Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.org.
Vandalism ^{[new report]}	User problems ^{[new report]}	Blocks and protections ^{[new report]}	Other ^{[new section]}
Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.	Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.	Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.	Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.
Archives
14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

^{Translate this page}

Note

Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
Notify the user(s) concerned. {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

Image displaying issue[edit]

I recently uploaded a new version of a file, but it is incorrectly displayed on a page in the history block. Black background instead of some parts of the SVG file. To create the file, I used CorelDraw 2020 (22.0.0.412) x64. What should I do? Need instruction or help from experienced project participants. file:RU COA Lunin.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legalwizard 2018 (talk • contribs) 06:30, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

The blocking of User:吳哲源 and User:Oooptt[edit]

Dear 1989, I’m the professor of Physics at University in Taiwan. I have a team to execute the project about Wikimedia Commons. I’m sorry for that we neglected and violated the policies of Wikimedia Commons. In the beginning, we wanted to contribute Wikimedia Commons some physics educating files which are made by teachers and registered a shared-account 彰師大物理實驗室 (彰師大 = NCUE, 物理 = Phsics, 實驗室 = Laboratory. So the full name means Physics Lab of NCUE.) to upload all files. After 彰師大物理實驗室 being blocked and all files being deleted by copyrights, we thought if all files are uploaded by our own author (including 吳仲卿, 呂承新, 吳哲源, and Oooptt), it may work. We all use the same computer and share the same IP. However, all of us are blocked again as we share the same IP. Under the help of Reke, the staff of Wikimedia Taiwan, we know the policies of Wikimedia ,and we will cooperate with WMTW from now on. Would you please unblock 吳哲源 and Oooptt) and allow us use the same computer (IP) to upload files in the future? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 吳仲卿 (talk • contribs)

Non-treated RfD with false, libelous information about living person[edit]

Can you please take a look at the RfD Commons:Deletion requests/File:WMSK – Výročná správa 2018.pdf? The file contains false, libelous information about living person (me) and is proposed for deletion for more that 2 months already. Thanks! --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 14:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Done. O, how I hate to take such decisions! But nobody did it for months, so I am bold today and close the request. Taivo (talk) 18:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

File renaming request[edit]

Kindly ask to rename File:Весь Петербург 1913 год.jpg → File:Novoderevensky vokzal in Petersburg (1913 map).jpg.
Reason: The Russian name given 8 years ago by the uploader is the name of the source of the image (the annual city directory ru:Весь Петербург, en:Ves Peterburg), while the object he intended to illustrate was the location of the «Novoderevensky vokzal» (Novoderevensky railway station). Thank you, Cherurbino (talk) (request is transferred from technical fgorum) Cherurbino (talk) 09:30, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cherurbino:

Done, please use {{Rename}} in the future. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 10:48, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Cherurbino (talk) 14:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in Sweden mass message[edit]

Hi!

I am part of the organizing team behind Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in Sweden, and would like to send a mass message. The recipients would include two groups: previous Wiki Loves Monuments participants in Sweden, and participants in Wiki Loves Earth this last spring. We believe that both these groups would be interested to know that Wiki Loves Monuments 2020 in Sweden is starting 1 September.

I've followed the recommendations here and here, and have created a page with the necessary information at Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_in_Sweden/Mass_message. Could an admin please send the message for me via Special:MassMessage? Many thanks. Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 13:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Doing…. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, this is my first time sending mass message. Am I supposed to update time in your signature or leave it as it is? -- CptViraj (talk) 13:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Does it work if you update it to four tilde? Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 13:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eric Luth (WMSE): Four tlide will replace your signature with Mass Message Delivery signature. I can replace timestamp in your signature with ~~~~~ which will give current time. -- CptViraj (talk) 14:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

That makes sense I think! Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 14:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 14:24, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 14:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Renaming a file to make it more obvious to reusers that an image promotes scientific racism[edit]

For those unaware of what scientific racism, please check the Wikipedia article, or refer to meta:Talk:Black Lives Matter#Scientific racism to understand why this is a systemic cross-wiki problem, with Commons being deliberately misused.

