User talk:Túrelio

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

---

ATTENTION: Please use my talk page rather than emailing me.

noframe

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.

---

Please keep discussions together:

• If I was starting a thread on your talk page, please answer there. I will watch your talk page.
• If you started a discussion here on my talk page, I will answer here.

All requests for and notifications of re-use of my images on Commons have been moved to Requests & Notifications.

If you can't find a comment or an older discussion here, take a look whether it is in one of my archives:
Archive1 (latest), Archive2 (2007), Archive3 (2008), Archive4 (2009), Archive5 (2010), Archive6 (2011), Archive7 (2012), Archive8 (2013), Archive9 (2014), Archive10 (2015), Archive11 (2016), Archive12 (2017), Archive13 (2018), Archive14 (2019), Archive15 (2020), Archive16 (2021), Archive17 (2022), Archive18 (2023), Archive19 (2024).

File:FRIDA KAHLO - Portrait of Cristina, My Sister.jpg

Could you please explain this deletion? As long the private collection is outsite Mexico, the 100 anni post mortem are not of importance. It is a strange imagination, that mexican law should also be valid in other countries. Marcus Cyron (talk) 00:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Sure. Frida Kahlo was a Mexican and died in 1954. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico#General, Mexican copyright currently lasts for 100 years pma. Though the Mexican gov repeatedly extended the copyright terms (Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico#Term extensions), the extension to 100 years pma happened (2003) when Kahlo's copyright was still valid per the former conditions (75 years pma). Wrt to URAA, on the URAA date (1996-01-01), the Copyright Act of 1982 was applicable (50 years pma) and Kahlo's copyright still valid (see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico#Term extensions). As per COM:L, Commons requires that uploads are free (or freely licensed) in the United States and in the source country of the work. For the yesterday deleted reproductions (File:FRIDA KAHLO - Portrait of Cristina, My Sister.jpg, File:The Suicide of Dorothy Hale (1939) von Frida Kahlo. (Der Suizid der Dorothy Hale); Öl auf Hartfaser mit bemaltem Holzrahmen, 59,7 × 49,5 cm.jpg, File:The Suicide of Dorothy Hale (1939) von Frida Kahlo. (Der Suizid der Dorothy Hale); Öl auf Hartfaser mit bemaltem Holzrahmen, 59,7 × 49,5 cm Detail 3.jpg, File:The Suicide of Dorothy Hale (1939) by Frida Kahlo.jpg, File:The Suicide of Dorothy Hale (1939) von Frida Kahlo. (Der Suizid der Dorothy Hale); Öl auf Hartfaser mit bemaltem Holzrahmen, 59,7 × 49,5 cm Detail 1.jpg, File:The Suicide of Dorothy Hale (1939) von Frida Kahlo. (Der Suizid der Dorothy Hale); Öl auf Hartfaser mit bemaltem Holzrahmen, 59,7 × 49,5 cm Detail 2.jpg) of her paintings, freedom-of-panorama (Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico#Freedom of panorama) is unlikely applicable.

See also de:Diskussion:Frida Kahlo.

However, due to the relevance of Kahlo, the case might be discussed in a regular DR to allow for more opinions, if desired. --Túrelio (talk) 06:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I think too, this should be discussed in a regular DR. I don't think, that the 100 years PM of Mexico count outside the country. Marcus Cyron (talk) 12:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Marcus Cyron, there we are: Commons:Deletion requests/File:FRIDA KAHLO - Portrait of Cristina, My Sister.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Requesting a file overwrite.

