User talk:JWilz12345
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 12:43, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
10:44 [update] |
---|
Commons clock - made from this set [update] |
Userboxes | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Sock?[edit]
Hi JWilz12345, I was wondering what your thoughts were regarding Valenzuela400. They have been uploading images on the English Wikipedia and them importing to Commons. They appear to be based in the Philippines. I took a quick look at their talk page on Wikipedia and noticed this comment, which gives me Judgefloro vibes, but I have not paid much attention to this user to make a call for sockpuppetry. What do you think? ✗plicit 04:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have already messaged User:Just Step Sideways (formerly Beeblebrox) about that in their metawiki talk page. They haven't yet responded. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Explicit I have nominated a few of their local enwiki images for deletion, mostly no-FoP reasons. I just nominated one image that may either show a logo ot a trophy. Valenzuela400 ignores the fact that English Wikipedia follows U.S. law and only applies architectural FoP, which means this user should not be uploading any Philippine monument locally at enwiki unless they prove that it is already old enough (for example, pre-1929). Or, they must know the non-free content criteria rules before uploading, provided that the monuments they are sharing locally have enwiki articles (but so far, there are none, so fair use tagging is useless). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 21:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Question[edit]
If can check this link for Pilipinas Super League and add few logos; i mostly noticed davao missing for long, for some reason the league isnt getting enough attention here; thanks Loptač01 (talk) 16:18, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Loptač01 based on your already-existing request at w:en:User talk:TheImaCow#Detail, you seem to refer to the logo of w:en:Davao Occidental Tigers, which lacks an image of it. Sorry, but this is Wikimedia Commons, not English Wikipedia. On Commons, all files must be freely usable even for commercial purposes, so licenses must not restrict commercial (like CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, or CC-zero). This rule also applies to images that may show copyrightable subjects like artworks and food packaging. Most contemporary logos are not acceptable on Commons, and the logo of Davao Occidental Tigers is likely among the copyrighted logos. Unless there is a permission from the artist or whoever holding the copyright of the logo, Commons cannot host that logo.
- English Wikipedia allows images of unfree works (see w:en:Non-free content), but those images should pass the strict criteria for worthy inclusion of the non-free images. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 20:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
National Book Development Board[edit]
Hi JWilz12345, the 2016 annual report of the National Book Development Board (books.gov.ph) has a copyright notice: "Copyright © 2017 National Book Development Board". Does this mean that photos from this report are not covered by Template:PD-PhilippineGov? Joofjoof (talk) 22:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Joofjoof you may want to contact the designer (R. Jordan P. Santos) via rjordanpsantos@gmail.com, if he does indeed have copyright claim on this public document. It has been a common practice by several government agencies here to hire either contractuals or third party individuals coming from private sector to create content, which means their works may not be in public domain (since they are not regular government employees). But I suggest you contact that person, just in case. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:38, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
goodbye[edit]
--Shonyx 136.158.60.178 01:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Shonyx: , do not try to evade questions on copyright issues of your uploads by making disgruntlements against me and image reviewers. If you make another rants against image reviewers, any one of us may file a complaint regarding your uploading and evasive behavior at COM:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- not me, im a tribe 136.158.60.178 02:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- my connection, see File:My own connection.jpg 136.158.60.178 02:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- sorry im not shonyx, because im a tribe in a forest with wifi. i have spears and its free by using the code "March1" 136.158.60.178 02:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- hey @JWilz12345, im a tribe in a forest with wifi. i have spears and its free by using the code "March1" 136.158.60.178 02:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- sorry im not shonyx, because im a tribe in a forest with wifi. i have spears and its free by using the code "March1" 136.158.60.178 02:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- my connection, see File:My own connection.jpg 136.158.60.178 02:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- not me, im a tribe 136.158.60.178 02:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
hey @JWilz12345, why your response took loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong. 136.158.60.178 04:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Australian Mural deletion requests[edit]
I dont really understand the legal side behind all the discussions around murals in Australia but I noticed one of my images has been deleted and another two nominated for deletion. I have no issue with this if that is what the law says but I'm curious about your approach. Aren't all images in Category:Murals in Australia and its subcategories up for deletion, shouldn't it be a bulk nomination rather than on case at a time? And shouldn't the category be deleted itself as everything in it is by default a copyright violations? I'm happy to nominate my uploads for speedy deletion if that simplifies the process, but not all are from me, of course. Calistemon (talk) 10:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Calistemon bulk deletions are typically discouraged, since the images may includemurals that are actually acceptable by age. There have been cases of applying w:en:WP:TRAINWRECK to several nomination cases here, like Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buildings in Bacolod City. Murals should be reviewed to determine if the muralists are dead for more than 70 years or not. If the artist of a mural died for more than 70 years, then the image/s may be acceptable, though possible complication with Uruguay Round Agreements Act of the U.S. (which restored U.S. copyright to all eligible foreign artworks) may arise, especially Wikimedia websites are hosted on U.S. servers and the United States does not grant Freedom of Panorama for copyrighted non-architectural works. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Mass nominations are best made if the category is focused on a specific work (like, COM:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Tower of the Sun of Japan), not for general categories like Category:Statues in Minsk. However, overuse of a mass DR page can lead to a great quantity of nomination threads that may cause errors to administrators' tools (some admins claimed errors in admin tools when dealing with open requests at COM:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Burj Khalifa). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)