Raising this rename action today for potential comment or other suggestions of solutions for: File:Neighbor-joining Tree-2.png → File:Neighbor-joining Tree-2, falsely promoting scientific racism by using Negroid, Mongoloid and Australoid.png

This rename is to make it a lot clearer on the multiple articles which have nothing to do with scientific racism or historic definitions of human races that this is not an appropriate neutral diagram to illustrate articles about modern anthropology, or generic articles about drawing "neighbour tree" diagrams. Deliberate misuse where terms like "Mongoloid" and "Negroid" are highly inappropriate include:

zh:近鄰結合法 (neighbor-joining method)
uk:Метод приєднання сусідів (neighbor joining method)
ur:ریاستہائے متحدہ میں مقامی امریکی (Native Americans)

Sadly, though this is wilful misuse, because of our COM:INUSE policy, deletion requests are unlikely to to halt the misuse of Commons in this way, unless every single insertion across multiple Wikipedia languages has been removed, regardless of whether the original insertions or file creations are by banned users or known sock farms. This file rename helps that process.

There are several other files where this method of renaming to make the issues of Original Research and Non-Neutral a more obvious issue for usage in non-English Wikipedias. --Fæ (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Note, I have now also moved File:Congo warrior Negroid Negroe Black African spear couple.png as the emphasis of "Negroid" was not the way the 1902 source for the published photograph presented it. The choice of the uploader to promote the word "Negroid" when the sources do not, is manipulative and hard for the Wikimedia Commons community to identify or correct. --Fæ (talk) 17:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

If we rename files to 00000000001.jpg, 00000000002.jpg ... 00063900001.jpg we would no longer have files with problematic names. We would not have to discuss if a name might be offending anyone or if it is neutral. It would also same users a lot of time they spend moving files around. There would no longer be any problems when a file is renamed and leaving broken pages anywhere. Then it would only be a matter of file descriptions, categories and structured data. That can all be fixed without influence on any articles. We could reserve numbers for each wiki so if a file is uploaded to en.wiki for example it can later be moved to Commons and keep the same file name (number). If we do not do that we can spend the next 100 years moving files around because what was a good word yesterday is a bad word today and tomorrow a new word is bad and offending.

What do you think of that? Should we rename a few files or should we solve the problem once and for all? --MGA73 (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the time and place for jokes is not here/now. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:45, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: You may think it is a joke but clearly some cares much about file names or this post would not have been started in the first place. --MGA73 (talk) 06:27, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@MGA73: in the light of your trusted roles as a Commons administrator and a volunteer with access to OTRS and in that capacity represents the Wikimedia 'brand', could explain exactly why a manipulative campaign to wrongly insert "Negroid" (black race) or "Mongoloid" (yellow race) into filenames and diagrams, when this does not accurately represent the original sources, is something that you don't want us to put right? Not just here but in a succession of discussions in relation to correcting the insertion of modern scientific racism, you have been effectively running interference to stop correcting the blatant misinformation and misrepresentation (ref User_talk:Fæ#Recent 'genetics' related DRs), so I'd really like to understand what outcome you expect and why it would be better for Commons, and the Wikipedia projects that rely on our content, to let those that promote the idea that there is a human white race and a human yellow race just carry on and use our project as their free forum for their political racial lobbying. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 07:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fæ: Read what I write please. I'm suggesting to remove ALL problems once and for all. I'm sure that "negroid" is not the only word that is concidered to be problematic. In Denmark there have been discussions about the words "Slave" and "Eskimo" and I know that there have also been problems with a word like "Women" where someone think that "People who menstruate" is better. We can avoid all future problems and discussions if we change the way we name files. In my opinion we don't need to put information in file names. Take Wikidata where we do not use names but numbers. As far as I know it works perfectly fine. So why insist on keeping descriptive filenames? Offending or misleading names is not the only problem. Chinese and other signs/letters is also a probem for some users. --MGA73 (talk) 07:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Throwing in "Eskimo" and "People who menstruate"? Classic right-wing tropes being used as chum, really?

You are running interference, and it would really help to understand why you are so committed to persistently creating tangents when you state this is not a "joke". Make the call, either stick to "No, no, no. I'm staying out of it" or explain why you are doing this and why it is for the good of this project that you are an administrator for.

Just to reiterate, your actions are hampering attempts to correct the uploads and cross-wiki insertion of images that falsely promote the idea that there is a human white race and a human yellow race. If you want, you could force my hand to create a proposal, but COM:SCOPE already means that we correct or delete material with negative educational value, and user created modern scientific racism is not an exception. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 08:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

These Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)'s exist already, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/entity/M17151054 --Schlurcher (talk) 07:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Exactly: Each file has already a serial ID. Filenames, on the other hand, are supposedly a handy, human-readable way to access them. Problematic filenames should be renamed, that’s COM:FR 101. I chose to interpret MGA73’s apport to this discussion as an obvious, if tasteless joke — since it has zero technical merit. If not a joke, then it had to be a derailing of the subject, soon to escalate to mention attack helicopters — and looks like we’re there already. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fæ: Excellent point: It is worrying when the original 1902 caption was not problematic, and stays usable today, while the filename selected in 2011 uses blatantly racist terms: The term "Negroid", especially, is fully unexcusable — for not only the term itself is irrecuperably tainted with racist overtones (like so many other such terms, irrespective of etymology and meaning), but also the very notion is itself unscientific and useless for any serious work on human Biology. As for that one image, now renamed, the categorization as "Scientific racism" can now be removed. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:45, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I further suggest to (exceptionally) delete all redirects resulting from these renamings. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

WRT redirects, these are handy for non-sysops to see what has been going on, so suggest delaying their deletion for a couple of weeks. There are also issues of housekeeping for the global usage where some Wikipedias might not receive the automatic renaming. --Fæ (talk) 09:59, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. There should be a tracking category for Category:Files formerly named in apparent promotion of scientific racism (with {{Hidden cat}}) to replaced the tagging with Category:Scientific racism in files which are not inherently so — that would us all to keep a persistent record of these cases. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fæ: Do you have any examples of filenames or projects in which the projects did "not receive the automatic renaming"? — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 10:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the file under discussion. The old name was not replaced in ru, uk, ur and zh language Wikipedias, ref global usage report and none of these usages is relevant to historic race theories, they are just misleading insertions which "happen to" trigger COM:INUSE and evade deletion on Commons for having no educational value. --Fæ (talk) 10:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

«The file under discussion» being the next neighbour diagram, not the 1902 Mlolo couple. I was suddenly puzzled. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin, Fæ: If you chose to see this as a joke or a derail no matter what I say then there is not much point in discussing it further.

@Schlurcher: Then the question is if we should not just use URI instead but that would have to be at another place. --MGA73 (talk) 09:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Now moved File:Mongoloid skull Huxley.png to File:Side and front views of the skull of a Calmuck.png, another derived work by Ephert (talk · contribs). This used "Mongoloid" in the filename when this was not justified in the source (Huxley, 1890). To avoid doubt I have linked to the source page so that anyone can verify the facts. --Fæ (talk) 14:53, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Now moved File:Árbol de uniéndose de vecinos.png to File:Árbol de uniéndose de vecinos, falsely promoting scientific racism by using Negroid, Mongoloid and Australoid.png; it's just another variation of Ephert promoting scientific racism hidden within an innocuous file name. --Fæ (talk) 15:01, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Now moved File:Sart man Mongoloid.png to File:In Russian Turkestan p.269 crop (IA inrussianturkes00meakgoog).png, another Ephert manipulation as the source only called the family photograph this tiny crop is from "A Sart and his sons". --Fæ (talk) 15:22, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Comment Looks like nearly every photo used in ast:Mongoloide and their derivatives needs similar treatment. William Graham (talk) 17:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

It's not always straightforward. Where there are historic examples of outdated race theories, such as those published in the 19th Century, then using the race words may be valid if there is correct and immediate context for using it. So a photograph including the word "Negro" or "Negroid" may be justified if the original source used that exact language directly. What Ephert has chosen to do is use words like "Mongoloid" and "Negroid" where the original book has not used these words to label or title the photograph, even though the book itself might use those words in other locations. Unpicking this rubbish wastes a lot of volunteer time and will probably never be fully undone considering these examples are already up to 9 years old without detection or complaint; probably because there is a lot of "racial" lobbyists active on our project that love making it look like these are "legitimate" views and user fantasies are okay to host for whatever twisted reasons.

Even given some of those more tricky examples, the pattern is clear. Should Ephert ever return to using their account on Wikimedia projects, this deliberate and shocking misuse of Wikimedia Commons to manipulate multiple Wikipedia projects into promoting scientific racism, would sensibly be the subject of a block or a global ban. --Fæ (talk) 17:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