Hi. I was wondering if you could overwrite the file File:President Donald Trump Participates in a St. Patrick's Day Reception with the Taoiseach of Ireland.webm as it was uploaded two months earlier with the one File:President Trump Participates in a St. Patrick's Day Reception with the Taoiseach of Ireland.webm, and then start a deletion request for the latter (based off the comment from here https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:President_Trump_Participates_in_a_St._Patrick%27s_Day_Reception_with_the_Taoiseach_of_Ireland.webm&oldid=1039364236). Thank you very much. RandomUserGuy1738 (talk) 13:53, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Ähem. So, this one File:President Donald Trump Participates in a St. Patrick's Day Reception with the Taoiseach of Ireland.webm shall be overwritten with this one File:President Trump Participates in a St. Patrick's Day Reception with the Taoiseach of Ireland.webm, right? And thereafter File:President Trump Participates in a St. Patrick's Day Reception with the Taoiseach of Ireland.webm shall be requested for deletion? --Túrelio (talk) 19:39, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Makarij at monastery in Verhoturje, 1909.jpg

Hi, you have recently deleted File:Makarij 09.jpg, File:Makarij at monastery in Verhoturje, 1909.jpg and File:Makarij monk.jpg. These file were previously requested for renaming multiple times by User:Ikumir (see his talk page). User:Ziv and I have declined the requests multiple times because there were no valid reasons for renaming stated according to Commons:File renaming. Now, User:Ikumir has uploaded exact duplicates of these files under File:Makarij in the Aktai farmstead.jpg, File:Makarij and Rasputin, 1916.jpg, File:Monk Makarij at his cell, 1910s.jpg, File:Makarij at his cell.jpg. This is a clear and inacceptable behavior of User:Ikumir to get around unsuccessful renaming requests. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

"Makarij at monastery in Verhoturje, 1909" is wrong: the correct description is what I've done. Don't delete it. Ikumir (talk) 14:36, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Hallo @Chem Sim 2001. Merci fürs erwähnen. Túrelio babelt übrigens auch deutsch wie wir beide. Mich erinnert das Ganze gerade an die Vorgehensweise des Users mit dem File:Napoleon (cadetto).jpg und weiteren Files. Das war eine ähnliche Geschichte. Bitte mal prüfen. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 15:26, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Name ist falsch, aber ich kann jetzt grad nicht weiter schauen. Auf Arbeit… זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 15:28, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Sorry dass ich die Vorgeschichte offenbar übersehen habe. Ich war heute eine Weile offline, jetzt auch wieder und werde mich später am Abend daran setzen und das ganze rückgängig machen. Wenn ich euch richtig verstehe, besteht ja mehrheitlicher Konsens dass die "alten" Dateinamen eigentlich in Ordnung waren. --Túrelio (talk) 17:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Turelio, kein Problem und vielen Dank fürs Kümmern. Sowohl User:Ziv als auch ich haben unabhängig voneinander die Umbenennung der Dateien kurz nacheinander gemäß COM:FR abgelehnt, hauptsächlich wegen Criterion 1. Ca. 1 Minute, nachdem wir die Anfrage abgelehnt haben, hatte der User die gleiche Anfrage wieder gestellt, ohne Änderungen in der Begründung oder des Dateinamens vorzunehmen. Das Ganze ging dann bestimmt 3-4 Mal so und auch meine Nachricht auf seiner Diskussionsseite scheint nichts gebracht zu haben. Schließlich hat er sich einfach dazu entschieden, Duplikate der Dateien hochzuladen und die bereits seit Jahren etablierten Bilder als redundante Kopien zu markieren. Gruß, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

