Permissions

I notice you have uploaded several images where you say you've received permission to publish the image under the licences specified. Please see Commons:OTRS for how to complete the required registration of these permissions with Wikimedia. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I've now given the required statement to this email-adress, with a copy to the two norwegian reading admins, who both know me from no: --Orland 23:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for your contributions. —LX (talk, contribs) 00:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Astrid Dahlsveen.JPG

Fingalo 13:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

de:Terje Rollem

Hei, we would like to get Rollem and the famous pic on the did you know division of the main page, however Datei:German surrender of Akershus Fortress.jpg is not the iconic picture, compare http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/bildeserieviser/?id=455603. Do you think we could get the last one for WP? Ha de --Polentario (talk) 01:45, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I've replied on your german talk page. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 11:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Good one! Do you have any foto of the stamp? That would ba great accomplishmenet here --88.65.201.147 11:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to find it, but the new year must have damaged my googling skills. I'm sorry. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 11:43, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Germanic languages

Hi. I dont know exactly what do you want I do with Scotland and Wales. In this countries I put the light orange in those places where english is spoken. If you can observe, this color are in all territory, but I remark the lands where is co-spoken with another languages. I cant remark each municipality in a Europe map. I dont put the places where a language is majority, I only remark in various colors the places where is spoken more than one language.-- Fobos | ¿algo que decirme? 10:08, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Fobos. It is very easy: stop making maps indicating that people in Wales and Western Scotland doesn't speak english. I've told you this several times at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Lenguas germánicas.PNG and User_talk:Fobos92#Germanic_languages.

As i told you 9 days ago: you have been in edit wars on File:Europe germanic-languages 2.PNG. Your opinion seem to be that english is not spoken in Glasgow nor any place west of Glasgow, while all other users prefer versions where all of Scotland is indicated as english speaking. Please provide sources to prove your that your opinion is right, or if you have no sources; then submit new, corrected versions of the maps.

Everywhere in Europe, people speak more than one language. If you insist to indicate this as a special feature for Wales and Scotland, you must at the very least provide a better description and discussion to the files.

I've told you this before. Please take action now! Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 13:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry Orland, but my maps Doesn't indicate that people in Wales and Western Scotland doesn't speak english. Dont you see that in Scotland and Wales on Orange appears throughout the territory? Only orange in areas in which practically only English is spoken, and scratched in areas where other languages ​​are also spoken with english. It is also necessary that the Scottish Germanic language appears on a map of the Germanic languages.-- Fobos | ¿algo que decirme? 17:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Please don't shout at me, Fobos. That doesn't impress anyone. When I'm reading these maps, i get the impression that english in only spoken by 50 % of the inhabitants in Western Scotland, due to the even scratches. Is that really a fact? And I'm probably not the only one misunderstanding this map. This explanation given above is not the same that you give next to the maps. If you insist on using these maps, you should explain the scratches better.

And still, there are no sources given. How can you be sure that your map is trustworthy? How can we? Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 17:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I dont indicate the percentages in anywhere, if this is your impresion maybe you should change the maps by yourself. I change it many times with the indications that all you give me, I am not shouting at anyone, Im talking clear. So, if you want, change yourself to some kind of map that you can understand, yo have my permision if this is what you want, because I dont go to spend more of my time working in something, only to recive the increpations of other users and no recognition.-- Fobos | ¿algo que decirme? 03:50, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello again, Fobos. No, you don't indicate percentages. You don't explain your maps in any way; that is a part of the problem, as I'v pointed out before. I'm telling you what impression the maps gives me. I am sorry that you don't receive any recognition. But this is after all the world's largest encycplopedia; you should probably do things right before you expect any recognition.

I've asked you to provide sources several times. Please do so, or change the maps according to other peoples input.

If i could redo the map, I would have done so a long time ago. I'm not skilled at making maps, unfortunately. But I understand for this that you accept other versions of the map now!? Right? Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 21:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Otnes i rendalen norway.JPG

{{Autotranslate|1=File:Otnes i rendalen norway.JPG|base=Image license}}

Yours sincerely, JuTa 22:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@JuTa: . Thanks for noticing me; I've corrected as requested. However, this reflects one of the problems with Commons: honest people supply pictures in good faith, with good intentions and to the best of their system abilities. Picture gains fairly wide usage.

