User talk:Martin H.

Welcome!

Hello, Martin H., and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Khoikhoi 23:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

• Archive 1

Your edits at List of Igbo people

Hi there. Your edits in the List of Igbo people article do not adhere to wikipedia guidelines concerning lists: "Difficult or contentious subjects for which the definition of the topic itself is disputed should be discussed on the talk page in order to attain consensus". If you want to challenge the notability of a person who is already listed, please go to the main article and challenge the notability there (e.g. via Prod or AfD). Do not remove the entry of the person from the list as long as the person has a BLP article in Wikipedia. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 16:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

You can hardly say, that a person adding himself with a reference to his own website meats the criteria to include him, so judge it a revert of the inclusion and not a removal. --Martin H. (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

See here on what to do to get fast results on this issue. Amsaim (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Image Uploads

All of them are mine I took them by my camera.And if you do delete them I will just upload them back.Nascar1996 (talk) 01:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Why did you block tanner1996 that is me I was going to choose Nascar1996 but someone else is using that name??????????Nascar1996 (talk) 13:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You are using the name yourself. http://toolserver.org/~vvv/sulutil.php?user=Nascar1996. Mistakes may happen, but I dont like lies. "took them by my camera"... well, the history on Commons shows, that this is a lie. --Martin H. (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

My commons page was created yesterday and the day before.Ohh my Gosh I just notice that i did have an old one when I was new to Wiki ohh now I know what you was talking about.Oppps.Nascar1996 (talk) 22:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Please check the image File:2010jimmiejohnson.jpg.I believe it is okay now.Nascar1996 (talk) 22:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

No, its not ok. It is simply stolen. --Martin H. (talk) 22:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Ohh well I will upload another and if you block me I do have another computer so.Nascar1996 (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC) The other one has got deleted too you beat me,ohhh pooo.LOLNascar1996 (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

And given this threat you now think I will say: Oh, in this case I would not prevent you any more from stealing and lying and acting here in an completely inadmissible way? You either mix this educational project with some kind of funny web forum where everyone can post everything no matter who created it and whats the legal status is or you know the rules and completely lost the track. Stop this, stop copyright infringement and turn back to normal editing. --Martin H. (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You will not have to worry about me I will only upload my copyright photos like File:JeffandJimmie.jpg.Thank You for teaching my lesson.Nascar1996 (talk) 00:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

If you havn't noticed, I now understand Wikipedia's basics. I also believe that I am a improved editor on both Wp and Wikimedia Commons. --Nascar1996 01:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Please Help

If you know an administrator please let them deal with this vandaliser for typing this The Pacific Ring of Poo Tards (or sometimes just the Ring of Poo) is an area where large numbers of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions occur in the basin of a Pacific Ocean. In a 40,000 km horseshoe shape, it is associated with a nearly continuous series of oceanic trenches, volcanic arcs, and volcanic belts and/or plate movements. The Ring of Fire has 452 volcanoes and is home to over 75% of the world's active and dormant volcanoes.[1] It is sometimes called the circum-Pacific belt or the circum-Pacific seismic belt." on the Pacific Ring of Fire.His talk page is User talk:137.164.225.235.Thank You. - Nascar1996 03:36, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Report such people at WP:AN so that an admin can intervene and block that vandal. --Martin H. (talk) 03:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay thank you Martin H. - Nascar1996 21:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Image message

Hi, I noticed that you left a message on User_talk:Ambrosius007 about the file File:Pacelli12.jpg. User Ambrosius007 was active on Wikipedia for about 2 years and I wrote several articles together with him. Then he suddenly stated that he was ill and stopped logging into Wikipedia. Based on various detailed he contributed to several articles, and what he said, I am almost certain that he personally knew Pius XII - and that is relevant because that was an indication of his age. I do fear that he is not active in Wikipedia because he is not active in the world, for he left some things he obviously cared about unfinished. Now, regarding the image, he specifically stated on the page and on his talk page I recall that he "owned" the original photo because it was given to him. So given that he owned, scanned it and uploaded it, there should be no problem with the copyright. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 19:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

File:OttoRehhagel1.jpg

I have removed the Files for Deletion tag from File:OttoRehhagel1.jpg, because you didn't create a nomination for it at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 February 24. If you still think it should be deleted, feel free to renominate it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

your edit of internet art

hi Martin

it's noticeable in the InternetArt article, for those of us who are involved, the vast removal of a lot of important links in this page modification:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_art&diff=339732986&oldid=336599556

there you removed a list which you are right to say included some spammy links, but also important references and i'm not just speaking for myself.

right now the InternetArt article looks like it's missing quite something, i hope you will find the time to run some researches online about those who are stated, maybe ask the intervention of an expert, and fix the problem

thanks for your attention to details jaromil (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I checked who included the links and found, that various self-promoters, who wrote articles about themself, added their name to the article claiming themself a "notable net artists and net art organisation" worth to be prominently linked as an example of notable artists or even as an artist worth listing as one of the most notable artist in that scope. The section was pure POV and has nothing to do with educational listing or a referenced selection. For a listing of all internet artists (or people who claim themself something like that, there is a whole lot of spam around in that section and Wikipedia obviously attracts unknown artists to do some spamming here) there is Category:Digital artists. --Martin H. (talk) 13:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Burnumburnum.jpg