So, jetzt ist alles wieder wie vorher. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Ich hab da mit zwei Bilder geholfen, ich hoffe es ist in Ordnung? Was ich mittags noch hinauswollte. Mich erinnerte dies stark an User:Pal-lon-cin. File:Quai de l'Horloge (Breguet).jpg hier war es ähnlich und auch der Nutzer hat dann aus Trotz, nur weil wir seine Umbenennenungsvorlschäge nicht genehmigen wollten, die Bilder dann unter dem gewünschten Namen nochmals hochgeladen. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 20:42, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Ah, Danke. Ich habe die "falschen" Duplikate inzwischen (dupe-)gelöscht. Da auf Commons so viel zu löschen ansteht, darunter manchmal auch hunderte bis tausende Duplikate/Tag, besteht leider ein gewisses "Mißbrauchs"risiko. Es ist sicher ratsam den hier betroffenen Benutzer etwas im Auge zu behalten. --Túrelio (talk) 21:44, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Vielen Dank, Túrelio, es scheint aber so, als ob der Nutzer keine Ruhe gibt, er nominiert jetzt deine Weiterleitungen immer wieder zur Schnelllöschung, siehe File:Makarij at his cell.jpg oder File:Makarij's chickens.jpg, obwohl sie bereits von User:Auntof6 abgelehnt wurden. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 06:22, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Edit: Scheint jetzt aber geklärt zu sein ... Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 09:19, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

z.K. Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ikumir זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 20:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Nun unter Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/GMatteotti. --Túrelio (talk) 06:46, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Conseil d'arrondissement.svg

Hi, nice to meet you

I saw you made the page "File:Conseil d'arrondissement 14.svg" redirect to "File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg", but i would need it to delete "File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg" and make "File:Conseil d'arrondissement 14.svg" the main article, or if it is simpler, delete "File:Conseil d'arrondissement 14.svg" and rename "File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg" to "File:Conseil d'arrondissement 14.svg.

You see I made a mistake by creating "File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg" and, as I'm not very familiar with commons yet, I created a duplicate instead of renaming it.

The thing is, as I work on the french muncipal election on Wikipedia fr, I've created many versions of "Conseil d'arrondissement.svg" such as Conseil d'arrondissement 24.svg or Conseil d'arrondissement 36.svg. Therefore, "File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg" is a to generic name, but I can't rename it since the page already exist. So could you do something about it?

P.S.: Please forgive me for any error I could I've made, as you can guess, I'm french and English is not my native language, please feel free to ask for clarification if've been unclear on anything Niivlem (talk) 07:37, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok. I hope I've understood you correctly. So, I have redirected (and thereafter deleted) File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg to File:Conseil d'arrondissement 14.svg. Now, File:Conseil d'arrondissement.svg does no longer exist. --Túrelio (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much Niivlem (talk) 20:20, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Stop deleting my photos

Those links you've shared doesn't own those photos, I owned those photos! I bought it from the original photographers Cecile77777 (talk) 09:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Stop writing "my photos". You are not the original photographer. Anyway, I've replied on your talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 09:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Del noms

Hello Túrelio, weren't the following, Section 2(c)(iii) in COM:FOP India#2D artworks..?
[1], [2]
--Gpkp (talk) 12:23, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gpkp,

sure. However, the advertising poster/banners are likely not permanently installed and thereby missing the 2nd condition for FoP. --Túrelio (talk) 12:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

ok thank you Túrelio. --Gpkp (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Goa-pre-liberation-stamps.jpg

Hi Túrelio, the above file (that you have deleted) showed stamps published in Portuguese India. The question is which copyright rule applies, whether Portugal or India. I think India should apply, because the place of publication (Goa) is in India. If so, according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/India#Stamps {{PD-India}} should apply. Maybe you want to reconsider your deletion. Thank you for your attention. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Robert, here you are: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Goa-pre-liberation-stamps.jpg. This allows a discussion about your point. --Túrelio (talk) 10:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 11:55, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at COM:AN/U#User:Salmaci123