As there are many more examples from the same uploader that need fixing or may never be fixed fully cross-wiki, I have started User:Fæ/Scientific racism cases. Should I work on other examples they will be added there for reference. Considering the longevity of the cases, logging these somewhere on-wiki, even when not for blocked users or established sock puppets is beneficial to the project. As a precaution against allegations of creating hostile pages, the user account names are not mentioned, only the files and fixes. --Fæ (talk) 09:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Comment. I completely agree with MGA73. Renaming system does not really working her. People do spend too much energy in renming. It can avoid a lot's of conflicts, reduce of CommonsDelinker bot work and other bots that doing the same job. It will make redundant many of commons work which is not really necessary. -- Geagea (talk) 12:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I disagree with MGA73, names are important to, and carry significant meaning for, many of our users and reusers. I thought MGA73 was being facetious. A serious proposal for such a drastic change would need consensus at COM:VPP. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 12:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Jeff G. Yes I know such a suggestion needs to be discussed at VP (as I said above it would have to be discussed somewhere else) but you pinged me :-) If you asked 20 years ago if it would make sense to make a wikiproject where there were no names at all only numbers then I'm sure everyone would laugh and called you crazy. Well now we have wikidata! As I'm sure you know Flickr also uses numbers as "filenames" and I know many users on Commons that have no problems finding photos on Flickr. --MGA73 (talk) 13:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I also agree with Jeff - words are very important indeed. Commons really should look long and hard at some of the garbage that is here simply because it is freely licensed. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Manipulating filenames, or falsifying diagrams from academic research via Wikimedia Commons in order to bias Wikipedia(s) is a highly effective form of vandalism. File names, especially for controversial subjects, need to be accurate and where charts are taken from academic research, again these must be verifiable. In these cases maps of genetic surveys and surveys of language use have been manipulated to introduce political racial bias, and modern genetic research has been deliberately misused to promote race myths. That there are Commons administrators that are creating distractions and arguing that we should leave this massive loophole for the manipulation of our sister projects open for political lobbyists and potentially funded bad actors, is a surprise and hard to understand, considering how serious instances could destroy any trust in Commons as a source for correctly copyrighted and correctly described images.

Just consider how serious it would be if the diagrams of COVID19 pandemic that are hosted here and used by Wikipedias in all languages, and subsequently massively relied on by journalists around the world, turned out to be covertly spreading deliberately faked data to make some countries artificially look better than others... --Fæ (talk) 12:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Fæ makes a further good point. Very easy to use filenames as subtle vandalism. The point about Wikimedia generally as a "reliable source" is also pertinent and well made. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Yet every wording in the file name belongs to the description. If the filename is good then he should move to the description. Regarding to the scientific racism. It should not be accepted in file name. It may be considerd in {{Original description}} (if it comes from original caption). -- Geagea (talk) 13:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

"F" file[edit]

Hi admins. I think it is high time to close Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ibne.png and other similars around, waiting since almost two months. --E4024 (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

The backlog of unclosed deletion requests is currently very high, reaching into the early months of this year. Commons administrators are working on the backlog, but it will take some time to clear. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 17:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

We could do with more Admins who know what they're doing, perhaps. Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

We could also consider loosening the requirements. Perhaps allowing for a type of 30-day proposed deletion for out of scope images? I wonder if there's some way that CFD doesn't continue with open discussions seven years later. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I mean, that would just shift the backlog to a different place. DRs don't actually require a consensus; if no one participates after several months then the closing admin will just make a decision based on their best judgment. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Overwriting images[edit]

I just noticed that @MaxxL: is overwriting images uploaded by other users. I don't think the uploads are in lone with: Commons:Overwriting existing files. I bring it up here because if it is an issue, MaxxL should stop it. If it's not an issue, I won't say anything else. Here are two examples (look at the history):

File:Wappen von Roetgen.png (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
File:AUT Groß-Enzersdorf COA.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Evrik (talk) 17:26, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

It is definitely an issue. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

All my overwritings since 14 years followed the COM:CROP guidelines especially better quality by higher resolution and colour corrections according the FIAV colour recommendations. What is wrong suddenly? -- MaxxL - talk 08:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I quite agree with @MaxxL:. Why is it a problem for you @Tuvalkin: and @Evrik:? You both never upload CoA! We dicuss problems in the Wappenwerkstatt (COA workshop). I invite you to do this there. Its seems to be a special Coa problem for you!?! Nobody talks about overwrite pictures generally. --Jürgen Krause (talk) 11:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jürgen Krause: So, I never uploaded a CoA to Commons therefore I have no business in criticising others’ interpretation of COM:OVERWRITE and in sharing opinions about Heraldry images, you say with vehement punctuation?… Well, I think I have a good grasp of COM:OVERWRITE based i.a. in my many Commons uploads of cropped images, and as for my Heraldry credentials, well… just go here. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:24, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jürgen Krause: Oh, and your invitation to discuss Commons’ images in the German Wikipedia? No, thanks. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@MaxxL: Nothing is wrong suddenly — and if you have really been doing a lot of these overwritings, then those need to be reverted and uploaded as separate images. At least the two uploads in question fail to adhere to any of the guidlines stated in COM:CROP, and the FIAV name dropping is ludicrous (hey, I met Željko Heimer in 1996, therefore I win?): Not only FIAV’s color recommendation focus on flag colors, not CoA colors (that’s what the "V" stands for — Vexillology), but also FIAV’s color recommendations are descriptive, not prescriptive: In fact, you don’t get to overwrite a given rendering of a CoA with a different one and cloak yourself under the cape of established Emblematics scholarship, which enshrines the notion that heraldic devices are essentially their blazon, not any specific rendering — official as it may be. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:24, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