Then suddenly, 10 years later, someone decides that those good intentions wasn't enought to satisfy the system. Luckily I'm still around. But many other contributors may not be here. How many good intended pictures are lost because of such policies? Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 09:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

@JuTa: It would be interesting to hear your opinion on the question above. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@JuTa: ; I would like to remind you about this. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 10:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I went into a "trap" that time. Another user/admin marked the license template {{Cc-by-sa}} as invalid, which resulted thousends of entries in Category:Media without a license: needs history check. I'm working from time to time on that maintenance cat and either restore some lost license-templates or mark the images as having no license. Inbetween most of the images used {{Cc-by-sa}} were modified to {{Cc-by-sa-1.0}} by a bot as far as I know. regards --JuTa 15:33, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

File tagging File:Fylkeskulturpris 2019 Jon Fredrik Skauge.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Fylkeskulturpris 2019 Jon Fredrik Skauge.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Patrick Rogel. As I work at the Departement of Culture in Trøndelag fylkeskommune, these pictures are actually within my responsibility. I hope that is enough documentation for you? Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 12:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately it's not enough. Mona Jønvik Andersson must send a permission via COM:OTRS. Kind regards, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:15, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

@Patrick Rogel: I understand what you're saying. But Ms Andersson is actually commisioned by us and acting of behalf of my department when she takes these pictures. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 12:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Morten. Then the mail sent to OTRS must have a copy of the transfert of ownership enclosed. An alternative (and easier) way is to add a free license to the Trøndelag fylkeskommune website. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:24, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Sigurd Some ex libris by Gudmund Hentze.png

'''{{Autotranslate|1=File:Sigurd Some ex libris by Gudmund Hentze.png|base=File license/heading}}'''

{{Autotranslate|1=File:Sigurd Some ex libris by Gudmund Hentze.png|base=File license}} This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:05, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding me. I'm surprised in went through upload wixard without a valid tag. I've added {{PD-Art|PD-old-auto|deathyear=1948}} now, as on the other pictures in Category:Gudmund Hentze. Bw, --Morten Haugen (talk) 15:59, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Senterpartiet

Hi, where do you see that the photos of Senterpartiet politicians that you've uploaded are under the CC-licence? I tend to check the files that have been added to the articles I've written but in this case I can't really verify that the licence is correct... Med vennlig hilsen --CaroFraTyskland (talk) 18:07, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CaroFraTyskland. I've discussed this with the photographer / photo editor in Senterpartiet, and she tells me that the only licence remark or limitations on https://profil.senterpartiet.no/brandcenter/no/senterpartietbc/component/default/25758 is the norwegian text attributed to the photos: "Foto kan brukes vederlagsfritt med henvisning. Foto: Ragne B. Lysaker, Senterpartiet" or "Fotograf krediteres". I've interpreted that as CC:BY. If you think it is needed, she could provide further licensing via e-mail. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 18:15, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it's safer from your side. Of course: If you say it's ok for her, I personally - basically never being on Commons - have no problem with it. But based on the text I thought it could be a CC BY-ND 2.0, too. And with Sandtrøens photo I couldn't even find the "Foto kan brukes...". --CaroFraTyskland (talk) 18:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

File:NK934 norwegian stamp vigeland abel.jpg

File:NK934 norwegian stamp vigeland abel.jpg has been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:NK934 norwegian stamp vigeland abel.jpg This is a deletion request for the community to discuss whether the nominated page should be kept or deleted. Please voice your opinion in the linked request above. Thank you very much! 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 ∙ кыргызча ∙ 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） ∙ +/−

Adamant1 (talk) 14:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Stamps of Norway This is a deletion request for the community to discuss whether the nominated contents should be kept or deleted. Please voice your opinion in the linked request above. Thank you very much! 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 ∙ кыргызча ∙ 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:

• File:NK1387 vigeland sinnataggen norwegian stamp.jpg

And also:

• File:NK1050 norwegian stamp Christian IV.jpg
• File:NK1117 norwegian stamp vigeland.jpg
• File:NK1388 norwegian stamp christian iv statue.jpg
• File:NK884 norwegian stamp folk art kristen aanstad.jpg
• File:NK885 norwegian stamp folk art olav hansson.jpg
• File:NK918 werenskiold bjørnson.jpg
• File:NK951 Hansteen norwegian stamp.jpg
• File:NK958 holberg norwegian stamp.jpg
• File:NK972 norwegian stamp vigeland.jpg
• File:NK973 norwegian stamp vigeland.jpg

Yours sincerely, 4ing (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

File:Hogskolen i telemark notodden.jpg

File:Hogskolen i telemark notodden.jpg has been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hogskolen i telemark notodden.jpg This is a deletion request for the community to discuss whether the nominated page should be kept or deleted. Please voice your opinion in the linked request above. Thank you very much! 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 ∙ кыргызча ∙ 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) 07:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

File tagging File:Siri Pettersen with her books.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Siri Pettersen with her books.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

EdoAug (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for this reminder, @EdoAug. I have for too long neglected my duty to remind Siri about this. Hopefully it will be fixed within hours. Bw --Morten Haugen (talk) 15:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

File tagging File:Siri Pettersen Raven rings distribution 2019.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Siri Pettersen Raven rings distribution 2019.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

EdoAug (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

File tagging File:Siri Pettersen Die Rabenringe collectors box.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Siri Pettersen Die Rabenringe collectors box.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

EdoAug (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

File tagging File:Siri Pettersen Vardari distribution 2020.jpg

العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Siri Pettersen Vardari distribution 2020.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case. Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own). Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

 

EdoAug (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Sormarka 2.JPG

File:Sormarka 2.JPG has been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sormarka 2.JPG This is a deletion request for the community to discuss whether the nominated page should be kept or deleted. Please voice your opinion in the linked request above. Thank you very much! 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 ∙ кыргызча ∙ 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) 03:50, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

«Bruk i media»

Hei hei! Istedenfor å litt hensynsløst markere bildet, spør jeg bare direkte isteden! 😅 Jeg ser File:Roy Jacobsen med bokomslag.jpg er blitt gitt CC-BY-4.0, men på Cappelen Damms nettsider, står det bare at lisensen er «Bruk i media». Ser jeg kanskje på feil sted, eller er det mulig at bildet ikke egentlig passer på Commons uten tydeligere tillatelse? Jeg har ikke sjekka andre opplastninger i skrivende stund. EdoAug (talk) 22:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

God morgen, @EdoAug. Helt greit at du spør. Jeg har en fot innenfor bokbransjen, og derfor får jeg nyhetsbrev fra flere forlag. En eneste, sjelden gang har Cappelen Damm sendt ut et nyhetsbrev hvor alle bildene i dette nyhetsbrevet var merket med CC-BY-4.0. Jeg har lurt litt på hvordan det kunne skje, men det skjedde. Den dagen lastet jeg opp 10 portrettfoto til Commons.

Jeg ser at lisensopplysningene ved bildene er endret siden, men de var tagget CC-BY-4.0 i nyhetsbrevet dengang. Jeg lyktes dessverre ikke med å spore opp nettversjonen av nyhetsbrevet på archive.org, men det er i alle fall dette som er historien bak. Mvh Morten Haugen (talk) 05:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Skaun Nissan Leaf lub 2025-07-26 Platten.jpg

For anyone else reading this. This sunday morning I was looking for pictures from Skaun, Trøndelag, Norway. And came across this picture in two of the Skaun subcategories. I removed the categories as irrelevant to the topic Skaun. User:L. Beck reversed my edit, and started this discussion.

On Commons, our work should consist of documenting the world a bit further with new images, replacing incorrect categories, and tidying up full categories. Tidying up does not mean removing category contents due to alleged irrelevance. This only makes sense in a few exceptional cases and should always be properly justified. In this specific case, I clearly disagree with you regarding both categories. Lukas Beck (talk) 13:51, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@L. Beck. When going to Wikimedia Commons looking for pictures, I expect the pictures I find in a category to say something useful and meaningful about the topic of the category. A close-up of a flat tire does not in any way bring any sort of information about 2025 in Skaun nor Transport in Skaun. Other than the mere obvoius that you can get flat tires in Skaun as well as any other place in the world.

To me, it seems as if you are trying to make a point in a POV perspective, blaming the muninipality or the road administration for your flat tyre.

Out of curiosity, and to investigate the limits of your position: Do you think that to person eating this pizza should have categorized the image by year and location!? Bw Morten Haugen (talk) 14:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution. Well, I find that the two images are not comparable, as the two objects—pizza crust and car tire—have very different properties. I agree with you regarding this specific image that categorization by year does not make sense.

However, categorization by location does, because it is certainly conceivable that a person might search for images of the pizza culture of a specific country. And for my image (thankfully, this is not my tire), this is also relevant. It was a car with a Norwegian license plate. This image is suitable for representing a Norwegian car tire. People could certainly be looking for car tires from a specific country.

I also consider the year to be relevant. Car tires looked fundamentally different 50 years ago and will very likely look fundamentally different again in another 50 years. I admit that my examples are not among the most likely, and there are images where the principle would be much more clearly visible, but the principle remains the same and my categorization is absolutely airtight according to the Commons guidelines.