 You are invited to join the discussion at COM:AN/U#User:Salmaci123. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Túrelio. Since you deleted the re-uploaded File:Tarick Salmaci in action on The Contender Season 1.jpg, I'm wondering if you mind taking a look at File:Tarick Salmaci pro debut w Muhammad Ali (1992).jpg (File:Muhammad Ali pro debut.jpg, File:Tarick Salmaci and Muhammad Ali.jpg, and File:Tarick Salmaci with Muhammad Ali.jpg), File:Tarick Salmaci at age 10 with Muhammad Ali.jpg (File:Tarick Salmaci and Muhammad Ali 1982.jpg), and File:Tarick Salmaci w Hall of Fane Trainer Emanuel Steward (1992 Olympic Trials).jpg (File:Tarick Salmaci and Emanuel Steward.jpg, File:Tarick Salmaci and trainer Emanuel Steward- Olympic Tials.jpg and File:Tarick Salmaci with trainer Emanuel Steward.jpg) since I think those three are also reuploads of files previously deleted multiple times. The remaining file, File:Tarick Salmaci 2025.jpg, might be new but looks professionally taken and perhaps just needs VRT verification. Similar professional looking files were uploaded by Taricksalmaci, and those were deleted; I don't think this latest one, however, is a reupload. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:26, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Funko Pop Photo

You recently deleted a photo of mine which consisted of a Funko Pop exclusive from Hot Topic in the box. So I can have clarification about the copyright rule I violated, could you explain why you deleted my photo? Thanks. TarheelBornBred (talk) 01:38, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, you likely refer to File:Hot Topic Funko Pop!.jpg. The file had been copyvio-tagged by User:Menakei. When I did a Google-Images-search, I found several other photos of the same item, though no identical hit. However, the real problem is that the depicted product-package shows enough creativity to be above threshold of opriginality; so per Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Product packaging it had to go.--Túrelio (talk) 07:35, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

File:WehebachTalsperre020.JPG

Hallo Túrelio, Du hattest die entfernung der Kategorie Category:Wehebachtalsperre bei der Datei File:WehebachTalsperre020.JPG entfernt. Ich hatte die Datei zur regulären Löschung eingetragen, und nachdem ich den Schaukasten, aus dem das Bild abfotografiert wurde vor Ort selbst gesehen habe, habe ich mit Copyvio die Schnellöschung beantragt. Der Baustein war gesetzt, als Du meine Änderung rückgängig gemacht hast. Ich frage mich, warum Du das gemacht hast, statt über die Schnelllöschung zu entscheiden. NDG (talk) 19:14, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi NDG, wie ich hier Commons:Deletion requests/File:WehebachTalsperre020.JPG kommentiert hatte, halte ich den copyvio-Verdacht für ungerechtfertigt und bin jetzt sehr erstaunt, dass ein Admin-Kollege die Datei trotz laufendem DR gerade gelöscht hat. --Túrelio (talk) 19:17, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Ich hatte das leider nicht unter Beobachtung, nach Studium der Definition gebe ich Dir recht. Allerdings sind Angaben und Lizenz in meinen Augen dann so nicht in Ordnung gewesen. NDG (talk) 19:27, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Also, eigentlich schon. Die Lizenzangabe bezieht sich ja auf das vom Hochlader erstellte "Reproduktionsfoto" und er hatte sogar im Klartext angegeben, dass es abfotografiert war. Was fehlte, war der FoP-Germany-Baustein, der sich aber hauptsächlich an Nachnutzer richtet. In diesem Fall hätte er allerdings vermutlich die Schnelllöschung verhindert. Weißt du ob es noch ein anderes Luftbild der Talsperre gibt? --Túrelio (talk) 19:33, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Ich habe heute mehrere erstellt und das gelöschte vor dem Copivio ersetzt NDG (talk) 19:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok. Dann können wir das erstmal so lassen. Das Bild war von der techn. Qualität her ja nicht so super. Mir ist gerade aufgefallen, dass in deinen Nikon-Uploads in den Metadaten (d)ein Klarname erscheint. Warst du dir dessen bewußt bzw. ist das ok für dich? --Túrelio (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Das ist nicht mein Klarname, sollte aber eigentlich nicht so sein. Wurde mir in der Vorschau nicht angezeigt. Wäre eigentlich besser, wenn der Name nicht dort steht. NDG (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Wir können es so machen: du entfernst den Namen aus den Metadaten (z.B. mit der Freeeware Exiftool), lädst die "gesäuberte" Dateifassung dann jeweils als "neue Version" über die alte Datei. Danach gibst du mir Bescheid bzw. am besten die Liste der Dateien und dann mache ich eine Revisionslöschung, wobei nur die unerwünschte Fassung weggelöscht wird. Ich gehe jetzt aber offline und bin morgen erstmal unterwegs. --Túrelio (talk) 20:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Besten Dank, das wird ein wenig Arbeit. Ich melde mich bei Dir! NDG (talk) 20:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Another batch of GODL