If (and it’s a big "if") these newer images are renderings that follow official graphical prescriptions issued by the armigerous entity, and if the filename in question is standartized to show the current/best image (as in the case of File:Flag of Libya.svg, see history) — then these overwrites are warrented, but the overwritten image must be reuploaded with a different name and all affluent links must be analysed to check which should link to each of the two images. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:24, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Como adicionar cartaz de filme a uma página[edit]

Saudações, Estou editando uma página de um filme que ainda será lançado, o diretor me passou o poster e eu queria saber qual a maneira correta de subir essa imagem para ilustrar a página do filme. Já tentei subir algumas vezes mais ele é deletado por não está de acordo com as regras. Queria uma ajuda de como colocar essa imagem do jeito correto. Obrigado — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddy Oliveira Designer (talk • contribs) 18:32, 1 September 2020‎ (UTC)

Adding a movie poster to a page

Greetings,

I am editing a page of a film that is yet to be released, the director handed me the poster and I wanted to know what is the correct way to upload this image to illustrate the page of the film. I've tried to climb a few more times it is deleted because it does not comply with the rules. I wanted a help on how to put this image in the right way. Thank you

translator: Google Translate via — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 21:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Eddy Oliveira Designer: É só seguir essas regras. Basicamente, ou:

o dono do copyright do cartaz o licencia de acordo com COM:L e pode-se carregar a imagem aqui no Commons para qq uso em qq wikipédia; ou:
se obtém na Wikipédia Lusófona autorização para carregar a imagem ao abrigo do fair use.

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Eddy Oliveira Designer: Se você deseja fazer upload de imagens de pôster de filmes de alta resolução aqui no Wikimedia Commons, consulte Commons:Licensing/pt para saber por que não podemos aceitar imagens de pôster de filmes de terceiros e tenha o (s) designer (s) de imagem, fotógrafo (s) , ou o (s) produtor (es) publicam Commons:Licensing/pt compatível com licenciamento para tal trabalho em seu site ou presença nas mídias sociais ou enviar a imagem e permissão via OTRS/pt. Cartazes de filmes de baixa resolução na Wikipedia em português foram carregados lá para uso justo, sujeito a pt:Wikipédia:Posição das Wikipédias em relação ao fair use. Não aceitamos arquivos de uso justo aqui no Wikimedia Commons. A Wikipedia portuguesa oferece duas opções de envio direto para aquele projeto: pt:Wikipédia:Carregar ficheiro e pt:Especial:Carregar imagem.

If you want to upload high resolution movie poster images here on Wikimedia Commons, please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept movie poster images of others, and have the image designer(s), photographer(s), or producer(s) post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the image and permission via OTRS. Low resolution movie posters on English Wikipedia (there called "film posters") were uploaded there for Fair Use subject to en:WP:F. We do not accept Fair Use files here on Wikimedia Commons. en:Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard gives four options for uploading directly on that project: Click here to start the Upload Wizard on top in the middle; en:Wikipedia:Files for upload:Files for upload process; Plain form for local uploads; and Old guided form (the latter three in the right column under "Wikipedia"). Portuguese Wikipedia offers two options for uploading directly on that project: pt:Wikipédia:Carregar ficheiro and pt:Especial:Carregar imagem. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 21:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Interface admin action needed[edit]

Could an interface admin update entry for Minorax in MediaWiki:Gadget-markAdmins-data.js? They have been an admin since yesterday. --jdx ^Re: 12:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jdx: It's regularly maintained by Krd. -- CptViraj (talk) 12:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, every day precisely at 13:00 (UTC). It's almost as if he were a machine. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe Krdbot is the real user and Krd is a bot? :) --E4024 (talk) 14:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

updated description of video with deletion request[edit]

The creator of the video updated informations and license of File:Festwagen der Brauerei Bender auf dem Weg zur Begrüßung des Deutschen Fußballweltmeisters 1954 und Maimarkt.ogv. We talked via de:Wikipedia:Telefonberatung and hope, the video can be used in this way and the deletion template could be deleted now. Regards for help, Conny (talk) 18:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC).