Jump to content

User talk:MGA73

Add topic
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Latest comment: 3 days ago by Leoboudv in topic 2 images
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66

Extending license review to full collection of files

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. Would it be possible to apply in batch the license review that you applied to the files in this category, to the remainder of files that belong to the same collection, that were uploaded later? The new files are all the files in this other category (rationale for the categorization: the first files are the maps of the proper cities, that are both in JPG and PDF versions; the new files are the maps of towns and villages, that are only in PDF). Although it is obvious that they are all part of the same collection, instructions for review in the original site are here, if needed. Of course, only if it's possible to do it in batch (doing it manually to 110 files is too much work). Thanks in advance (I promise that this is the last time: the collection is fully uploaded now, so there will be no more similar petitions). MGeog2022 (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello MGeog2022! They are all reviewed now :-) --MGA73 (talk) 10:57, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
@MGA73, a million thanks! And I see that you did it file by file, a fair amount of work. Places change over the years, and these orthophotomaps are a good way to see how the main populated places in Asturias were at a certain time. Thanks to our work (and to the regional government, that published them under a free license), we've made them easily accesible, and we have ensured that they remain available in the future. MGeog2022 (talk) 12:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yeah. If there are many more files we should find a way to do it with a bot. It did not take that long to do it by hand and I wonder if we really need to review the files when it is clear from the info on the file itself where the photo originate from. But now they are reviewed :-) --MGA73 (talk) 13:36, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
It is established that the documents published by the Government of the Principality of Asturias on this website, unless otherwise indicated, are published under the terms of the Creative Commons-Recognition license (CC-by 4.0). That, along with my natural paranoia, and the commitment I have to the preservation of these files, are the reasons behind my petition :-) MGeog2022 (talk) 19:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Supercool image not found

[edit]
Latest comment: 28 days ago13 comments2 people in discussion

Dear MGA73,

  • The images below were passed by me at Internet Archive but the MGAbot tag of image not found remains on them.

Thanks, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:09, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I wonder why the bot could not find them. Anyway we should clean up templates on all the files. For example there should not be the "not found" flickr template for all the files where the bot confirmed the cc-license. Will clean up later. Also I think it seems like most users think the files should not be deleted even if the license can't be verified by other users now. --MGA73 (talk) 11:00, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
  •  Comment: Yes. It seesm clear to me that Supercool at least understands free image licenses. But your bot should remove the images I marked as cc by 2.0 from the not found category. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 11:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
Bot is doing a second check. It has found 2 extra files so far. After that I will remove the temporary template and let the original review replace the failed flickrreview. --MGA73 (talk) 18:17, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
  •  Comment: That is good. Hopefully Supercool's uploaded images can be saved...especially the ones that are in use on wikipedia. But that is not my decision sadly. Its just that the prospect of Supercool reviewing his own images that could not be verified by a third party...does not look very great. But that is ancient history now. Its the same as living in a condo or apartment. One person's stupidity with smoking in their condo unit or cooking their BBQ too close to the apartment siding on their deck or patio can cause the whole building to catch fire. This has happened twice in real life in Metro Vancouver's condos or apartments in the past 8 years where everyone in their condo had to abandon their home for months or 1-1.5 years until the whole condo building was repaired. People's stupidity just ensures other innocent people get hurt. I am a real estate appraiser and know this issue. Supercool knows image licenses but he took a stupid "shortcut". Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

PS: I think your bot missed these photos that I reviewed:

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 22:01, 29 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Naa it just took many hours to complete :-) I'm starting to clean up templates a bit so the files will be removed from Category:Flickr images not found. --MGA73 (talk) 17:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

The flickr source has good metadata and several other train images. Maybe it can be passed as an exception of own flickr account owner's work. But what do you think? Thanks, --Leoboudv (talk) 06:17, 1 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

The camera does not match what he claim to use. I left a note and asked. --MGA73 (talk) 15:20, 1 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Thanks for dealing with the Supercool images. They were most likely free indeed at upload since I never found a single unfree image when I could validate the license. Today July 1 is Canada Day and our independence day. As for the flickr account owner, hopefully he will respond as his flickr account has been inactive since 2018. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 20:12, 1 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
Happy Canada Day! Hope you enjoy it. --MGA73 (talk) 05:18, 2 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

File:Sunil Bharti Mittal.jpg

[edit]
Latest comment: 28 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:Sunil Bharti Mittal.jpg 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） ∙ +/−

Perumalism (talk) 15:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

File:טל 39.jpg

[edit]
Latest comment: 26 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Nutshinou Talk! 23:15, 4 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

This DR

[edit]
Latest comment: 25 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear Admin MGA73,

Is this a clear DR above safe to be closed or is it better to let do nothing? The fact that Commons has a PD-South Vietnam tag in the image messes everything up. If you wish to do nothing, it may be the "safe" thing to do. You know whatever you do, I respect your decision.

Secondly this second DR is a clear copyright violation.

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

File:BajuBiru.jpg

[edit]
Latest comment: 24 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:BajuBiru.jpg 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） ∙ +/−

Krd 08:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

File:Kirchberg MUDAM.jpg

[edit]
Latest comment: 19 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
File:Kirchberg MUDAM.jpg 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） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 12 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Latest comment: 18 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 03:16, 13 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Latest comment: 17 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Adamant1 (talk) 09:00, 13 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

My upload records

[edit]
Latest comment: 10 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Dear Michael,

Do you know a way to show the number of images that I have actually uploaded to Commons rather my number of contributions--which includes images that I reviewed or simple edits to correct typos/errors to image descriptions which is not really pertinent in my request. Unfortunately it is early morning in Canada and I have to go to bed. If you know a way to check for my image uploads, please feel free to do so. If not...then it is what it is, I suppose. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 12:34, 20 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hmmm. I guess we need to make a query where you are either the only uploader or where you uploaded the original file. I do not know of a tool we can use. --MGA73 (talk) 20:17, 20 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I tried to find the number for you:

  1. https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/95740 425 files
  2. https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/95739 4,000 files

The first one should show files with multiple versions where you are the original uploader. The second one should show files with only one version where you are the uploader. --MGA73 (talk) 21:33, 20 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

2 images

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Dear Michael, If you have time, please kindly review the first image below--so that I am not the only person reviewing images from this excellent and reliable flickr account below:

Secondly, can you check to see if this second image is a flickrwash: File:Wonderlane, sangha members make the mandala offering.jpg The flickr account owner gives links at the flickr source to a now dead tv link and upload 2 other images here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/wonderlane/8237132664/in/photostream/ and here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/wonderlane/8237080202/in/photostream/ which looks like it could be derivative images. But, I am not an expert here. I just am not comfortable reviewing the second image. The only problem is that the images are from 2012 when images were of lower resolution. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 11:04, 27 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MGA73&oldid=1062587858"