Hello @Túrelio, wishing you well, I'm here with another batch of GODL-India images for you to review. These are all till date.

Thank you in advance. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 12:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

@Túrelio thank you so much for all of this. Just 9 more from 10th of June and we are done till now.

Also File:Air India 171 runway CCTV.webm needs a review. Thank you. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 17:17, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 20:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Coming South (AWM ARTV09225).jpg

Hallo @Túrelio

Warum hast du diese Datei gelöscht? Behalten wir jpg und tiff nicht mehr separat? Ich hatte deswegen extra den Antrag von JaCVubby diesbezüglich abgeändert. Grüsse, זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 16:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Ziv, sorry, da war ich wohl unaufmerksam. Normalerweise lasse ich jpg neben tif bestehen. Hab sie jetzt wieder hergestellt.--Túrelio (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Danke sehr :) . זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 16:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

@Ziv -- I just happened to save the file in TIFF format, it's not the usual case of an archive giving both JPG and TIFF. JayCubby (talk) 16:49, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Ich habe die Datei zufällig im TIFF-Format gespeichert, es ist nicht der übliche Fall, dass ein Archiv sowohl JPG als auch TIFF anbietet. JayCubby (talk) 16:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Is okay @JayCubby, we do not had the Tiff Format before. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 16:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

No worries @Ziv. I've mostly replaced them. JayCubby (talk) 17:09, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Pics review and advice

Hi there, I recently uploaded several images to the Iran U19 v Pakistan U19, 8 December 2009 category that I created. There are a total of 14 images, 7 from Mehr News and 7 from Fars News. And this cropped pic. Could you please review and confirm them when you get a chance.

However, I just noticed a note stating that the Fars News license is considered valid only up to 13 February 2024. I completely missed that detail earlier, my apologies. Since I uploaded these after that date, I’m not sure if they’re still acceptable under Commons licensing policies, even though the images themselves are from 2009. It’s odd how that license notice seems to have disappeared, sigh :) They’re valuable images and would be a great addition, but if they no longer qualify under the policy, I completely understand and would be fine with a speedy deletion if necessary.

Thanks for your time and all the work you do. Cheers! JayFT047 (talk) 01:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi JayFT047, I've reviewed the 7 MEHR-images. Regrettably, I had to delete the 7 FARS-images, as they were uploaded after 13 February 2024, whereby the formerly valid CC-BY license can no longer be claimed. --Túrelio (talk) 10:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Please help if possible.

@Túrelio Dear sir, I kindly ask for clarification regarding the recently deleted the Școala Nr.1, din Brezoi.jpg file and cited one Facebook pages that belong to me as the source of the conflict. If you look carefully in the description, you will see a link to Wikipedia and the text Page x - Free license for Wikipedia CC0. Please help me recover the photos if you think it was an error, or if not, please help me replace them in such a way that there are no more problems. Best regards and Thank you!

User:Claudiupt Claudiupt (talk) 13:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Claudiupt, are you refering to File:Școala Nr.1, din Brezoi.jpg? It seems, my colleague Ziv has already restored and reviewed the image. So, there is no longer a problem with it. --Túrelio (talk) 18:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

CCTV footage copyright

Hi Túrelio,

Thanks for reviewing c:File:Air India 171 runway CCTV.webm. You may be right that this falls under the exemption for CCTV footage, but I'm not so sure. The license states that it's public domain because it consists entirely of information produced by an automated system, such as a fixed CCTV or traffic enforcement camera, without human input (my emphasis). I don't think that's the case here. You can see a cursor on the screen being moved. Someone is making manual inputs -- both to zoom in, and to change the pointing of the camera.