Restored. Is the transwiki incorrect because it should really be fair use? Doesn't look like it should be public domain and GFDL/CC at least (as commons version says). Peter 13:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Given the comment 'I scanned and edited it from a flyer so now Im the copyright holder'... I tagged it for speedy deletion. --Martin H. (talk) 10:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Madonna Ciccone.jpg

Please take a look in this file and see if the licensing is correct. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The rational The image is in public domain since the subject passed away in 1963, ie between 1929 and 1977 and is deemed to be in public domain is strange because it gives no evidence and circles around a persional interpretion based on circumstances, not on legal facts. You must provide (the first/approved by copyright holder) publication and demonstrate, that THAT publication fulfills the requirements stated by the license template. This is not done at the moment. --Martin H. (talk) 12:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Idf_soldier_treated.png

Would you care to explain why you reverted the license information for File:Idf_soldier_treated.png? It is properly licensed in Flickr. What do you exactly mean when you say "that account is bad"? --386-DX (talk) 22:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

they are not the copyright holder and not allowed to license it. See the deletion request on Commons, this file comes from the initially written source and was not published by the copyright holder on flickr. --Martin H. (talk) 02:19, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. MBisanz ^talk 02:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Hentzer

I think you may be mistaken Martin, my goal is to put images worthy of wikipedia pages because the pages in English in Brazil are much to be desired, and if I wait for her willingness to legalize images I will die earlier if materialize, then stop behaving like the terrible Adolf Hitler, deleting images that I had work to find, try and be more rational and try to help republish them according to law, because I do not know in which category I place the images, because I am not an employee of wikipedia, but a contributor, and has made great contributions to quality texts, which you should consider.

Summary: try to resolve the leadership instead of behaving like a dictator in Brazil hate this behavior typical of poorly educated, what we like and seek to resolve all based on reason. Then format the images as it should be rather clear.

Wikipedia is a Free content project - that means the copyright owner MUST agree that anyone (not only wikipedia but any person or company on this planet) can reuse their content anywhere, anytime for any purpose including commercial reuse. Thats not given for all your uploads. You have not "searched" them - you have grabbed the images from other webistes and claimed them "entirely your own work" - wrong - and claimed that the copyright holder (you.....) gave anyone the permission to reuse this image as free content as long as the reuser attributes you as the copyright holder - also wrong. Its nothing about leadership, im a simple contributor here too, the only difference is that my contributions are about copyright and the spirit of this wiki - free content and correct information instead of false claims - not about the blatant infringement of copyrights and the careless uploads of non-free content with false claims on authorship and source. --Martin H. (talk) 16:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

And now read the Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Adding_images please. Is the photo your work? No - although you make the false claim that it is. Did the copyright holder licensed it freely? No, its not free content. Is it public domain? No, copyright in Brazil expires minimum after 70 years, the photos are far to recent. So why do you upload, why do you give false author and source information, do you think that this is accurate editing? --Martin H. (talk) 16:14, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

P.s.: My impression changes. You not did this accidentially but from some images like File:Concordeclubfloripa.jpg you removed the watermarks to hide your stealing. --Martin H. (talk) 16:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Arab League images

What ended up happening here? Also, thoughts on this? Enigma^msg 03:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I stay with what I said last. The uploader explained the source, so we should (1) delete all photographic contributions except userpage images, (2) check the information provided with the Logos but (3) keep the maps. I however have to mention, that my qustion at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Arab League#Arab Atlas and other maps, my last commment, isnt fully answered, he not explains the source of the maps or what software he uses, but I dont see the copyright problem that big for the base maps, so its ok for the moment. Additionally I wounder why this user was never forced to rename, its a redicolous to have some boy naming himself after an organization and creating the impression, that the Arab League is editing on Wikipedia. For me the biggest problem is, that it realy hard to search his contribs on Commons as MER-C already said ;) --Martin H. (talk) 05:04, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

OK. The issue seems to have died there, so maybe it should be brought up again. Enigma^msg 14:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• 1st i would GREATLY appreciate it if you both talk about others in some respect, and having the good intentions, and will gesture...

• 2nd, i have answered pretty much everything here [1] and have not found a response to of why am i still being under investigation.
• 3rd, instead of attacking me, it would be more beneficial to Both each others, and wikipedia to assist in changing the copyrights to suit Wikipedia, and to be properly regulated,
• 4th, i still had no response on how to regulate copyrights, and have not found your assistance in it, yet you keep on attacking me for not changing them...

Thank you for your time.. Arab League User (talk) 03:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)--

File:Caprivi-escort.jpg

The most recent version of the page had {{coord|18|5|30.22|S|21|40|10.1|E|display=title}} --B (talk) 00:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks good, transfered that information. --Martin H. (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:Jc thong cu.jpg

Hello Martin H.. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Jc thong cu.jpg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Im not wasting more time in searching where that vandal has stolen the files from. Have a good life with the stolen images here on Wikipedia. --Martin H. (talk) 03:12, 11 July 2010 (UTC) P.s.: For File:Jc thong fb.jpg it was simple, please use your time for the other image, it is obvious! --Martin H. (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Melbourne, Florida

The Melbourne, Florida article has an issue with an anon editor (Using the 97.102.12x.xx IP range) and looking back at the history it has been on going. The editor is also socking on Commons (User:Drummerboy37 is one of them) so the only thing we can do there (Commons) is to block and delete the images (which are always copyvios and some even from other editors on Commons itself claimed as Own work). Not to sure what could be done with the Melbourne, FL article though. Bidgee (talk) 13:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Only revert the edits, dont know what to do with that article either. Obviously that guy not knows how to use Template:Clear too prevent images from going in the next section, he instead uses linebreaks (that however depend on your own browser and monitor size and will have different results for different viewers). Stupid. Also that he needs 4 edits to add one linebreak... I confirmed your sockpuppet findings on Commons and agree with deletion. --Martin H. (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Paulini article

Hi, I've noticed you've redirected the Paulini article back to Paulini Curuenavuli. The reason why i changed it back to Paulini is because she's known just as Paulini in her career. For example, the singer Ciara doesn't have her full name on it's article title. ozurbanmusic (talk)

The reason why I changed it is a copyright breach you created. Copy&pasting is the worst thing you can do on this wiki, with copy&pasting you claim the entire article your own writing!! Note the edit box saying "You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License " - you are allowed to copy other peoples text from Wikipedia but you must attribute all authors! Therefore we use the "move" button to move an article and not copy&paste. (1) Ask for a consensus to rename the article (2) use the move button, not copy&paste. --Martin H. (talk) 12:42, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I have tried the Move button a lot of times but I can't because the article, Paulini has already been created. If your an Administrator, can you please help me by moving the article to Paulini. ozurbanmusic (talk)

Thats another sign that you have to ask for consensus first. If you have consensus you can point an admin to the debate and he will delete the old article and redirect to make place for the move. --Martin H. (talk) 12:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by consensus? Do you know any good administrator/s I could request this move to? ozurbanmusic (talk)

Read Help:Moving a page please. --Martin H. (talk) 13:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Blocking of 62.171.194.0/24 range

Hi. I'm a sysadmin at the school where this IP Range is used and I'm trying to upload two images for a new article on the new school we've had built (from Filton High School to Abbeywood Community School) the school logo and a photo from the lobby area. I was going to upload it to Commons but you've blocked the IP (and fairly, too) so how would I go about getting these images online? I would have posted this on your commons page...but I'm not allowed :P Many Thanks, Tb2571989 (talk) 08:50, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I created the account and sent you the pasword via email. --Martin H. (talk) 09:24, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Much Appriciated. Any advice on what license to put the pictures on? (One photo and one logo) Tb2571989 (talk) 11:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The license that the copyright holder - the creator or the employer in case the exclusive copyright was transfered - preferes. Wikipedia often recomands the use of a duallicensing with GFDL and CC-BY-SA-3.0, see commons:Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses. --Martin H. (talk) 11:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Codewit

Hi Martin,

In case you missed it, you got a mention here. –Moondyne 15:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thx, I felt a need to answer. --Martin H. (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Deleting A Photo of two Stamps issued By Germany in 1985 for the celebration of European Music Year 1985

Hi, you just deleted a photo European Music Year 1985 depicting two stamps without discussing the matter first. Would you please explain your action to me why, these stamps were not relevant or rather "Unrelated" as you put it? Thanks a lot. Fusion is the future (talk) 14:42, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I gave an explanation in the edit summary as well as in the deletion log. No reason to upload a low quality redundant version of File:DBP 1985 1248 Georg Friedrich Händel.jpg and File:DBP 1985 1249 Johann Sebastian Bach.jpeg with bogus licensing and wrong author claim. --Martin H. (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

• Dear Martin H. please watch your language. Wikipedia:No Personal Attacks

I noticed you called another user a liar.User talk:Martin H. - Image Uploads I kindly remind you, this is strictly against the principles of Wikipedia.

• "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all."
• Making mistake is a common thing. If I did so, you can/must explain it to me in a civil manner and help me do it right. (Licensing and author claim.)

Agreed?

Having said that.

• Millions of people have these stamps issued by Germany in 1985 and they all are free of use since copyright law does not apply to them.
• You still did not answer my specific question: Why these stamps were unrelated, as you described them in your edit summary?

You reasoned in your edit summary exactly such as: "stamp, that's unrelated"

Sincerely best. Fusion is the future (talk) 15:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

If I find someone intentionally lying to me I will call him so and due to my limited abilities to speak English I use exactly this words. Care about your own business and don't play teacher here with reminding me of some policies. Thanks.

