User talk:Yann

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Bahasa Indonesia ∙ dansk ∙ italiano ∙ sicilianu ∙ Deutsch ∙ euskara ∙ magyar ∙ čeština ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ español ∙ português ∙ English ∙ français ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ galego ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ ქართული ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

/archives 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

God is busy, may I help you? / Dieu est occupé, puis-je vous aider?

You can leave me a message in English or French, at the bottom. Click here. Yann 22:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Undeletions

Hello Yann, I noticed that you Team kits at the UEFA Champions League on a speedydel. The fact is that I created it on purpose in order to stay consistent with the category tree of UEFA Champions League. An user didn't like it and put it on speedydel instead of discussing the options. -- Blackcat 19:32, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done OK, fine. Undeleted. Yann (talk) 20:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Popeye The Sailor - Ancient Fistory (Full Episode - High Quality).webm

File:Popeye The Sailor - Ancient Fistory (Full Episode - High Quality).webm 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 ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Nosferattus (talk) 16:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Argo Blockchain Helios Facility.jpg

Bonjour, Je viens de voir passer cette Deletion request. Quid de File:Argo Blockchain Mirabel Facility.jpg? A455bcd9 (talk) 17:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@A455bcd9: I couldn't find an earlier copy on the Net, but feel free to nominate it if you do. Yann (talk) 17:20, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK I have no opinion on this so I won't nominate it, I only wanted to re-use the image and I was afraid it may be deleted soon as well for the same reason. A455bcd9 (talk) 17:22, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simplement.. Merci !

Bonjour Yann,

Merci pour la suppression et j'en profite pour saluer ton très gros travail (souvent de corvée) sur Commons notamment. Passe un très bon week-end. ;) Tisourcier (talk) 15:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is happening

Hi, Yann. What's happening? You reverted several of my taggings. In the past (not very long), you deleted several files I tagged as unsourced. I understand Geo Swan coming to hunting me, because that's what he is. He was indef. blocked in en.WP exactly because of this kind of behavior, but you? Some of the files I tagged, and you reverted, like File:Talismã.jpg, are obvious not "own work" and don't have a clear source. This is very very likely a copyvio. Others like Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wave to earth (2).jpg is a picture of a South Korean band, without any metadata, uploaded by a user from Brazil. This is, again, very likely taken from the internet. My work here is close related to my work at pt.WP. Most (if not all) of these uploads are from unreliable accounts. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 20:39, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kacamata: Hi,
Thanks for your message. Yes, I agree that File:Talismã.jpg is certainly not own work, but it has a (wrong) source. It would be better to create a proper DR, which I did. Depending on the date and the country, it might be OK. Idem for File:Wave to earth (2).jpg. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Normally, I tag files that are clearly not own work, have no metadata and were uploaded by an unreliable account as unsourced. Should I start creating a DR for all these kinds of files? Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 21:13, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kacamata: At least, "no permission" is better than "no source". Yann (talk) 23:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Normally, I tag "no permission" when the metadata indicates that the image was uploaded by another person. I, honestly, have no issue starting a DR for every improper filled/likely copvio/taken from elsewhere image that I find here, but I think it's a waste of others people time, since, as I stated before, most of these images were uploaded by unreliable accounts. But, in these cases, it's better to tag as no permission or start a DR? Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 23:38, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:Kacamata, when I looked, a couple of days ago, I found 30 images you recently tagged with {{No source}}. You have asserted that they were all "clearly" not own work. I said I did not see the basis of your concern for File:Igreja paroquial de Lamelas.jpg, for File:Coração do Penedo do Cavaleiro.jpg, for File:Altar do Teixo e Stª Bárbara.jpg, for File:Bolos Podres de Lamelas.jpg. You haven't taken the time to go to their DRs to explain yourself.
So, I am skeptical of your bold assertion that ALL the "own work" images you tagged with {{No source}} were "clearly" not own work.
I took about ten minutes, and made a rough search through your contribution history, for how many edit summaries showed you tagged an image as {{No source}}. You did this about 2000 times. If your error rate on the first 2000 was the same as it is on last 30, I'm afraid your tagging triggered something like 300 completely valid images to be deleted.
Kacamata, you asserted I was "hunting you". Your tagging pattern triggered my concern. I've told you why, and I did my best to tell you politely. You said " Most (if not all) of these uploads are from unreliable accounts." Aren't these individuals entitled to have you tell them what they did that triggered your concerns? Now, maybe you did tell them, on the Portugese wikipedia. But, don't you think you should explain your concerns here too, so Yann and I, and other third parties can read your explanations, and reach our own conclusions as to how valid they are?
Kacamata, I dispute I was "hunting you", since I told you what triggered my concerns. But, if you target the contributions of these people, nominate their contributions for deletion, without fully explaining yourself, based on, well, prejudice against them, do you think they could say you were hunting them? Geo Swan (talk) 01:35, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yann, if you allow me, I'll completely ignore Geo Swan message. If this talk page was mine, he would be reverted. I told them several to not send me any messages. I don't want to talk to them, because I don't believe they act in good faith, their history in the en.WP says all you need to know about them, what they are and what is their proposal here and in any WMF project. I'll not address "their concern" as I don't really care about what they think about me or my contributions in this project. I'm only interested in your opinion and advice here, because I believe in your good faith. Thanks for taking your time to answer me until now, and I'll be very open to listen to you if you want to answer my last message. Again, thank you very much. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 03:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yann, I too believe in good faith. I don't know what justification Kacamata thinks he has to challenge whether I operate in good faith. Yes, I was blocked on en.wiki. That block came after a mounting off-wiki hate campaign that lasted a decade. I didn't do what my accusers claimed I did. Not even close. I don't know what Kacamata thinks my en.wiki history shows. For many years I worked on very controversial articles. In doing so I put in considerable extra effort to show good faith, and patience. I think that is what my en.wiki record really shows. Nevertheless, because the topics were controversial, my efforts triggered animosity. I won't apologize for asserting I don't think I deserved that animosity at all.
  • I believe every contributor on a WMF project, from Jimbo Wales on down to the barest newbie, should feel an obligation to act accountably. They should be able to either explain their edits and comments, or own up and say they made a mistake. Kacamata has asserted they only ignore uploader's "own work" claims when they are "clearly" bogus. I asked about 1 2 3 4 files they tagged where I thought the own work claim was credible. I think if he or she can't explain why they challenge these own work claims they should withdraw their claim they only apply {{Nosource}} when own work claims aren't credible. Geo Swan (talk) 04:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kacamata: Where this is the slightest possibility that the file is OK for Commons (for whatever reason), a proper DR should be created, e.g. File:Grêmio Recreativo Cultural Escola de Samba Mocidade Alegre.jpg. This is not own work, but the image is in the public domain in Brazil. Yann (talk) 10:26, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kacamata: I draw your attention to my update on Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Daniela_Pierre_Firme.jpg. You have stated or implied, here and elsewhere that your gut feeling a contributor is "unreliable" is sufficient justification to tag their images as {{No source}}. I'd like you to further explain and defend this justification for speedy deletion. In particular, I think these individuals deserve to have you spell out your concerns. First, it could be a simple misunderstanding; or second, it could be you had valid concerns, but they just didn't know any better, and will curb their behavior after your explanation of what they were doing wrong. Geo Swan (talk) 16:20, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:18 novembre 1870, combat d'Illiers..jpg