What is the threshold in such cases, and can you point to where that line was established? Renerpho (talk) 15:19, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

@Renerpho, honestly, I am not a specialist for CCTV material. 2 years ago there was a discussion about CCTV/PD at Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-automated. You are correct that our video seems to be a sort of "screenshot" from a screen and shows some - likely human - intervention. I could put the file into a regular DR to allow for discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 18:40, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Considering the attention that the image is getting (the article about the crash, where the image is used, got more than 200,000 page views yesterday, and 1.5 million since June 12th), I think it's a good idea to discuss deleting it, just to be on the safe side. If it's kept, great, no harm done. Renerpho (talk) 21:28, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

I started a deletion discussion at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Air_India_171_runway_CCTV.webm. Renerpho (talk) 07:23, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

File:John Doe.png

Should we not wait for the uploader to send his permission to VRT? Trade (talk) 11:47, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

In this case it might have been without risk. However, if they send a permission, VRT will either restore or initiate the restoration of the file. If the uploader is willing to obtain a permission, but needs the file to be online, contact me agin.--Túrelio (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières

You unilaterally deleted my graphic of the university's shield of arms. The only explanation given was "Copyright violation: https://www.uqtr.ca/index.shtml" which didn't really give any information.

My best guess is that you thought I had copied & pasted the illustration from the university's website. I hadn't. That graphic was my own illustration created based on the text of the blason given by the Canadian Heraldic Authority, as are nearly all of the images on this page. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, deletion is always "unilaterally", as only one person can click the delete-button. Anyway, your upload had been copyvio-tagged by another user and, yes, you are correct that I assumed you had copied or reproduced the original logo. I see now that your logo differs considerably. So, copyright seems not to be the problem, therefore restored. However, does it make sense to put a logo into an article which is not the true one? --Túrelio (talk) 19:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Ernst Ludwig Kirchner Tanzschule 1914-1.jpg

Hallo Túrelio, du hast 'File:Ernst Ludwig Kirchner Tanzschule 1914-1.jpg' gelöscht. Begründungː Exact or scaled-down duplicate. Beide Dateien geben zwar das gleiche (Original-)Bild wieder, aber ich habe das gelöschte Bild selbst vor Ort fotografiert und nicht von 'File:Kirchner - Tanzschule (Ballettszene), 1914, 13350.jpg' abgeleitet. Deutlich sieht man auch Farb- und Kontrastunterschiede. Bitte wiederherstellenǃ Warum wurde ich eigentlich vor dem Löschen nicht auf meiner Disk informiert. Grüße Rufus46 (talk) 13:50, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Rufus46,  Done. Bzgl. ausgebliebener Benachrichtigung: das tut mir leid; ich hatte mich darauf verlassen, dass der SLA-stellende Kollege das gemacht hat. --Túrelio (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

two pictures

Hi my friend. Just to declare that your edit here: this one to redirect one file to another as you mentioned it is "Exact or scaled-down duplicate". the difference in the two photos is that one stamps was perforated while the other is not perforated. Please recheck the photos if you can. Mahmoudalrawi (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi, the file had been duplicate-tagged by a bot. Honestly, to me they seem to be identical. Anyway, for now restored. --Túrelio (talk) 14:18, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

File talk:Saratov Tram Map 2021.jpg

Why was the file removed? The image in the lower left corner has a CC BY-NC-SA license. Serega2363 (talk) 15:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

NC- and ND-licenses are not allowed (if the only license) on Commons, per COM:L. --Túrelio (talk) 15:27, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Regarding copyright of File:Photoshopped photo of Alan MacMasters.jpg

Hello! I noticed that you undeleted the Alan MacMasters photo; however, I don't think it can be hosted on Commons. It was initially uploaded under the pretense of it being {{PD-US}}, so Alex technically didn't release it into public domain – and I don't see a VRT ticket tag on the file – so it seems to be non-free. I saw the Nominate for deletion thingy say to contact ye first before nominating, hence this message.