Regards Lukas Beck (talk) 14:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Seriously, @L. Beck. If someone were looking car tires from the specific country Norway, why should they have to look in Category:Transport in Skaun!? And if someone were looking for car tires from the specific year 2025; why should they then look for it in Category:2025 in Skaun??? This does not make sense in any way. Lucky for that you are so confident it's "absolutely airtight". Morten Haugen (talk) 15:33, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

It definitely makes sense to have a yearly and country reference in the categorization. And well, just as is clearly stated in our categorization guidelines, images should always be sorted into the lowest existing level of the respective topic. So yes, I am very confident in the correct categorization of this image. Thank you. Lukas Beck (talk) 15:40, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I am deeply sorry that I have to use good time on this with you, @L. Beck. There is no way that Category:Transport in Skaun could be the "lowest existing level" of the topic car tires from the specific country Norway?? And if this tire is produced by w:Triangle Group, how is it even a car tire from Norway? Morten Haugen (talk) 15:49, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I feel sorry for my time to Lukas Beck (talk) 15:49, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Since you're still here. Please explain in plain words how Category:Transport in Skaun could be the "lowest existing level" of the topic car tires from the specific country Norway. Morten Haugen (talk) 15:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

I did and I have nothing more to explain, except that I will not tolerate your change. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

It's exhausting having to repeat myself over and over again when people like you just don't seem to understand. This image is categorized according to the same pattern as millions of other images, and it fully complies with our guidelines. Therefore, I cannot and will not tolerate your vandalism to my image. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@XRay Findest du vielleicht die passenden Worte. Ich scheine meine offensichtlich nicht glaubhaft rüberbringen zu können. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:27, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

At Lukas' request, I would like to express my opinion, but I do not wish to engage in discussion. First of all, images should be categorized in the best possible way, not minimally. Categories can be both descriptive and organizational. There are also categories for other purposes. If a suitable category does not exist, it is created or the next higher or most general level is selected. For example, a car detail may ultimately end up in the transport category. Basically, I don't think it makes sense to remove categorizations. If the categorization is incorrect, the correct one should be set. In the case of the photo in question, it makes sense to also specify the location, as well as a content and time assignment. The location itself does not have to be visible in the photo. There are many reasons for the assignment. Perhaps the photo shows a series of bad roads. (Even Category:Art in Oslo or Category:Vehicles in Oslo (i. e. helicopters) contains many photos in which Oslo is not visible.) This is also in line with our category system, as documented in Commons:Categories. -- XRay 💬 16:55, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me put my thoughts into the right words (which I don’t always manage very well). I really have nothing to add to that. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, @XRay, for giving me a good example: File:Tier elsparkesykkel, Oslo.jpg does not give any information about Oslo, and that category should also have been removed.

From the picture's point of view, I understand Becks need to tell "that was where/when it happened". However, that information could have been given in the image description. Categories are there for something else; for other users' ability to trace pictures. It is impossible for me to imagine someone looking through Category:Skaun and it's subcategories looking for good ways to illustrate a topic related to Skaun, and settle for this picture. He might with equal justification have used Category:Things that happened on a saturday.

On his user page, Beck displays 3 pictures of cats. One of these pictures has a exact location category (Category:Kirchstraße (Stadt Wehlen)); while the two others only are only located by Animals of Landkreis Hof and Cats in Bavaria. I have interpreted that as Beck realizing that there is no street-level information in these two cat pictures; therefore he has not located the cats by street or Gemeinde. My wish is that he'd apply that reasoning to this flat tire as well. Bw Morten Haugen (talk) 18:37, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Well, I find that reasoning to be a bit far-fetched. 1) The graffiti image is correctly sorted into the 'Oslo category'. By refusing to assign such images to cities, municipalities, and countries anymore, you aren't just opposing my perspective and XRays, but also the established practice across all of Commons. I can understand your point of view, but to implement it, you shouldn't be tinkering with random images while millions of others are categorized according to the same principle; instead, you should seek a fundamental policy change. Afterward, once a consensus has been reached within this project—which I cannot imagine happening—I would adjust my categorization work accordingly. But certainly not at the request of a single individual.

2) You mention my pictures of cats, nice, aren't they? :). I like cats, which is why you find these images on my user page. But you should also have seen that I have over 16,000 other images. But let's take a look at this specific case. The cat in Stadt Wehlen was sitting right by the side of the road. Parts of the road are clearly visible. This way, a user browsing the street category finds other details that belong to the street as well, alongside general views and buildings. The cats on the farm, which I uploaded much earlier by the way, were not taken on any street or square with a specific name. What should I have categorized there? However, with Category:Animals of Landkreis Hof, I have established a clear link to the administrative area here as well. Lukas Beck (talk) 18:50, 11 January 2026 (UTC)