Can you make out the name in the signature? Looks like Maurice and a surname that starts with P? Abzeronow (talk) 21:14, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Abzeronow: It could be en:Maurice Pillard Verneuil. Yann (talk) 21:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And it seems there was also a Maurice Palland, working in that area with the same kind of subject. Yann (talk) 21:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not sure it is Maurice. Seeing [1], it could be Manuel ou Meunier. Yann (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose Muriel might also fit. Abzeronow (talk) 21:55, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wave to earth (2).jpg questions...

You offered an image in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Wave_to_earth_(2).jpg&diff=prev&oldid=831811966 this comment] of these musicians "wearing the same clothes".

And, in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Wave_to_earth_(2).jpg&diff=next&oldid=831811966 your closure] you offered another image of the musicians wearing the same clothes.

Do you see these images as undermining the credibility of [[User:Leonor Gonçalves Rodrigues]]? Fans had an opportunity to take photos of the band. You found two fans who uploaded their photos to pinterest. Can I ask, do you think the existence of similar images, from other people, confirms [[User:Leonor Gonçalves Rodrigues]]'s own work assertion aren't credible? Yes, she might have copied an image from a place like pinterest. Or she still might have taken the images at the concert, just like she claimed.

You closed this discussion. Did you forget that you also opened it? Isn't it the normal practice to wait for a second administrator to close discussions one opened? Geo Swan (talk) 01:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Was the second image a duplicate of File:Wave to earth (2).jpg? Okay, an actual duplicate would have merited speedy deletion. But, in cases like that, in future, may I request that the deletion log says "copyright violation", not "per nom"? And that your closure also state "copyright violation"? Once the image is deleted a guy like me is merely going to see that it was similar.
So, was the second image an actual duplicate? I used tineye, and it didn't find any duplicates. How did you find it? Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 02:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See the link I provided in the closure. It is the same image. So as a small image without EXIF data with copies on the Net, a speedy deletion is appropriate. If the uploader is the author, a permission via VRT is needed (probably with the original image with EXIF). I edited the DR, so that it won't be confusing. Yann (talk) 07:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 09:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User doesn't understand concerns with his uploads

Yann, I see that you declined Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current requests#H_Baudu_wiki.jpg, and are a native Francophone, so I'm raising this issue with you instead of Didym, who I originally started writing to.

