks.--UtharaMalabar (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

All you need to do is Click the Edit tag for the images concerned , and add 2-3 sentences for the description field of

the {{information}} template that's present. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

My reciently uploaded image

How do you find the images that you say may or may not be public domain, do you just troll around until you find one that might be or not be completly public domain, and by the way, don't template the regulars. --Clarince63 (talk) 16:16, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I was using Special:Filelist and scanning in a systematic fashion.. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Mariusmiti

All makes sense, alas! I have, with regret, blocked this account until the man, woman or dog behind it speaks to us and says "Ah, so that's what 'own work' means!". If there was just a hint of communication going on I wouldn't have, but there wasn't. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Audio excerpt fair use rationale

You have tagged File:Hamlet opera-Act1Sc2 Ombre chère 6bars 26of605sec trk13 CD1 EMI7548202.ogg with the Template:Short-Rationale. It is not clear to me what kind of additional information you are looking for. Do I need to quote on the file's description page the passage in the article which comments on the audio excerpt? Or do you think the commentary is insufficient to justify fair use? --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I have added more detail to the file description page and will remove the template for now. If this is not sufficient, please explain. --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. if you can udpate other short-rationales it would be appreciated :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

RE : KPS Flag

I understand, but i have one question, how can i make(change) the copyright status? Thanks. AceDouble (talk) 2:56, 01 November 2010 (GMT)

Click the 'Edit' tag on the Image Description page and amend the license to something appropriate. The flag image IS 'fair-use'

though, so you'll also need to add in some information as to why it can't be replaced with a 'free' image. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

MTA Maryland bus pictures tagging.

Why are you tagging the bus images to be copied to Commons. If I wanted them there, I would have uploaded them there when I had the chance to.--ETLamborghini (talk) 15:57, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Images are free licensed. Free images get moved to Commmons. Are you saying that these images are NOT in fact freely licensed as claimed? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:03, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

No, they are free. I took the photos. To be honest, I didn't know that free images had moved to Commons until today with you.--ETLamborghini (talk) 16:08, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Skyscraperman

Please be advised the copyright holder for the image at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraperman> has finally been successful in sending the appropriate email to: permissions-en@wikimedia.org Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Mimiken (talk) 23:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Usairmailstamp-C68.jpg

I fixed it, thanks, I missed that one. Nasa-verve (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply about image

I got it off Wikipedia, which has it sourced. I altered it from observing the AMPAR (or maybe it was NMDA receptor) receptor image in the AMPA receptor article, I believe. I manipulated the red diamond, put in a green diamond, and I'm too fucking busy to describe this since you should be intelligent enough of a Wikipedian to notice that I sourced it and there are various linked articles that could give you an example of where the image came from. --Cyberman (talk) 06:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

ALL image on Wikipedia need a source, and when tagged the image that the above comment relates to did not apparently have one.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's not my fault that you are uneducated and do not know how to find the correct sources for things; Wikipedians hold multiple jobs. Some make images and attempt to attach the right source; others who hold domain over particular parts of subjects can relate sources when the wrong source is presented. You apparently do not hold domain very well over a neurobiology section. You were suggesting a decent image, contributed by an intelligent member was deleted. That was foolish. It took more time for me to make the image than find the source. I don't think you are qualified to even hold dominion over those cellular biology sections. --Cyberman (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

If you are to delete my image, you must delete these:

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Activated_NMDAR.PNG

2) Laube, B; Hirai H, Sturgess M, Betz H, and Kuhse J (1997). "Molecular determinants of antagonists discrimination by NMDA receptor subunits: Analysis of the glutamate binding site on the NR2B subunit". Neuron 18 (3): 493–503. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(00)81249-0. PMID 9115742.

This is my own image, snapped from my own camera

Hi, Noticed your response about my image which was uploaded. Since it was posted by me, taken from my camera, I believe the copyright won't be much of an issue.

Best Regards

Siddhesh Joglekar (talk) 11:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Sfan,

Sure, will take care from now on - for now, I see that you have added the creative commons license to the image. So, can I remove the disclaimer put there? From the next time, I shall be careful about images uploaded on wikipedia...

Cheers Siddhesh Joglekar (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

RE: File:Gauloises sticks.jpg

This image is currently marked as being 'fair-use' although you indicate it's your own work.. I don't see anything in the image tha would make this un-free, Perhaps you could clarify your reasoning for marking it non-free? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:58, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The 'fair-use' is in relation to the visible logos which are copyrighted however it is also my own work with regards to the photo it self. As I understand it, both classifications apply though maybe I misunderstand. Is it not required that if a picture contains logos of copyright material that it be labeled as such but can be used if there is no free equivalent and there is minimal extent of use? David Rogers (talk) 21:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, You've quoted policy directly back at me! It might be worth making it clear which part of the image is free/non-free

if it's not already. IIRC someone else may have considered the logos as 'textlogo' which leads to a slightly different interpratation of the rules, because in the US certain forms of 'text-logo' aren't always considered 'original' enough to be copyright anyway Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Imzadi1979-MI.svg

You tagged the map as a candidate to be moved to the Commons. It has been deleted off Commons for falling outside of the educational scope of that project back in March. Just because something is freely licensed and hosted on the English Wikipedia does not mean that it is automatically a candidate to be moved to the Commons. In fact, in the time that the map was nominated for deletion, I had uploaded a new version of it on Wikipedia to keep it updated on the progress in the County Challenge contest. Please evaluate the content of the image before tagging them to be moved. If there is no possible usage in other projects, don't tag them. Imzadi 1979 → 12:00, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

P.S. You should read file description pages more carefully. This edit tagged a photo as a Commons transfer candidate. It's PD in Canada, but as the template lower says, it's not PD in the US, so it can't go to Commons. For it to be PD in the US, it needed to enter the PD in Canada by 1996. It only entered the PD there at the beginning of this year. Imzadi 1979 → 00:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to de-tag accordingly then :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Files such as File:Credit_Agricole_HQ.jpg

Hi,
I dont understand why did you put a template "short rationale" on my images such as this one. I am French, and I had difficulties to understand the problem of "no-Fop in France", but a US guy helped me : no free image available, real use... What is missing ? I thought I add all necessary informations. Thanks. --Tangopaso (talk) 22:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

You need to expand the FUR portion with respect to WP:NFCC, 'short-rationale' isn't a deletion notice BTW. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright notice required for a Wikinewbie

Being somewhat new to this game, I think I may have added the required copyright notice on File:Aqk Percy Aug2005.jpg as requested. Please let me know if this is what is required, or if there is some other hoop(s) that I must jump through.

Indeed, please inform if I have approached you in the correct manner, o exalted one. I.E. is this where I plead for my picture's acceptance?

Aqking (talk) 12:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC) - in reply to the following admonishment- (I'm slowly getting the hang of this)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Aqking (talk • contribs) 12:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

August Manns

Perplexed by your note. Image is out of copyright and I thought adequately documented. Please tell me what you think the problem is and I will attend to it. Tim riley (talk) 23:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

East Side Playhouse

"Standard" template. I really don't see what good this template does. It forces the reader to scroll past it to get to the information they are seeking. To me, it is just another big ugly blob that Wikipedians are fond of putting on image pages. Can I please delete it? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure , but the image will keep showing up as a false positive in the list of images without a rationale if it's removed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Commutative diagram zelmerszoetrop.jpg

It says I made it on the page. I made it in MS paint. Don't delete it. Zelmerszoetrop (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

So add a license tag ... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what the means or how to do it. I made it, I don't care who uses it, or for what purpose. I can't imagine anybody would want it. Zelmerszoetrop (talk) 23:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Candidate to move to Wikipedia Commons

Hi! just wondering what this tag means? you placed a tag for a picture of mine to be moved to Wikipedia Commons. Just Wondering about this.

Pumkinhead001 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC).

Wikimedia Commons is a repository of free media, moving an image there means that other projects can use it :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

LOC at Flickr Commons

There are 6,000 photos that need help linking them to Wikipedia if you want to help. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm busy enough patrolling new stuff, but thanks for the consideration Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:49, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Government Physical Education College, Dhaka.jpg

Thanks for informing me that copyright status is unclear under the file. The file is uploaded by me and it is the image of physical practice of college students. While uploading the file , unfortunately I have missed to add the licensing information. Actually, as a newcomer I have missed it to upload image according to Wikipedia`s guideline. Anyway, again I have uploaded the file to add the licensing information. If any mistaking is still now, please let me know again kindly. Thanks. Md Saiful Alam (talk) 18:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Cover picture on Fatu Hiva (book)

The fair use tag says all. The picture illustrates the article on the book in question. If anything else is required, send me a message. I deleted the picture at Thor Heyerdahl, because it might or it might not be anything or other. And I deleted the other tag requiring something which is already there. How many times and in how many ways something has to be spelled out? Kraxler (talk) 18:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

An image on Wikipedia being used under fair-use, needs additional information to explain why it's free use and why the image is not replaceable with a 'free' equvilant. WP:NFCC explains the criteria. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

