User talk:Sfan00 IMG

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nohat-logo-XI-big-text.png This user is one of the 400 most active Wikipedians of all time in the English Wikipedia.


Reference errors on 11 October[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Daniel Parker (artist)[edit]

Can you please help me get the pictures restored that were improperly removed from this article? The artist is my own brother, and I have his full permission to post the photos which I took myself (with the exception of the photo of our parents). The latter is a photo of which was taken by a studio called "Tobias Studio", located in Kalispell, Montana, in 1956. I have both the original and negative for that photo in my possession. --♥Golf (talk) 14:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


I beleive the photo should be considered free as it is a photo that I clicked myself using a bottle I purchased. The white background was created using plain A4 paper and the photo was clicked using an MI4 phone camera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suddhadeep (talkcontribs) 17:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team![edit]

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


Can you please not spam me messages over images. I could not care less what you delete. I trust your judgement. But spamming me when I've asked you many times in the past not to is disrespectful. Please programme whatever you use to not drill me messages, thankyou.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)


Is there some good reason for taking File:DruidHillsCourseLayout.JPG to PUF? Why not just tag it for G12/F9? It's so obviously a deletion candidate that I'd like to delete it immediately, but being generally unfamiliar with PUF, I'm not sure whether such a thing would be considered kosher. Nyttend (talk) 11:39, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

If it meets CSD, you can say that in the PUF, and do the speedy. I was using PUF, mainly to give the uploader a chance to respond. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:40, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, thanks; I've now deleted it and explained the reasoning. Nyttend (talk) 11:44, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


As stated in original file: The image has been taken from and it is a logo from the site. It has been protected by Attribution 1.0 license

Source - point NO 2.3

So, as you see, the image is totally free to use. Please, close the discussion and clear dispute.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Please provide a link that EXPLICITLY states it's Creative Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:51, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Image files on Norm Sartorius page[edit]

Thanks Sfan00 IMG for altering me to issues with images on the Norm Sartorius page. Being relatively new, I don't understand what is needed. The image descriptions state they are by photographer Jim Osborn. Documentation about the release user CC-by-SA 3.0 was submitted earlier to the OTRS system. What do I need to provide? For example, the NormSartoriusCollaboration.jpg image says the work is by Norm Sartorius. Photo by Jim Osborn. What other source information is needed here? The images were provided to me by the photographer Jim Osborn. Thanks. Craiger19 (talk) 20:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Who took the actual photo?... You can mark stuff you notified OTRS about with {{OTRS pending}} Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:07, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Subset from larger image, "Group portrait of released 1916 prisoners outside Mansion House, Dawson Street, Dublin".png: Difference between revisions[edit]

The photo is available for non-commercial use, as stated on the linked page, per the Wikipedia photo posting directions. The only issue I can see is that Wikipedia is expecting the older Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license.

"Group portrait of released 1916 prisoners outside Mansion House, Dawson Street, Dublin. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License."

The link is here:

Please let me know what other issues there might be. Matt Hannan (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

User talk:Mabelina[edit]