Didym deleted that and another file uploaded by Superka2711, leaving a message on the user's talk stating licensing grounds. The user doesn't understand the issue and instead of asking, has filed the undeletion request and has asked (in French) on English Wikipedia at the Teahouse noticeboard for new users. I see that the user is writing a biography—the statements at the Teahouse suggest it is an autobiography—in his sandbox on French Wikipedia, and has uploaded File:Hervé Baudu Ensm.jpg to illustrate it. Can you please explain to him in French what he needs to do to establish the right to use the image and to release it under an appropriate license? I'm going to note at the Teahouse discussion and/or one of his Wikipedia talk pages that I have left you this note. Many thanks. Yngvadottir (talk) 11:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yngvadottir: Hi,
There may be 2 issues here. First if this is not a selfie, the copyright is owned by the photographer, so a permission is needed.
But more importantly, I am not sure this person is notable enough to have an article, and this user has no edit except his autobiography. So the image is out of scope for Commons. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for responding! I'm getting all tangled up in my rusty French trying to leave the editor a message on his talk page at en.wiki. He seems to be completely new; just welcome templates on both Wikipedia user talk pages. I agree about the draft, autobio or not, but it's in user space and French Wikipedia can deal with it anyway if they need to. On the image, that was my thinking, although given the subject's profession I suppose there might be the "military photographer in performance of their duties" exception to copyright. (Or taken on a timer?) But the problem is, the user appears to not understand at all what the problem is. I'm not sure whether he clicked through to see a translation of the speedy deletion notification template he received. But it's apparent that he needs a plain-language explanation in French that he needs to have pressed the button himself; and that he should upload it on French Wikipedia, not Commons. Yngvadottir (talk) 11:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wrote a message in French on his talk page on French WP. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I saw, thank you very much! He has responded there. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2023 Grindavik eruption.jpg

Hey Yann. Earlier, you said the image cannot be a FPC since it had a non-free license. That issue was resolved and can be seen that it is resolved in that nomination for deletion. As I am the nominator, I am unable to use the template to contest your quick deny of the picture for FPC. Since the original issue was quickly resolved (mere hours after the FPC decline), could you self-contest your decline and allow the image to continue as a FPC? WeatherWriter (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@WeatherWriter: May be you can show me, but I don't see any free license on Icelandic Meteorological Office website (Commons:Deletion requests/File:2023 Grindavik eruption.jpg). Yann (talk) 18:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can see it here: [2]. WeatherWriter (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please undelete

Category:Unidentified logos of the Netherlands: Not empty, now, and should be tagged with {{Empty category}}, anyway. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 20:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays!

Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and successful New Year 2024!

-- Radomianin (talk) 12:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Brednäbbad simsnäppa-(Phalaropus-fulicarius) Ystad-2009.ogg

Hi, you removed this file and CommonsDelinker removed the references to it. I guess it was a bit too speedy because CommonsDelinker hadn't processed the file move yet. Could you undo it? bdijkstra (overleg) 13:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It seems CommonsDelinker processed the file. It can take some time, but it will do the job once it is scheduled. Yann (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is that CommonsDelinker processed the removal before it could process the move. bdijkstra (overleg) 10:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Season Greetings

Wishing You all the best for the
Holiday Season!

I hope You are warm, safe and treated kindly
♦
-- Cart (talk) 18:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Joyeux Noël!

Christmas star decoration at a window with the reflection of a sunset ✴ Happy Holidays, Yann ✴

Merry Christmas and a happy new year!
Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!
Joyeux Noël! Bonne année!
¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!
Buon Natale e felice anno nuovo!
Frohe Weihnachten und ein gutes neues Jahr!

Aristeas (talk) 17:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays and best wishes!