File:The Rip Off Review 2nd Edition.jpg

Hi Sfan00 IMG, What more information would I need for this image. I actually followed the Hightimes magazine upload perfectly. I'm just starting the article for which I'm going to use this image. Do I need to add more information under summary? Check out Hightimes-first-issue-1974.jpg. Let me know. Thisandthem (talk) 01:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

You need to explain how use of the image meets each of the non-free content criteria - see WP:NFCC Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

What happens next? Do you approve it? The last time I uploaded a non-free I got plenty of help, please let me know. Thank you!Thisandthem (talk) 12:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

If it meets the criteria, it stays :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:32, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Fourpeaked map

Thanks for the heads up on the Fourpeaked map. I notice that someone had made it appear that it was copyrighted by the State of Alaska. That was an error. The file was created by folks working for the Alaska Volcano Observatory, which is under the auspices of the USGS. I have edited the file to reflect that. AlaskaMike (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Feedback on image clean-ups

Hi, as requested on IRC I have taken a random sample of six images you have worked on, 3 on Wikipedia, 3 on Commons. Only identifying those with issues:

1. No problem.
2. File:Register renaming:tag indexed scheme.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); adding the information template is fine, though as source information is missing this ought to be sorted out before moving to Commons (I found no matches on TinEye but if the uploader does not identify a source then it probably should be marked for deletion or, as it is a simple illustration, replaced with a new originally designed SVG version).
3. No problem.
4. No problem.
5. There appears to be a duplicate File:Corticosterone.png vs. File:Corticosterone (1).png, there probably is no benefit in having both versions. No other issues as the source is clear.
6. File:Dlr-crittercountrymap.GIF (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - with no source and no author this probably should be marked as PUF (though I find no matches in TinEye) unless replaced with a re-drawn original alternate.

Conclusion: You may want to make more use of TinEye and checking for duplicates on Commons before marking for move to Commons. I would also suggest not marking any image as suitable for a move until the source information is added. Cheers, Fæ (talk) 15:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the feedback. I am planning on trying to add {{information}} regardless of Commons-ability...

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Overzealous Image Tagging

Please do read the full image descriptions before making deletion nominations. If you do so, you'll see that the following images that you tagged for deletion were released into the public domain by their creator, and that the contact information of that creator was available in case clarification was needed. If you find the licensing information to be confusing, then feel free to contact the image's creator to clarify before wasting time with deletions that will have to be undone later.

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]

Nathan McKnight -- Aelffin (talk) 15:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, I hope the permissions on those images have now also been sent to the relevant OTRS queue? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The permissions on those are as they were. Since you seem to understand the permissions process better than I, feel free to take whatever action you feel is necessary to get the official ducks in a row. Nathan McKnight -- Aelffin (talk) 16:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

*sigh*

Please don't template the regulars. You're being a dick, man.
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 22:26, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

File duke of Alba

I don't know who is the author of the photo of the 17th Duke of Alba I have uploaded. Ca I say it was me becuase I scanned it? I don't no wehter I can do this. Thank you --Paliano (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

See the response I left on your talk page Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Panorama Kings 2.jpg

Hi,

That photo is indeed my own work. Not sure if I need to do something more than letting you know? thx Peregrine981 (talk) 13:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I can now tag it for Commons :) Sfan00 IMG (talk)

File:NoPromises.jpg

Hi, you asked me to provide a better source for this image. I saved it from iTunes when I bought the single as a digital download, but it's since been replaced by User:MatthewWaller and I don't know the source for that image. He failed to update the source. So you would have to ask him. AnemoneProjectors 15:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

clearly logo

Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_September_5#File:Recsam_logo.jpg - what tha? If you know it is a logo, it isn't appropriate to delete it. -John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

OK Noted, That PUI shouldn't have been closed as it was then...Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Binh Gia

Hi mate,

I just uploaded File:Binh_Gia_Victory.jpg as a separate image which I would like to be released into Wikipedia Commons. I uploaded the first one due to a mistake, so could you delete the first one please?Canpark (talk) 13:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Incubosullacittàcontaminata.jpg

I have no idea what you are talking about so I've removed your tag. The image is correctly license and the url link is fine.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:48, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Protecting my file

I am the author of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Physical_Education_College,_Dhaka and the image File:Government Physical Education College, Dhaka.jpg . Already I have given necessary licensing information. Anyway, How can I protect my file from speedy deletion process? Could you say me please , again, Sir? Thanks Md Saiful Alam (talk) 03:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)