The stamp is unrelated to the artist. A stamp is an artistic work. Is the artist related to that work (stamp designer)? No. The stamp illustrates the contribution of Germany to this event as well as the 300th birthdays of Händel and Bach, both born in 1685. Is is the artist related to this contribution of Germany? No. Is the artist related to either Händel or Bach? No. Is he related to both composers 300th birthdays? No. The only relation is that the artist is related to that event but from a different country with a different approach, Germany celebrated 300 birthdays of Bach and Händel, Denmark did something different. Does this very marginal connection between the stamp and the artist justify to include the stamps into the article, an article that really not lacks images but that rather looks like a random collection of images? Obviously not, there is no connection between the stamp and the artist, so the image is just necessary. The consequence is simple, the file on Commons was deleted because of bogus author and license claims and redundant upload of something that we already had on Commons. The images are not replaced in the article with their high quality duplicates as usual but removed because they don't provide any illustrative value to the article. --Martin H. (talk) 18:49, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Binahian

Hi there, just a note, the article Binahian, which you proposed for deletion, has been restored after its deletion was contested. If the article still merits deletion, please initiate a discussion at WP:AFD. Thank you. — ξ^xplicit 19:08, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Commons block

Hey Martin H., I'd like to know why you keep on blocking me. Sorry, I do not speak english so well (I'm brazilian), but I'm working on article Cher in the portuguese wikipedia and I had so much headache to find pics that do not own any copyright, like the old ones, and I noticed that you deleted all pics, including the ones taken in the 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s that clearly do not own any copyright. Other pics were taken by the fans on live shows and posted on the Cher Gallery (I sent an OTRS permission and I was waiting for a reply until you deleted them).

I mean, last year I had another account named Djosci and I didn't know any of the Wikipedia rules, and I apologize for that, but now I know. And is devastating when some work that you spent so much time on it is simply deleted without any explanation. Please reply me, because it's impossible to talk to you on Commons. Thank you. Lordelliott (talk) 17:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

"not own any copyright" will require evidence of first publication in the U.S. at that time without complience to the requirements of copyright of that time. That was not given with any upload, the files are just a little bit older, thats all. Aditionally: I not blocked one sockpuppet of you, I block half a dozen. I not found your sockpuppets because I like to search, I found them because of lots of recent copyright violations related to that artist - all coming from you. Your comment above is not even half of the truth. --Martin H. (talk) 17:35, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for the sock puppets - it was a disastered way to avoid that all pics were deleted at the same time only by my historic in Commons. I thought that you could help me with the licenses and all these burocracy. I really wanted to know how to proceed to improve the article, but it seems impossible, so I'm giving up. Thank you. Lordelliott (talk) 17:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Write articles, you are better with that. --Martin H. (talk) 18:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Football logos

Thanks for definitively help me to upload files which can't be removed without pitiless and give me my first steps. Thanks and excuse me a thousand times. All forgotten by my side --Raul-Reus (talk) 19:27, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Ontthb.png

About Ontthb.png. It was six years ago! I can't really remember, but I suspect that I copied it from Ontwel.png, just filling a different section in red. It was listed as GFDL. I say that it probably came from Ontwel.png because that is an image which highlights Waterloo Regional Municipality, Ontario, which is where I live and where I have done some editing. I can't say definitively where it came from though, because it was so long ago. --  timc  talk   00:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Dacian helmet/stub

Hi. I saw to put the Dacian helmet for deletion and removed it from Dacia stub. I think this is one of the best pictures on Dacia topic. Not sure who uploaded and I am not clear what are you suggesting and implying here. If there is a better one to use, I am for it. But it would be a pity to lose it altogether. Which copyright does it break and who do you think owns the picture? I can go ahead and try to contact the original author, if you think you know it. Also which copyright laws apply to pictures of ancient artifacts? Thanks! --Codrin.B (talk) 19:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

The copyright applies to the photographic work only. Quite obvious the images uploader isnt the photographer, that matters, the source and author is wrong, the license is wrong. --Martin H. (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

So what solutions are you suggesting? I saw you provided this link [2]. Is that image ok, if I get in touch with the owner of that site and get his permission? In other words, I am trying to have a picture with the helmet respecting the copyright laws, but I am not clear what's the best approach as I am new to this. Thanks! --Codrin.B (talk) 20:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Its a scan from an exhibition catalogue, ISBN 9783882703252, the copyright owner on the photographic work is the photographer (there is no transfer of copyrights in Germany, so the publisher is only a licensee). I dont have a copy of the book, the photographer is named there maybe. Maybe the publisher - the Schirn Kunsthalle Frankfurt who also made the exhibition from January 1994 to April 1994 - can help with knowing or contacting the photographer. Another solution would be to simply go to the museum in Bucharest where the object is located today. --Martin H. (talk) 20:37, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for clarifying and for the detail. I contacted also the owner of this blog [3]. I think he might have taken the pictures at the museum plus he seems involved in the reconstruction of the broken helmet. Regarding pictures taken in the museum, if my understanding is correct, it is ok to post them in Commons, even if the museum discourages the taking of pictures? --Codrin.B (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Maybe he can offer an alternative image for free use, looks promissing. --Martin H. (talk) 13:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I hope so to. But just to clarify, what is the policy regarding pictures taken in museums. They are ok, right? --Codrin.B (talk) 21:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The musum may forbid commercial reuse of the photos, but thats not a copyright restriction. commons:Commons:Non-copyright_restrictions#.22House_rules.22. --Martin H. (talk) 00:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Got it! Thanks for pointing me to the link. Very helpful! Cheers! --Codrin.B (talk) 01:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Images and graphics per PD-RO-1956

