User talk:Kelly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Copyright of image[edit]

Have inquired [question: NLAref101056] of the National Library of Australia who host the digitization site from which the image [1] is sourced. Hope to have a resolution shortly. Jgk168421 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:46, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jgk168421: Thanks for the heads-up. Kelly hi! 11:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

The owners of the web site hosting this image, say they do not have the authority to grant permission for its use, and consequently I have deleted it and its associated info box from the relevant article. I do not seem to have the authority to delete the image file itself, and ask that this be done. Jgk168421 (talk) 08:37, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jgk168421: Thanks for researching this. No further action is necessary, the file will be deleted soon through the normal housekeeping process. Kelly hi! 08:52, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of image[edit]

Hello Kelly, you prompted the artwork of George-Maran Varthalitis Bird Bequest for deletion. I forwarded to the email of George - Maran Varthalitis giving me permission to post his artwork online. Please remove the banner of deletion from the image. Thank you

  • Yes check.svg Done Kelly hi! 18:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Question re message from you[edit]

Hello Kelly, I got a message from you that the image file for Dr. Feingold called File:Dr feingold82.jpg is being listed for discussion. This message was dated yesterday. I had been wondering why the picture was deleted when you had permission from the Feingold Association to use it per its history dated 2006, but I figured his picture isn't so important. But why I was sent the message about a discussion on it just yesterday? I am having a serious problem with an editor of the page called Alexbrn who insists that the 1983 review of studies is definitive and nothing new is appropriate as far as whether Dr. Feingold's "notion" of diet affecting behavior was effective. I have tried including newer meta analyses & reviews, acknowledging that there was - and still is - controversy on the subject. But he just removed everything. Trying to explain the reason for updating the information to include the last 4 decades of research has made me feel like Alice lost in Wonderland. Your page lists lots of awards for being the calm spot in a storm, etc., so maybe you are the right person to get involved in this issue too? I will be planning to update the whole Feingold Diet page next .... but don't want to go through getting deleted just because some admin prefers the Quackwatch version of the world ... What is my next step?Shulae (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

@Shulae: - I'd recommend looking at WP:DR to find some help with resolving your issue at the page. Kelly hi! 08:54, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

portrait image of Andrea Hamilton[edit]

Hi Kelly, you deleted Andrea Jarvis Hamilton.jpg from page Andrea Hamilton due to lack of permissions which confused me as they had been sent previously. I have now discovered that the permission for the portrait image was given for an image called Andrea Hamilton Portrait.jpg. It was sent on 8 June, see below. I have now loaded the correct image. Thanks for your help. Subject: Fwd: [Ticket#2016050310018124] Copyright authorization Erik Fiere wrote:

I hereby affirm that I Erik Fiere, the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of Andrea Hamilton’s portrait: [photograph][1] as shown in the attached image.[4] I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.[5] I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. Erik Fiere 26/04/2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by RisenFall (talkcontribs) 11:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

@RisenFall: - thanks for the info. I've made a request at WP:OTRS/N for a volunteer to update the file information. Kelly hi! 08:54, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Your message on my talk[edit]

I'm sorry but I don't really appreciate somebody showing up on my talk page and basically telling me "I don't like your edits". If you had made a constructive criticism of some edits of mine or something, that'd be one thing. But this is you just throwing around random and general accusations. Which is insulting.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:45, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

File Queries[edit]

These might be useful -

link description Files which lack an {{information}} block, are not already in some process, etc, and which are not self work, and that are not tagged for Commons. Query for finding free-files on Wikipedia that lack {{information}} which are nominally tagged with a self style license, so that those files may be checked for adequate description and sourcing. Query for finding free-files on Wikipedia (other than self), that lack {{information}}, so that those image may be checked for adequate description and sourcing.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sfan00 IMG: Thanks! Kelly hi! 05:05, 4 August 2016 (UTC)


Do you know anyone that would be able to assist in evaluating really old images, some of which I've raised at FFD recently?

You seem to do a lot of image work and so I figured I'd ask. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look when I get a chance. Kelly hi! 11:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Some more stuff to watch.[edit]

Category:File where self-authorship has been assumed Category:Files where a release under a free license has been assumed

Earlier in Wikipedia's history some editors including myself were more open minded about which images were self, or on the basis of what was known about them, and thusly may have added in good faith {{information}} which overly optimistic. As you seem to be doing a lot of image cleanup, I figures you might be the person to ask about resolving these. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:04, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sfan00 IMG: - many thanks! I'm doing some cross-wiki stuff with British heritage sites right not but I'm sure I will be back to old image cleanup again before too long. Kelly hi! 15:37, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Yet more stuff for cleanup[edit]


This is with a few exceptions all the images I added information to for images uploaded prior to around (July 2006.). I'm slowly reviewing these because of some concerns Stefan2 and other raised about images presumed (on little evidence to be self), or which were assumed to be GFDL.