Happy holidays!
Merry christmas!
Best wishes for 2024!
-- Giles Laurent (talk) 18:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Christmas star decoration at a window with the reflection of a sunset *ೃ༄ Feliz Navidad, Yann *ೃ༄

Merry Christmas and a joyous new year filled with peace, love, and happiness!
Щасливого Різдва та Нового року, нехай він принесе мир, любов та радість у ваше життя!
Joyeux Noël et une Bonne année pleine de paix, d'amour et de bonheur!
¡Feliz Navidad y un próspero año nuevo lleno de paz, amor y felicidad!
Buon Natale e un felice anno nuovo pieno di pace, amore e felicità!
Frohe Weihnachten und ein gutes neues Jahr voller Frieden, Liebe und Glück!
Feliz Natal e um Ano Novo próspero repleto de paz, amor e felicidade!
メリークリスマス、そして平和と愛、幸福に満ちた新年おめでとうございます！
메리 크리스마스와 평화, 사랑, 행복이 가득한 새해 복 많이 받으세요!
मेरी क्रिसमस और शांति, प्रेम, और खुशियों से भरा नया साल मुबारक हो!
圣诞快乐，新年快乐，愿你的生活充满和平、爱与幸福！
عيد ميلاد مجيد وسنة جديدة سعيدة مليئة بالسلام والحب والسعادة!
С Рождеством и Новым Годом, пусть они принесут мир, любовь и счастье в вашу жизнь!
God Jul och Gott Nytt År fyllt med fred, kärlek och lycka!
Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar vol vrede, liefde en geluk!

Wilfredor

Wilfredor (talk) 19:01, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays!

   * Happy Holidays! *  
  • Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!
  • Joyeux Noël! Bonne année!
  • Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!
  • ¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!
  • Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!

   -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)   Reply[reply]

File:Dua Lipa-0761.jpg

Hi! Please, could you nominate this photo? I already have two active nominations. ★ 13:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 09:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays!

Happy holidays, Yann!

Kia ora, Yann, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Thank you for all the hard work you've put in the last year to make Wikimedia Commons the place it is today. Enjoy the festive season from wherever you are in the globe.

Greetings from Te Moeka o Tuawe, Te Tai Poutini, Aotearoa.
(Fox Glacier, West Coast, New Zealand)

--SHB2000 on 00:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seasonal Greetings!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello Yann, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024.
Happy editing,
A1Cafel (talk) 03:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Mariuva 2.png

Thanks for answering my earlier questions.

{{FOP}} for otherwise valid images that contain a sculpture, where the sculptor has their own IP rights... Thanks!

Your deletion log entry for File:Mariuva 2.png says COM:WEBHOST. I left a note somewhere, about looking into this image. I am pretty sure I concluded the individual had a measure of notability.

I have participated in some discussions where other people have called for deletion of images on notability grounds, when, in their opinion, the individual in the image would never measure up to the wikipedia's WP:GNG. I've argued that this is too high a bar. BLP says that individuals whose notability is not sufficient for a standalone article may receive some coverage in a subsection of a related article.

So, an image of an actor who is not notable enough for a standalone article, may nevertheless end up being used to illustrate an article on a movie or play they appeared in. I think this puts these kinds of images in scope.

I've made this suggestion multiple times, in the last couple of weeks. No one has offered their own opinion as to how notable an individual should be before their selfies are in scope.

Free images of individuals are hard to find. This means that we can end up with free images that are not well lit, or are slightly distorted, because they are cropped from the edge of a larger picture. When a notable individual's vanity triggers a complaint about the free image we are using I encourage them to upload a selfie they like better.

I've asked whether other people thought I was giving those notable people bad advice.

Can I ask you to clarify your position on this? When someone with some measure of notability uploads a selfie, so their image would be in scope, is it your position it should, nevertheless, be deleted on Com:WEBHOST grounds?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Her article was deleted on Portuguese Wikipedia, with only 2,290 Google hits, she is not notable enough to have an article. And this is most probably not a selfie, so the permission from the photographer is needed. Yann (talk) 20:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brasaomuller

Yes, the coat of arms is used in a Wiki, so the first attempt for deletion was wrong. But what about the copyright? As already said, I think this COA is maybe no real coat of arms of an existing family (the use in the article is OR). It's maybe just artwork and fantasy. Artwork is under the protection of copyright. So the proper reason for deletion is copyvio. (Please note the copyright sign in the file!) GerritR (talk) 16:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GerritR: Copyright violation of what? Can you show the source? Actually this CoA seems to exist: [3]. Yann (talk) 19:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The COA in the source is slightly different, if you look exactly. But talking about copyvio, I refer to Commons:Pcp. The uploader has to prove that the image is not under protection of copyright. If not, we have to assume that it is protected.--GerritR (talk) 20:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think you are a bit confused about Commons:PRP. This is not a reason to delete anything without a valid rationale. This design could be old, so you have to provide some evidence that it is a copyright violation. Yann (talk) 20:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quality Image Promotion
Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Pic de la Saume, Champsaur.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments  Support Good quality. --C messier 22:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yann&oldid=835554627"