Hi Martin, I have a question since you are very experienced with these licenses. I am wondering if commons:Template:PD-RO-1956 applies to images and graphics from a Romanian book from 1929 as is Getica by Vasile Pârvan, made available by the Romanian government here: [4]. I hope this license or others apply to this content, as some of the archaeological artifacts depicted were destroyed during World War 2, are lost or maybe in some obscure museums or private collections, making it impossible to create newer photographs. Thanks a lot!--Codrin.B (talk) 20:42, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Ask commons:User talk:Alex:D --Martin H. (talk) 20:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I posted the question to Alex. --Codrin.B (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Fark

Hi Martin H please upload eva Larue4.jpg please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.134.144 (talk) 12:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

UserFind12313143 Hi Martin H please Block User Gohe007 reason Vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.134.144 (talk) 22:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey! What you do here is ridiculous. You order us to upload non-free images, the scope of this projects is Free content! Read about it, free content is everything this whole website is about! Second you bring bad speech on people who spent their time here and do voluntary work. Can you please comment on why you do this and can you please stop it? What do you not like on Wikipedia or what do you not understand? --Martin H. (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I removed your below comments. Answer my questions or go. --Martin H. (talk) 12:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

User Fark HI Martin H please Unblock me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.135.179 (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Martin H please unblock me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.137.132 (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

About Tankini

Hello Martin, Take love and respect. My Wikipedia profile has been hacked and I can't fix it. And the hacker is continuously adding sexual materials into various articles. Sorry for your problem, I didn't know what he added into this article.

Thanks. Mohammadarafat (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Molly81=Seancasey00

Just to be clear, I know Molly but I am not Molly. We do work together in the same computer lab though. Since you think I have a conflict of interest with the Cistulli page I'll leave it alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seancasey00 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

about Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu

Mr Martin H. I am one of the advisors of HE Ihsanoglu. We try to make H.E.'s article as perfect since 2 month. We looked and searched many websites to complete his bio and we gave many weblinks to find proper information about mentioning issues. But as far as I understand you delete many of them because of it is weblink spam. We check our page with this information and we also find there many link to erase. But not the weblinks. Thanks for your warning and your further helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfoke (talk • contribs) 11:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

User Orangesms Hello Martin H please Unblock me 94.236.141.153 (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Big Bird photos

Martin, thank you for your help in properly formatting these files for English Wikipedia. X4n6 (talk) 22:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Tige_Andrews2.jpg

Just a quick note to say I removed your speedy deletion tag from this image. There are two main reasons:

1. It is credible that the uploader might be the copyright holder. Actors typically own their own headshots, and the uploader may be the heir. Note - I'm not claiming that this is the case, but the fact that it is possible and credible means that the copyright infringment is not blatant, and so speedy deletion is not appropriate.

2. There is a viable fair use claim to be made, since the subject is deceased.

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 01:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

User Guz23456 Hello Martin H please unblock me Guz23456 08:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guz23456 (talk • contribs)

User Guz23456 Hello Martin H Please Unblock me BENJIECI (talk) 15:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

iamamiwhoami

Hey Martin, I wanted to consult you for some guidance before uploading another photo. I made mistakes on the previous attempts, but I truly just want the wikipedia article to look more appealing to read. After all, a wikipedia article full of just text is really boring. The artist, iamamiwhoami is playing in a concert, and it is her first live concert and a poster has been released by the official event website. How do I go about uploading the poster to the article? Please help me out, thank you!Borderings (talk) 11:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Stryofome/S.S.Miami

Hey, great minds think alike. I just chanced across StryoFome (talk · contribs) and blocked him here. Can you take care of the stuff on Commons? I'm pretty certain this is the same user as the Bialytock&Bloom account. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:18, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Already done on Commons, the last upload File:MichaelCodron.jpg is watchlisted, he at least describes the correct source and gives the correct author. My only concern is the remaining freely licensed uploads of Bialytock&Bloom. --Martin H. (talk) 18:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

By the way, when you become aware of new Amir Hossein socks on Commons, could you give me a quick heads-up here too? It's repeatedly happened that his socks have managed to fly under the radar here on en-wiki for weeks after they were blocked over there, as happened now with PouriaNoi (talk · contribs). Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:52, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2011 June 21#Uploads by TheMightyGeneral

		The Original Barnstar
		Good catch. How upsetting that they've sat there like that for the best part of a year. J Milburn (talk) 00:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Firas1977 photos.