Hi Sfan00 IMG - thank you for your recent attention to my uploads & please see my Talk Page : [1] in order to progress. Many thanks. M Mabelina (talk) 03:41, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Was there a specific image you wanted a decision reviewed on? I tend not challange if an undeletion review progresses. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Sfan00 IMG for your prompt reply & naturally please do not confuse matters further by involving yourself with any undeletion review processes underway (of which I hope two are being considered: namely West Hall, High Legh & The Earl Lloyd-George of Dwyfor's coat of arms). Given that my uploads almost in every case are being deleted, and given your recent attention accordingly, I simply thought you would be in a position to offer some insight as to what is going on and how to remedy the situation. Surely it is not to Wiki's benefit that images are deleted possibly without good reason (but maybe because that uploader, ie. me right now! has temporarily and unwittingly fallen foul of the powers-that-be)? I am merely seeking as much helpful guidance as possible to get matters straight so we can move forward. Many thanks. M Mabelina (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm probably not the best person to consult on matter involving copyright restrictions on hearaldic items, as I said if you think there was a mis-tag/ bad call on something file a deletion review or request for undeletion asking for a clarification.
In general, most artistic works are assume copyright unless it can be shown otherwise, I will note here my view that that (unless it's clearly older than 1850 or so) with some Coat of Arms, the copyright as such lies wither with the owner of arms (as reproductions thereof will in most circumstances be works of hire commissioned directly by them), or with the issuer (such as the College of Arms). This means that permission should be clarified with them. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks again Sfan00 IMG - and I can see from Wikipedia's viewpoint it is really difficult to allide copyright compliance with the law of arms, because let's just suppose for one minute that it became accepted I know what I am doing, Wiki policy however must be all-encompassing to protect against those who don't know or even are trying to subvert the system. Anyhow I can now see, having made these enquiries, what a vexed situation Wiki is in & needless to say in such situations it is much easier/better to adopt a blanket cautionary approach. Now here's one for you: File:Earl-Bishop Hervey COA.jpg has disappeared - this chap was born in 1730, succeeded his brother as 4th Earl of Bristol in 1779 and died in 1803. Much obliged if you could let me know what you think about this. Many thanks in advance. Best M Mabelina (talk) 10:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)


Why was that one deleted? Based on the dates it would be PD-old, provided it was adequately sourced. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Precisely, I have no idea - but I can see that pretty much all my images have deleted so I began to assume that it became common policy for my uploads to be deleted without much thought - maybe wrong about that but one could be forgiven for thinking that! So, what to do about it? because every time I upload/reload something I get a load of earache. Many thanks. M Mabelina (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Coats of arms are defined in text form (blazon) and then people make drawings based on the blazon. We can assume that someone made drawings of his coat of arms during his lifetime. If he died in 1803, those drawings would now be in the public domain (at least if published sufficiently long ago). However, anyone can make additional drawings of the same coat of arms at any time. If such drawings were made recently, then those recent drawings may still be copyrighted, see c:COM:COA. When uploading a coat of arms image, it is necessary to identify how old the drawing is, or obtain a permission from the one who made the drawing. As the image has been deleted, I can't check whether that information had been provided. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Use {{information}}, with a clear licensing tag, and make sure every field is filled out as fully as possible. Include relevant dates as appropriate.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sfan00 IMG - prior to embarking on the uploading process (which seems possibly to be my undoing!), let me show you one source for the 4th Earl of Bristol's arms immediately available, qv: I much appreciate your assistance so far. Best M Mabelina (talk) 11:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
You'd need a clarification from the maintainer of the site, as the site doesn't seem to say where they got a copy from, I'd strongly advise having a chat with User:Stefan2. In addition I'd suggest asking User:Rodolph for possible older (and thus less likely to be copyright) sources for older "establishments".Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:26, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
NB. after looking into File:Earl-Bishop Hervey COA.jpg I can't identify an e-mail address to write to for permission as you request - it is a blog. (I don't feel comfortable starting to blog quite unnecessarily for seemingly superfluous Wiki reasons). Any reasonable suggestions welcome - many thanks. Best M Mabelina (talk) 00:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
You're a star Sfan00 IMG - much better to liaise with those in the know than keep paddling upstream...! Re the Earl-Bishop's arms, it should be noted that site maintainer has no right (or as much right, depending on how you view a thing) to display his arms as anyone else..... (on the proviso that they are used with regards to the 4th Earl, that is - what would be open to legal challenge is either his arms being incorrectly depicted or by being designated for the wrong person - neither of which applies here!) Many thanks again. Best M Mabelina (talk) 11:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

False positive or manual edit?[edit]

I saw this edit and was a bit confused — it's a good change, but it looks like it was done at least semi-automatically (judging by the edit summary), and the only way I can imagine a tool making this kind of edit is by means of a false positive. The image ought to be {{PD-textlogo}}, so I agree with your edit, but I'm left wondering whether your tool made a mistake (nothing machine-readable indicates that this should be PD-textlogo) and just serendipitously happened to end up with the right result. Of course, if you did this manually, chalk it up to me misunderstanding your edit summary. Nyttend (talk) 17:51, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

The edit you linked isn't mine, and I don't have a tool for evalauting {{SVG-res}}. I only added the NFUR not needed tag because when I encountered the logo it looked like simple text, so I added the NFUR not needed tag so it could be reviewed.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:10, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Oops, sorry; I meant this one. "It looked like simple text" — so it was a manual edit, and I just misunderstood something. Nyttend (talk) 18:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


Good day to you. I hope that you are doing well. I have noticed your messages on my talk page the other day. I would like to have an explaination on why my pictures of various parts of the Canadian Honours System might be deleted. These are pictures that I have taken during the "It's an Honour" exposition in Ottawa back in 2012. Therefore, I do not see how I could have violated a copyright? I have taken these pictures to that it could be shared here on Wikipedia.

I would like to have your assistance so that these pictures will be able help with the educational aspect that I respect here on Wikipedia.

Cheers Ctjj.stevenson (talk) 22:59, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

The concern here is that the medal designs are not licensable under CC-BY-SA, as they would typically be held as the copyright in the medal design would either like with their designers, or given that they are "honours" more likely as a Crown copyright in Canada. I would strongly suggest you check with the "It's an Honour" people, what the copyright status of the design of Canadian honours is, and encourage them to confirm this with the permissions queue here. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Therefore, if I add a "fair use" rationale for my images, therefore would this solve the issue? Ctjj.stevenson (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Definitely. You should request a review of the deleted ones with a view to converting them to fair use. I can't see anyone objecting given these are 'national level honours'. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:26, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Can we not use the same logic of other Canadian medals found on Wikipedia. Here are a few that are posted here, and for years, no one seem to have a problem with these pictures:
  • The Canadian government provides copyright protection for emblems like this for 50 years from publication. How old are these? I don't think that it would be possible to retag all of these as non-free as I don't think that all of them would satisfy WP:NFCC, but it might be possible to retag some of them. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Charles Hiram Randall[edit]

You sent me something about the photo which is used on the above page, but I can't see anything wrong with it. Thanks. I will be checking my mail from time to time until I decide whehter to keep editing or not. I hope you can keep the photo up. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:01, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for your notification re The image is currently being used in the draft article Nmwalsh (talk) 12:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

This logo is now in use on this draft page Nmwalsh (talk) 14:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Tracking down an Australian entity[edit]


For some reason I cannot edit the Humanities page - but here you go: Manxmania (talk) 14:07, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

thank you for your note about the political party logo I uploaded[edit]

Unfortunately, you missed the large part of my talk page in bold where I said I did not wish to receive any notes about political party logos I uploaded. Nickjbor (talk) 16:46, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:!Copy to Wikimedia Commons[edit]

Template:!Copy to Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for merging with Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:20, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Martin Fowler 4.png and File:Martin Fowler29.jpg[edit]

Hi, I saw that you tagged these fair-use images as orphaned, and indeed, both image description pages say that they are not currently in use. However, they are both in use at Martin Fowler (EastEnders), so I can't explain what's going on. Have you any ideas? They shouldn't really be deleted. –anemoneprojectors– 07:50, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

This appears to be a unforseen glitch. If you;ve found them to actually be in use (and the admins responsible for doing the actual deletions should be checking anyway), then the tags can reasonably be removed.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:24, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Cool, it's just that it's not something I've ever seen before. They're showing up as being used in the article now. Thanks! –anemoneprojectors– 14:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


Used in draft of article, will be released soon.VjacheslavWolski (talk) 22:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Tracking down an Australian entity[edit]

Hello SfanOO

Along with the site I have found that site very helpful. This site copyright expired and is in the Public Domain. The poster "Will you fight now or wait for this" was part of the first World War Australian Government recruiting kit. [1]

Other sites which were found from the National Library of Australia [2] Lindsay, Norman. & W. E. Smith Ltd. (1918). Poster "Will you fight now or wait for this". The Library has the original drawing located at: PIC Drawer 3698 #R8763. Author W. E. Smith Ltd

[3] published by Sydney : Govt. of Commonwealth of Australia, [1918] Contributed by Libraries Australia ID 1416601.  FrinakatFrinakat (talk) 01:22, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
If you can update the image page, This should be a good Featured picture Candidate, for a few days time ... Hmm... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Ajip Rosidi circa 1967.jpg and like[edit]

  • Hi Sfan, please note that the tags did not conflict. As clarified at the bottom of the page,

According to the copyright law in effect in Indonesia at the time of the URAA, copyright on this image expired on 1 January 1993 (25 years after publication). It will not be out of copyright in Indonesia under the current copyright law until 2018.

I have added a clearer notice to the bottom of the page you tagged:

According to the copyright law in effect in Indonesia at the time of the URAA, copyright on this image expired on 1 January 1993 (25 years after publication). As the new copyright law which extended copyright on photographs to 50 years after publication was enacted in 2002, after the URAA, copyright was not extended in the United States. Under the current Indonesian copyright law, copyright in Indonesia expires in 2018.

If you see any similar cases, please use this notice instead of tagging the page as having a conflicting license. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:05, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks. When I upload other images which are in a similar copyright situation, I'll use the new clarificatory text. I have a fair amount of image-heavy books from the late 1960s which have yet to be digitized. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:09, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
So the new law copyright law worked retroactively in Indonesia but not the US. Complex  :( Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Re-insertion of image to FIFA Manager[edit]

Could you please explain this edit? Earlier today, I removed the images from that list article under WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFCC. We do not include per-entry images on list articles like this. It is really no different than a discography. It might be ok to include one image at the top of the article as demonstrably representative of the series, but I don't think that's the case here. Having the pd-text logo at the top is sufficient for that purpose. Re-including the image as you did simply violates WP:NFLISTS. Can you explain please? --Hammersoft (talk) 18:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, Thanks for the pointer, I'll remove it. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Re:File source problem with File:MJB TLS.jpg[edit]

Thanks for the warning about File:MJB TLS.jpg, but I have just provided a source for it. I know fairly used images without sources violates the rules. It was such a big mistake I made, but I hope I wouldn't make the same mistake again. Thanks, Sfan00 IMG. Please get this when you are on your talk page. DBrown SPS (talk) 12:18, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use tagging[edit]

Hi Sfan00 IMG, I notice that you have been tagging a number of images as F5 (orphaned fair use). It is no longer necessary for humans to do this - B-bot (talk · contribs) will automatically do so. --B (talk) 01:51, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Mostly I've been manually checking because of a glitch in relation to the usage links, meaning that I've sometimes been able to resuce images, by purges. Is your bot capable of doing the rescues? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
As long as there is a fair use rationale on the image, yes. My bot purges any articles linked in the fair use rationale template (resolving redirects as needed) and then re-checks the links. So the only case where I'm not going to find an image in use is when it is missing the rationale (or the correct article name is missing from the rationale). Then, the night before images are due to be deleted, I redo the purge and re-check the links so if someone has re-added the image to an article (or if its removal was vandalism and that has been rolled back), it will be caught. I'm obviously not going to find anything where the rationale points to the wrong article (e.g. the rationale is for Virginia, but the relevant image has been moved to History of Virginia). But as long as the rationale is in place with the correct article name, my bot will handle it correctly. --B (talk) 22:33, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
User:B: You might wish to use something like this when purging pages, instead of the code you currently are using. That purges all articles linked to from the file specified, without any need for you to scan FUR templates or resolve redirects. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Sometimes, I've had to do a null-edit to get the links to fully update, but OK Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of Children's Film Society of India.jpg[edit]

The image File:Logo of Children's Film Society of India.jpg needs to be deleted as it was uploaded by mistake. I could not figure out how to delete it.Srucreate (talk) 16:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Non-Summit.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Non-Summit.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

iPlum Logo[edit]

The logo is now in use on this draft page Nmwalsh (talk) 11:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Khums images[edit]


the memorial has been built by the goverment in the early years of gaddafi regime (around 1970-74), i took the picture in 2013...


as for this picture i found in an old album in some library، i was told it's not copyrighted as it's owner is unknown. i think i have chosen the wrong license when i uploaded it.

Thanks.. In response to both images

(Of the monument) Commons says that Libya doesn't have a Freedom of Panorama exception in it's copyright rules so, you may want to look further into whether the subject of the image is something that can be freely photographed.

(Of the photo). What people are told about the copyright of any image and what the actual status is can differ greatly sadly. I'd advise doing a little bit more research. As the image is from the period of Itallian occupation it can be not later than 1943? If so then the copyright will most likely have expired. I'd suggest asking User:Stefan2 for assistance as well.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Feuerwerks-gif.gif Happy Diwali!!!

Sky full of fireworks,
Mouth full of sweets,
Home full of lamps,
And festival full of sweet memories...

Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali.
§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Rights to bike-related images[edit]

Hi Sfan00 - thanks for the recent query about "self" vs. "public domain" copyrights on some files I uploaded. I've replied my talk page. Please feel free to continue the conversation or set me straight if I've done something amiss. Andersem (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Scottwalfordbrighton.jpg[edit]

You tagged this file for deletion for not specifying the creator. As this image was produced pre 1923, I understood it was out of copyright and such information was not required. However it is there anyway. If you actually check the notes you'll notice that not only is the creator specified (Mr E Pannell of Hove), I also gave the year of publication (1905) Fork me (talk) 21:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I've just noticed that although your message on my page says that it is the creator that is missing, the tag on the page said the source was missing. I have now added the source. Fork me (talk) 22:04, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Mountain Rhythm Poster.jpg[edit]

Hello, Sfan00 IMG. Was your Rename media tagging of File:Mountain Rhythm Poster.jpg a mistake? The file name is descriptive and appropriate, and does not conflict with any other file name or article name. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 23:55, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

At the time it was tagged it was simmilar in name to a poaster for a different film, the two rename request add the year so the posters can't be confused. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I see Mountain Rhythm (1943 film) and its poster. Thank you for your quick response. Bede735 (talk) 00:04, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


Speedy deletion nomination for File:Kahler tremolo system.JPG[edit]

Hi, I'm the author of File:Kahler tremolo system.JPG. Why have you nominated the picture for speedy deletion? -- Mecanismo | Talk 15:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Because the file was at Wikimedia Commons, it's only the local description page that was removed. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:49, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Cirque du Soleil show logos[edit]

Please don't delete the pictures I uploaded. I meed to keep some of the infoboxes updated. So please don't delete them. If you do, I'll contact an admin and have him restore the images. -Matthew250

So provide the correct licensing, and a fair use rationale :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Marie Serneholt[edit]

If you want to, please take a look at this weeks TAFI selected article, Marie Serneholt. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


Under Russian law, per {{PD-Russia-2008}}, why should an anonymous photograph from 1930 require deletion? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:55, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Because my understanding was that it needed a source. Do you have one? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:02, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
I have reverted your removal of the 'no source' template. A source is needed both to verify that the picture is from 1930 and to verify that the photographer is anonymous. Without a source, we can't determine if the copyright tag is valid or not. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


Dear Sfan00, the photo you have referred to on 11/13/95 is from private albums and is not sourced anywhere else. Appreciate your understanding. I'm completely open to any questions that you might have. Thanks much. Axshah95 12:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axshah95 (talkcontribs)

Re: File:Broadcaster Ed Walker in 2003.jpg[edit]

I have responded to your concern on this page. Please advise if there is anything else I need to do, to validate that this file is properly sourced and will not be deleted. Thank you. Rdb112 (talk) 13:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: File:Attor Krishna Pisharody.jpg[edit]

This file's origin is from my family archives. This individual is my great-grandfather. There is no copyrighted to the photograph. Anything else I can do, pls advise. Jayraghavan (talk) 23:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Should you become a File mover?[edit]

Thanks for your valuable work at WP:FFD. You've tagged many files for move with appropriate criteria - should you consider becoming a File mover so that you could perform these moves yourself? Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 08:55, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
I resigned file mover over competence issues, besides I like 2 step moves, ensures I don;t suggest batshit crazy stuff.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:27, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 22 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)