Am I missing anything, or should it be deleted? {{Lemondoge|Talk|Contributions}} 21:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

See this thread: User talk:Túrelio/Archive1#Undelete AlanMacmasters hoax image?. --Túrelio (talk) 07:57, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

I did check there, but I didn't see any evidence that Alex properly released it into PD. It was initially uploaded under {{PD-US}}, but the photo wasn't actually created before 1930, and User:Gustave.iii (Alex) never put {{PD-self}} on it himself – with PD-US being invalid, there's nothing to allow the image to be kept here. The original Commons deletion discussion also brought up this copyright issue, and the English Wikipedia was using the image under WP:NFC prior to it being undeleted here on Commons.

Did Alex ever release it into PD off-wiki or something? I'm skeptical, though. {{Lemondoge|Talk|Contributions}} 14:55, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Amanita_excelsa_var._spissa_4.jpg

Please undelete the file. You missed the link to the original source from Gbif to naturgucker where the original picture is taken from by gbif and which is licenced as CC-BY-SA. You simply had to click on "Copyright by the creator. For license and creator details, see https://nabu-naturgucker-beobachtungen.de/?sprache=en&bild=-416361396." on the Gbif record. The person who reported the file also omitted to check that. TyranCometh (talk) 07:47, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, you are correct; though the wording "freigabe erteilt für" sounds a bit ambiguous. Anyway, restored. --Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Ryan Trahan photo

Hi, why did you delete the Ryan Trahan photo? It was uploaded by his media manager. You didn't even update the talk page. Please restore the image. SOner (talk) 13:45, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, what file you are talking about? Please provide the filename. I delete lots of files and don't have all the names in my head. --Túrelio (talk) 15:52, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

File:Ryan-Trahan-Prof_(4).jpg SOner (talk) 01:36, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Ok. 1) the file had been found prepublished on Facebook. Facebook-content is no free per se. 2) If User:JamesKeresey is the mentioned "media manager", he should have declared that on his Wikipedia-userpage, as this means a potential conflict of interest. 3) "talk page" ? If you meant the uploader's talkpage, he had been notified, see User_talk:JamesKeresey.

Now. If James Keresey is indeed the media manager of Ryan Trahan AND if he has shot the image really himself, he should send an according statement from his official/business email address to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (COM:VRT), mentioning the exact filename on Commons. If he has not personally shot the image, we need either a statement from the true photographer, confirming the choosen free license, or, if the copyright has been fully transferred to the agency, a corresponding declaration by the agency. --Túrelio (talk) 08:22, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

This is isn't some multibillion dollar company, it's Wikipedia. It doesn't matter in the slightest. If companies have an issue with images on Wikipedia they can and should issue a takedown request. James has the rights to the photo. Please reupload the image.

As for point three, there was no mention on the Ryan Trahan article's talk page on the photo being nominated for deletion. I suspect it was deleted without consulting anyone first, which is poor form. SOner (talk) 00:28, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I see that any further communication with you is futile, as only your opinion counts. Go to COM:UR where you can officially request its undeletion. EOD. --Túrelio (talk) 07:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Non-duplicate duplicate

File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.47, Nov. 20, 1920 - DPLA - e4f9b50e68fa4f2e208e390a8311e8ec (page 10).jpg, which you deleted and redirected to File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.47, Nov. 20, 1920 - DPLA - a1f6b7759b54a613dae19620d035bb5e (page 10).jpg, was an entirely different image. (It looks like it was a duplicate of File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.48, Nov. 27, 1920 - DPLA - e7697ee539505ea9e4e0e29c199763fc (page 10).jpg, and I will change the redirect accordingly) I suspect it was not the only image where something similar happened. I noticed this because with your change, File:Santa Claus in a 1920 furniture ad.jpg, extracted from the former, showed itself as extracted from the wrong file. (Also, categorization/sorting seems to have been missing from the page that was the target of your redirect; I've addressed that for this file, but I suspect you know what other files you might have been working on.)