July 2006 is when policy seems to have changed to requiring licenses and sources as at present. Any assistance you can provide in identifying images which are problematic and thusly can be dropped out of the listings would be appreciated. ( See my recent contributions for examples of what tags to use.).

In most instances the history of an image will need to be checked to determine if either the license was added by a third party or the source/authorship data was 'created from nowhere' (albiet in good faith).

The query is currently at about 1800 entries, so whilst I am revieing myself, the assistance of other image patrollers would be greatly appreciated.

The euqivalent query for images uploaded after JUly 2006 (when stronger sourcing standards should be applied) is here -

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:00, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Deleted James Dill image[edit]

I've been searching and searching and searching for the source of this picture of James Dill and I cannot for the life of me find it. However, I would very much like to restore this under the rationale:

Pictures of deceased persons, in articles about that person, provided that ever obtaining a free close substitute is not reasonably likely. Note that in the case the image is from a press agency or photo agency (e.g., AP, Corbis or Getty Images) and is not itself the subject of critical commentary it is assumed automatically to fail "respect for commercial opportunity".

The man is dead as a doornail and I don't think I'm going to find any other pictures of him taken before 1937.

What do you think? PanydThe muffin is not subtle 18:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Panyd: I think that would be fine - I recommend making a request at WP:REFUND stating that you will be adding a non-free use rationale to the photo. Good luck! Kelly hi! 05:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

DaHeala Profile.jpg[edit]

Hello, thank you for clarifying about the copyright issues. I have actually asked the owner of the picture to send an email to wiki with the appropriate licensing / ownership so that we can assure it wont be deleted. This has already been done. If there's something else I have to do to convince the wiki universe not to delete a picture of an artist that is taken by the artist and sent to me personally (like I have stated), please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiggamafu (talkcontribs) 18:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Your message on my talk page[edit]

Please see my e-mail. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Regarding referred to images B5S2919.jpg, B5S3533.jpg, B5S3593.jpg - PLEASE DELETE[edit]


I'm the rightful copyright owner of the images referred to in the talk page - these being images B5S2919.jpg, B5S3533.jpg, B5S3593.jpg.

Please delete the referred to images.

These images were attached to an article on the inaugural Osheaga Music and Arts Festival in 2006. This article has long since been removed and these 3 images have been "orphaned" as a result. At the time of posting I may have used the Rhoro user name, hence the "confusion".

Thank you for your attention to this matter - Rogan Coles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tingyat (talkcontribs) 06:00, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Snow keep FfD[edit]

File:Atsme, self-portrait.jpg - per Wikipedia:Image_use_policy It's on my user page. I fixed the code for "keep local" on the image. ;-) Atsme📞📧 16:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
@Atsme: That's fine, the photo was unused at the time I nominated it. {{Userspace file}} may be more appropriate than {{Keep local}}. Regards - Kelly hi! 21:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Kelly. I was unaware the userspace template existed. Happy to change it. Atsme📞📧 21:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for discussion[edit]

Hi Kelly, i've replied at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 August 16. Just letting you know. Thanks Jenova20 (email) 15:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jenova20: Thanks! Just FYI, I would recommend always uploading Flickr-sourced files to Commons, as they have a license review process that ensures the file remains safe even if later it is deleted, hidden, or has the license changed on Flickr. Also, the photo of the mural may also have a problem in regards to freedom of panorama - see Commons:Commons:Freedom of panorama#United Kingdom. Feel free to ask if you have any questions in the future. Regards - Kelly hi! 16:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
It appears that this mural maybe shouldn't be allowed anyway then under Freedom of Panorama =[. That's a shame. Thanks for the speedy reply Kelly Jenova20 (email) 15:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

My deleted file[edit]

Hi, you deleted my file [File:AMPS mug.jpg] on Aug 18. That was my personal creation and I would like it undeleted. How do i go about that please? regards, DMorpheus2 (talk) 16:39, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi DMorpheus2, I didn't delete your file, it was a community discussion. To appeal it, you should first speak to Jo-Jo Eumerus or, failing that, go to deletion review. Regards - Kelly hi! 16:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
DMorpheus2 There is some question about whether the symbol on the mug is copyrighted. A photo of a symbol can fall under the copyright of the symbol. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:55, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointers DMorpheus2 (talk) 17:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank-you for kindly reviewing our image. You mentioned that you could not find the copyright permission on our site. Is the footer not sufficient? We lodged and copyrighted the logo (here in Australia) nearly two years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlovisa (talkcontribs) 09:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


Thank-you for kindly reviewing our image. You mentioned that you could not find the copyright permission on our site. Is the footer not sufficient? We lodged and copyrighted the logo (here in Australia) nearly two years ago.

Jlovisa (talk) 09:05, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

@Jlovisa: Thanks for the reply - where can the text about using the logo for any purpose be found? Kelly hi! 09:29, 27 August 2016 (UTC)