Hi, I've been copying User:Firas1977's photos to Wikimedia Commons, I now wish I hadn't done so as you have uncovered that these are all likely copyright violations. see File:Ali Diab.jpg I'd appreciate it if you could make sure they are deleted from Wikimedia Commons as well. You can see what I've transferred here and here. Sorry and thanks. --Kafuffle (talk) 16:45, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I deleted those files from Commons already that I identified. Im waiting what will happen from the user, or a mass dr will take place. --Martin H. (talk) 16:48, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

User:L'Écolier uploads

I've deleted the ones you tagged - I would suggest put all the rest up for Puf. I did the same yesterday for a different user here and I also added this report - but that's a bit academic as that user (like your one) has left. Well spotted.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I first clean out his uploads from Commons and I will then check if he is conected to that Havana sockpuppet zoo that I recently discovered on Commons. No question that all his uploads are copyvios, they will be deleted in a PUF that I start later. Thanks for your help, I will look at your CCI case and look if I can find some of them. I bet (wihtout having looked so far) I will :) --Martin H. (talk) 22:18, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Good hunting ;-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Economy of Angola

Hello Martin: I use to work on Angola related articles and just discoveret you edit on "Economy of Angola". What I don't understand is your remark "datei umbenannt". NB: I do speak German - which is why I am puzzled. Aflis (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

file renamed. A file was renamed on Commons and the filename was changed in the article. --Martin H. (talk) 13:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Block and Block

Hi. I'm NimaFallah or You said AmirHossein7055. You're the only administrator in Wikipedia??? Why others don't have been do for me only you must delet my images and block me??? I said you please don't block me but you do no problem! I said please don't remove my images but you do no problem so! but why you deleted images that was free??????? What's problem in the image for Iranian rial. What was problem in . What??? PLEASE ANSWER. 80.191.41.225 (talk) 10:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I dont know of the Iranian rial, but I know of nothing in the copyright law that exempts the banknotes from copyright. This means: Protected by copyright. This means: Not allowed to upload as long as the copyright not expired. You can answer the rest of the questions yourself. This is a free content projekt, free means: All content is free to reuse by anyone for any purpose including money making purposes. Stop stealing photos from various websites, stop making false claims of "own work" on this photos and stop granting rights to others that you not own. For example the right to reuse a file worldwide for money making purposes. --Martin H. (talk) 17:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

UserSpray2132143242 Hello Martin H One question well why block me give reason 109.121.141.253 (talk) 14:44, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I can answer that one for you: blatant abuse of multiple accounts; that is not allowed here, and you clearly know that. –MuZemike 18:52, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Images removed from Tegucigalpa article due to copyvio reasons...

Hey Martin, I noticed your removed several images from the Tegucigalpa article citing copyright violations. While I can't vouch for every image you removed, some images did have permission from their original creator to be distribute for amusement or instructional purposes. A couple of the images were in fact, windows paint-style graphs which I would venture to say were "hand drawn" for the purpose of illustrating the content on the article. Not sure if the Google terrain map with roads highlighted in color through some graphics painting program was permitted under fair use rationale. I have contacted some of the authors whose images appeared on the article to request permission, three have replied stating we may use the images on Wikipedia, I will attempt to replace these images (ones with confirmed permission from authors) onto the article. Thank you.--Usfirstgov (talk) 05:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

"for amusement or instructional purposes" - "we may use the images on Wikipedia"... Please read the Wikipedia instructions on image uploading. This is a free content project, we require free reuse by anyone (not only Wikipedia but anyone, worldwide), anywhere, anytime for any purpose, educational as well as commercial purposes. And sure Googles terms of use not comply with this requirements. --Martin H. (talk) 18:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Chakma4.jpg

You may well be correct - however I do known Flickr is notorious for being incorrect and users putting up copies of other people's photos, claiming their own. Had User:Souvik.arko claimed it as his "own" - I would have deleted it on the spot. Maybe I assume too much WP:AGF as times - c'ést la vie - better than too little I suppose. Joel Chakma may well be fiction - and there are others with the same "author" - I've tagged them all as G11 - I doubt if we'll see any permission from Mr Joel Chakma, so they will be gone next week. I've checked all his uploads - and found another G9. :-)  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree with you in other cases where the author is not clear. In this case it was clear. --Martin H. (talk) 22:20, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Julian LeBlant

Martin: You are indeed correct that I incorrectly listed myself as the source of the LeBlant images rather than the photographer. I work on Wikipedia in fits and spurts and don't always get things listed according to Hoyle. I am busy taking care of someone elderly, so feel free to change the source so it reads correctly. The derivative images are mine, but the source is the painter. Sorry I got that backward. Trying to give a biography to a neglected artist. ArtnHistory (User talk:ArtnHistory)

