Commons:License review/Requests
Kindly read Commons:License review and relevant pages such as Flickr files before applying for the right.
To become a reviewer, you need to be familiar with the general licensing policy of Commons and the common practices of reviewing. A reviewer is required to know which Creative Commons licenses are compatible with Wikimedia Commons and which are not, and be dedicated to license reviewing every so often and offer their assistance in clearing the backlogs. Relevant knowledge can be demonstrated by regularly participating in deletion requests or in New Files Patrolling.
Post your request below and be prepared to respond to questions. The community may voice their opinions or ask a few questions to verify your knowledge. A few days later (usually 48 hours), a reviewer or an administrator will determine the possible outcome of the request based on the input received from the community. The closing admin/reviewer will grant the right if there are no objections and add the applicant to the list of reviewers. If permissions are granted, you can add {{User reviewer}} (or one of its variants) to your user page and begin reviewing images.
Click the button to submit your request. Alternatively, copy the code below to the bottom of this page, and only replace "Reason" with the reason you are requesting this user right. Requests will be open for a minimum of two days (48 hours).
==={{subst:REVISIONUSER}}===
{{subst:LRR|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|Reason ~~~~}}
- Note for Admins/Reviewers: To close a request, please wrap the entire section excluding the section heading with {{Frh}} and {{Frf}}. If the request is successful, please leave this message
{{subst:image-reviewerWelcome}}--~~~~on the applicant's user talk page.
 |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 5 days. |
Requests for license reviewer
Aplucas0703
- Aplucas0703 (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · deleted uploads · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (search username in archives) (assign permissions)
- Reason: I've been working on wikimedia Commons (with occasional breaks) for a long while, including nominating pages for deletion and uploading files from Flickr. I have been a patroller and used that right, but honestly, being an image reviewer is •more of the kind of thing I would enjoy doing. I have a good understanding of the licenses used on Commons, Flickrwashing, and some other common issues, including the FoP issues when inspecting certain files.--Aplucas0703 (talk) 02:36, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
- Scheduled to end: 02:36, 10 July 2026 (UTC) (the earliest)
Comments
@Yann and Grand-Duc. Pinging because this has been long stale and both of you commented (and were the only commenters) on a previous request of mine when I was less experienced. Aplucas0703 (talk) 23:53, 26 July 2026 (UTC)
- Their work here looks decent, so I have no objections to this request. Jianhui67 T★C 02:54, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- I see that you changed the license of File:AR Cephei DSS.png (uploaded by User:EF5). However it is not clear to me why this is a work by NASA. The source is the Strasbourg astronomical Data Center, which is a French organisation. Could you explain please? Yann (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- @Yann It seems like this is the organization hosting the data, which credits NASA/STScI with the information. I accepted the information we have saying that STScI produced files are not copyrighted, as seen in the template. Aplucas0703 (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- I suppose you mean this statement? This is a clear copyright claim. Yann (talk) 16:39, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- @Yann Lots of organizations have a history, including NASA themselves, to falsely assert copyright notices on works that don't qualify for copyright. However, in this case, the source might have thrown me by a misunderstanding of the work that was done by NASA and STScI since it didn't credit the photographer but the digitizers. That information makes it clear that it probably should be deleted. Aplucas0703 (talk) 16:54, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- Though, for further context, I changed the license more as a maintenance thing, since it was already labeled as a government work. I moved it to a more specific tag since it was stated to be NASA work. Aplucas0703 (talk) 17:02, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- @Yann Lots of organizations have a history, including NASA themselves, to falsely assert copyright notices on works that don't qualify for copyright. However, in this case, the source might have thrown me by a misunderstanding of the work that was done by NASA and STScI since it didn't credit the photographer but the digitizers. That information makes it clear that it probably should be deleted. Aplucas0703 (talk) 16:54, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- I suppose you mean this statement? This is a clear copyright claim. Yann (talk) 16:39, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
- I see that you changed the license of File:AR Cephei DSS.png (uploaded by User:EF5). However it is not clear to me why this is a work by NASA. The source is the Strasbourg astronomical Data Center, which is a French organisation. Could you explain please? Yann (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