Sorry if any of that is unclear, it's complicated, and if you don't follow I'll try to clarify whatever is unclear. - Jmabel ! talk 18:17, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Similar issue with File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.47, Nov. 20, 1920 - DPLA - e4f9b50e68fa4f2e208e390a8311e8ec (page 14).jpg being redirected to File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.47, Nov. 20, 1920 - DPLA - a1f6b7759b54a613dae19620d035bb5e (page 14).jpg, when it was actually a duplicate of File:The Town Crier, v.15, no.48, Nov. 27, 1920 - DPLA - e7697ee539505ea9e4e0e29c199763fc (page 14).jpg. I found this because of the change to File:Henry B. Walthall.jpg- Jmabel ! talk 18:24, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi colleague, that's indeed surprising, as all these dupe-requests were bot-generated. Over the lasts weeks I processed (using the duplicate-script) quite a number of these requests by the DPLA-bot and, so far, had the impression that it worked properly such as the OptimusPrimeBot. --Túrelio (talk) 18:31, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Disputing a copyright claim

File:N52te 800.jpg was found on a blog claiming CC-BY-SA 2.5 at https://strangera.com/2008/11/25/belkin-n52te-speedpad/ and not from the site which claimed copyright (https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/10/29/first-look-belkin-n52te-gaming-keyboard/). If this is not actually the license of the image, there was no way of me knowing, but I dispute because the page had no image before I edited it. Gadg8eer (talk) 00:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, first: tagging a file on Commons with a copyvio-speedy-tag is neither a legal judgement nor a moral verdict about the uploader. It just documents that there is suspicion that the upload either is not own work (if claimed) or that the assumed free license is questionable. Per our general policy, after evaluation of the evidence, we tend to delete such files in order not to violate other peoples copyright and to prevent exposing external re-users to copyright-litigation. Deleted files can easily be un-deleted if the suspected copyvio is disproved.

I didn't find any CC claim on that blog. Anyway, more important is that the image is obviously a professional promotional shot, not produced by an end-user. So, a CC claim would be hardly credible. In addition the mercurynews hit is older than the blog-entry, which again questions that the blog-writer created this image. --Túrelio (talk) 08:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

request for feedback

Hello. I'd like to make contact regarding the proposal Commons:Village pump/Proposals#remove mandatory username verification from username policy. A private discussion with uninvolved bureaucrats concluded that the proposal has not enough participation to be closed currently, and it was suggested by crats to put a notice at the talk pages of the ten most active admins and ask for feedback, which I'm doing hereby. If possible please comment directly in the proposal with your opinion.

(I hope this is not interpreted as canvassing. I was told it's not as the criteria of contacted users is clearly defined, and the proposal was already mentioned at several noticeboards. Please don't feel biased because of being personally contacted.)

Thank you, yours --Krd 09:53, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying. The proposal had completely escaped my attention. --Túrelio (talk) 10:49, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

New GODL Batch

Hello @Túrelio, new batch of my GODL uploads to review.

• File:Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets the President of Paraguay, Mr. Santiago Peña at Hyderabad House, in New Delhi on June 02, 2025.jpg

Once again, Thank you in advance. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 17:23, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi, currently pib.gov.in refuses connection (ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED). So, it may take some time. --Túrelio (talk) 07:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:34, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much @Túrelio. I see you left one for obvious reasons. I've fixed it now for you to review. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 11:09, 5 July 2025 (UTC)