Re: Import request

Hi Martin, glad that it's all sorted. For future reference, it's impossible to import pages directly from the Wikimedia Commons to the English Wikipedia; one would need to import from Commons to Meta then from Meta to the English Wikipedia. Graham87 13:53, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Picture John Coltrane

hello,

the painting is in the infobox because the former picture (File:John Coltrane 1960.jpg) was removed, see [5]. The painting is the only good picture, as it illustrates the adult Coltrane. The other available pictures are one when he was in the youth years, and the other one is an icon. The album covers must not be in the infobox, as it violates WP:NFCC. Regards.--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 21:17, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

NPOV maybe? The article is 55KB NPOV text. The picture is 343KB 100% POV image showing nothing but an unknown wikipedia users personal impression of Coltrane. 86% of the article (in KB) is POV. Thats not appropriate for an encyclopedia, --Martin H. (talk) 21:32, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Images Contribs, Jonas

I'm sorry to those embarrassing stuff but not all are stolen and im not actually sockpuppetried. Intentionally welled for wiki. Regards.--Jonas_T^C_{N25 November 2011 (UTC)}

Figedy

Nice catch! Peridon (talk) 17:42, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Copy-vio

Hello can you please have a look at File:HelenaPaparizou002.jpg at commons. It is credited as an own work but all the editor did was photoshop the background. The photo is from a 2008 promo and actually the exact picture can be found on a tour poster on the article Vrisko To Logo Na Zo. It's been in commons so long it's hard to believe nobody commented yet. GreekStar12 (talk) 18:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Good catch. --Martin H. (talk) 18:55, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Please don't bite the noobs.

Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers nuff said? Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:55, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Uchunari coffee

This article is complete advertising BS through and through. In case the PROD gets removed and you see it before I do, hit it with a speedy delete. I put some of the reasons on the talk page there. Sick of this crap. KarlM (talk) 08:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Dear Karl I don't know who you are and I don't understand this anger, this product truly exists and it's the very first product. I asked you help to improve the article and change things which need to be changed why don't you answer me and try to help me ! I am open to suggestions. --Annerella (talk) 09:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Unblock "User:JonasEncyclopedia"

Hi, you currently blocked me in Wikimedia and I requested for unblock appeal at this session. Reason: The multiple images I upload are taken from the site Flickr. It is uploaded with citations except my own work images which are also deleted in Wikimedia. I haven’t stolen any non-free content in the internet rather, it is from flickr wherein termed to be upload exceptional. It is not my fault that Flickr input to remix but not acceptable to Wikimedia. Whereof, I intend to contribute images not violate any of conditions. I’m sorry if the warning messages I haven’t read on my talk page, I don’t recognize it when I use to upload. Moreover, the accusation socking puppetry is already clarified. I have no any account in Wikipedia. I passed the appeal for socking lacking and indefinite. As a city informative editor of Cagayan de Oro, I’m looking forward to this unblock session for it is my reputation to clean and to contribute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonasEncyclopedia (talk • contribs) 05:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you missed some essential points: Every photo you uploaded - most of them taken from elsewhere and (i doubt) self-created photos - have been uploaded with the claim that this photo is 100% your work. Untrue in most cases. Inst it clear that taking someone else photo and uploading it to Commons with the claim "its my own work" IS violating many rules? Isnt it commonsense not to du such evil things? --Martin H. (talk) 09:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Paul Ankomah

Could you please provide a reason for proposing Paul Ankomah for deletion at the PROD template otherwise it will have to be contested on procedural grounds as per WP:PROD you must provide a clear and non-generic reason. Cheers ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 08:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind was speedy deleted per WP:G3. Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 10:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I used the talkpage for the reason..... --Martin H. (talk) 15:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Blocked User: Ale4115

Hi there. You have recently blocked me (User:Ale4115) and I requested for unblock appeal. I understand the reason, I have been a wikipedia editor since 2007, I think there has to be a way to sort this out, most of the images were taken by the same author which I know, from the Skyscrapercity argentine forum which I am full member. I find this block quite disapointing because I personally dedicate part of my time and passion to edit in wikipedia. It is quite a shame because most of the images were going to be part of a major improvement of both spanish and english argentine articles (if you take a look at my contributions at wikipedia spanish). This is really sad and I am really looking forward to hear from you.

Regards, --Fercho85 (talk) 21:09, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I cant see how taking other peoples photos and uploading them to Commons with false "own work" claims is an improvement. --Martin H. (talk) 21:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

And for "tken by the same author which I know"... thats untrue. Your uploads here on Wikipedia are stolen from dozen of authors from flickr and panoramio. I already identified many of the true authors of your uploads. If your not ask for deletion of your uploads here yourself I will do it. --Martin H. (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, fine I assume all the responsability here I have no problem if all the images I uploaded are deleted, I had enough with uploading images and later have copyright issues, do what it needs to be done. Just for the record, my other existent accounts were created in base of good faith (I have lost the password of most of them) Some of them were part of my first edits here in Wikipedia and they had not been active for about five years. I still do not understand the paranoia by treating me as if I committed sock puppetry. Anyway relax it wont happen again.

Cheers, --Fercho85 (talk) 08:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Subte3.jpg and Subte55.jpg

Thanks for including the date of the source pages in the copyvio templates for these images; it made it a lot easier to ensure that the uploader copied from those source pages rather than vice versa. Nyttend (talk) 02:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

CCI update

Thank you for uncovering and doing so much to address the problem. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:Files by Chokolate

Re:Files by Chokolate

Can you provide any kind of proof or explanation? Bulwersator (talk) 13:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Sir Matin about the photos of Limassol

PHOTOS ARE NOT STOLEN and it is the proper own work of tech bro user who is uploading them through Wikicommons. He EXCLUSIVELY owns the copyrights as pictures are taken by him irrelevant if they are also shared by his own website blog. Please allow him to use them cause it is his own rights and has the permission to share them in Wikipedia also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Findblogging (talk • contribs) 13:39, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure. And thats why I found his uploads in ~10 different flickr accounts. He even has stolen pictures from our own users. --Martin H. (talk) 13:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

No sir the 10 different photos you saw that belong to flickr accounts it is the same group of people that own them! The user tech bro has a blog where these photos are shared and everybody approved he would upload them in Wikicommons. Please trust the user.

Thus in the following days you would see even more accounts editing in Limassol forum, all those owning the pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Findblogging (talk • contribs) 13:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

This does not mean that he can claim something "own work". The true source and the author must be mentioned. And obviously what you said is not true, two of the files already where on Wikimedia Commons. --Martin H. (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Martin please it would be better for Limassol article to revert it to the form it had been in the 1st of September last edited by the user IsrArmen where the article was 36047 bytses and included just old photos which are under the owner's copyrights!!! Please do it like tis, it would be much better for not damaging completely the "Limassol" article.

Thanks a lot for helping

Now I see. You are one of the sockpuppets of User:Andreas2009. Wasnt you asked to please leave the project? --Martin H. (talk) 14:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking for guidance

Sorry, I wasn't sure I was doing it right, and I appreciate you pointing it out. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, and still trying to figure things out here. In each case, the photos were given to me to post. Most of them were snapshots, taken with a personal camera that belonged to the subject of the photos. You say, "the photographer is the author and the copyright holder must give written agreement to the free license." Can you explain how exactly I do that? MartinMartin226 (talk) 16:36, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, is it too late to save these photos, or will they be taken down? MartinMartin226 (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've been reading over COM:OTRS; I think I see what I need to do; I will contact each of the owners and ask that they email their permission to Commons. Would you kindly unblock the accounts; I do understand the sockpuppet issue, and I can assure you I will not be using separate Commons accounts to load photos in the future. I truly did not know that was a violation of Wikipedia policy. Sorry for your trouble. MartinMartin226 (talk) 18:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I've been reading through the "Commons:Village pump" - I definitely see now how to handle posting photos emailed to me by other people. And, again, I do understand about the sockpuppet issue, and I apologize- I do see how that was a violation of Wikipedia policies. I'd really like to straighten this situation out- can you please help me clear it up? MartinMartin226 (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The best Idea is to use one - and only one - account. This means: Use the same login on other projects. Wikipedia:Unified login.

And from your statements on Commons I suggest you to read Wikipedia:COI, especially Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Declaring an interest. It appears that you use Wikipedia for promoting others, for example your edits at Non-surgical rhinoplasty with your account Wikicoffee1373 (talk · contribs) and your uploads with commons:Special:Contributions/River2zero suggest relation to spam for some surgeon. I strongly suggest you to tell about your interests, I found that this is recommanded in Wikipedia:Paid editing (essay), section 3.3. --Martin H. (talk) 20:47, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

P.s.: the use of multiple accounts also applies to Wikpedia (see above, also User:Susb1983, User:Michaelatstarbucks, etc.). --Martin H. (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:Jenniffer-gonzalez-28th-house-of-representatives-portrait.jpg

Hello Martin H.. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Jenniffer-gonzalez-28th-house-of-representatives-portrait.jpg, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Photo claims OTRS permission. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 11:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Thats wrong, the photo not claims OTRS permission. The OTRS permission works for paintings located inside the capitol building. The template that contains the OTRS tag explicitely says this. --Martin H. (talk) 14:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Martin H.. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Faizan -Let's talk! 12:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The self-created artwork spam

Please, note that in here => [6], the argument "self-created artwork spam" was used by you to prohibit display of image, and now the argument "we don't know who created the art-work" ( HERE => [7] )is being used to to prohibit display of image. Isn't that a cool observation about elimination OCD? Luizpuodzius (talk) 20:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Im not sure what my observation has to do with the other peoples doubt in the authorship. My observation was that you upload trashy self-created paintings and include them in articles with no interest in improving the article but with the only interest of increasing the noticeability of yourself. --Martin H. (talk) 06:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your insights about art-work. I was just disappointed that you decided not to offer your conclusion that the work was a "trashy self-created paintings". Thank you for your contributions and your interest in improving all articles. Luizpuodzius (talk) 22:39, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Image sources

I'm interested to learn how to locate original image sources, such as those taken from other websites, as well as screenshots taken from online videos. Thanks. 77.43.143.31 (talk) 19:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Martin H.. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)