User talk:Omphalographer

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an article, file or the talk page of an article or file. If you find this page on any site other than the Wikimedia Commons you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than the Wikimedia Commons itself. The original page is located at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Omphalographer.

This is the user talk page of Omphalographer, where you can send messages and comments to Omphalographer.

• Be polite.
• Be friendly.
• Assume good faith.
• No personal attacks.

• Please sign and date your entries by clicking on the appropriate button or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
• Put new text under old text.
• New to Wikimedia Commons? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers as soon as possible.
• Click here to start a new topic.

Archives 2023, 2024, 2025

Thank you.

Hi there, I just knew you deleted the file of "File:Examples Game Map.jpg" so I went back to the rules and I consider that you made the right choice because of this picture is made by an AI as you can see so it's does met the rules so thank you for helping me deleted it and I'll be watch out again next time. Best. James27742 (talk) 10:05, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Fictional Philippine Ships

Is there a guideline on Commons against the posting of images that were generated by artificial intelligence, or was their deletion a matter of common sense? I am just wondering. Also, did you find the sandbox on ENWP because you first saw it on Commons? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:56, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

To address your questions in order:

• There isn't yet any general guideline against AI-generated images, but there are very few situations where they are likely to have any educational use. A line of ships that the uploader made up is clearly not one of those situations. (There is, however, the proposed guideline COM:AIIP which - once approved - will forbid uploading most AI-generated images of people.)
• I did indeed find the enwiki sandbox from the Commons uploads. I routinely survey Commons uploads which are likely to be AI-generated and nominate unused and/or inappropriate AI-generated images for deletion, and those images showed up on one such survey.

Omphalographer (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Glamtools

In case you didn't know about it yet, you can find usage with glamtools more easily. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 05:31, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I use VFC for mass nominations. It has a feature to spot in-use files, but I must have overlooked its warning for this file. Omphalographer (talk) 06:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Question

What is the category for user created paintings that are not on there user pages? Krok6kola (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any specific, single category for that. If there's multiple paintings and they're in scope then we might have a "Paintings by SomeCommonsUser" category. Omphalographer (talk) 18:42, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Commons delete

@Omphalographer Hi there. Please look at Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Harold_Foppele#Separate_files. It might be simpler. Thanks Harold Foppele (talk) 17:12, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Copy of message "Response to the speedy deletion request filed by Omphalographer on February 8, 2026" left on the discussion page of the image "Disc dur - Esquèma generau.png"

Hello, the two images are similar because, in both cases, they depict a hard disk viewed from approximately the same angle, with the read head positioned on the disk. However, this is not a derivative work of the image mentioned by Omphalographer. Three arguments support this point:

• I took a photograph of a 2TB 2.5" Toshiba hard drive. I no longer have the model shown in the photo, but I found another hard drive of this type on E-bay ("Toshiba 2TB 2.5" Internal HDD Hard Disk Drive 9.5mm SATA 6GB 128MB Cache PS4 PC" [1]). The product specifications indicate a production date of January 26, 2020 (in the photo showing the label affixed to the back of the product), which is hardly compatible with an imitation of a 2008 diagram.
• the version of the disk shown in the allegedly copied image and in the contested image is not exactly the same. A difference can be seen at the level of the drive spindle. Some differences can also be observed in the upper part: straight lines in the contested image, and a series of small dots in the allegedly copied image.
• the allegedly copied image and the contested image do not share the same shadow patterns. This is explained by the fact that the contested image is the result of a photograph I took. I had to deal with shadowed areas, an issue that does not arise in the allegedly copied image, which is a diagram.

In my view, the image allegedly copied is a generic “Winchester” hard drive diagram, not an actual model. Consequently, in accordance with the “Contestation” section, I will withdraw the request for speedy deletion, but I remain open to any discussion should further clarification be needed. Best regards, --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 08:26, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure I believe that explanation, particularly given that the drive in the illustration is neither 2.5" nor SATA. I've opened a deletion request at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disc dur - Esquèma generau.png. Omphalographer (talk) 20:32, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Appeal regarding "The Quiet Engine" files

I am formally appealing the "Out of scope" designation for the files related to The Quiet Engine. While these are associated with a creative work, they serve a primary educational and philosophical purpose by illustrating complex concepts of Systems Theory and Urban Sociology.

Extended LLM content follows

The main perpose of the public this creataion in this wiki is mainly to share this knowloaged to others. The creation is free and anyone take anything form it. I request that these files be retained based on the following specific merits: 1.Conceptual Illustration of Systems Theory: The files document the "Lattice," a systemic model where "every motion echoes" and "every step is recorded". This serves as a visual and textual allegory for how minor nodes in a system anchor a larger social structure. 2.Study of Bureaucratic Architecture: The work provides a detailed look at "Garrens Marginal Affairs," a study of how administrative offices "nudge small actions into neat columns" and how systems use "bureaucratic patience" to maintain equilibrium. 3.Allegory of Urban Sociology: The city is described as a study of "architecture [that] could disguise curiosity" and explores how urban layouts dictate the "intention" of its citizens. 4.Mechanical Philosophy: "The Quiet Engine" represents a mechanism of "clockwork, pressure plates, and unseen connections" used to resolve social consequences and maintain equilibrium. 5.Proposed Resolution: I am happy to move these files to educational categories such as Category:Sociological allegories or Category:Systems theory illustrations. I argue that the images, in particular, serve as standalone diagrams of "calculated, necessary chaos" and "stable nodes" within a theoretical system. Thank you for your time and for maintaining the integrity of the Commons. Devon93 (talk) 04:19, 11 February 2026 (UTC) Formal Defense of Educational Merit (COM:EDUCATIONAL) Intellectual value is not always immediately obvious. Just because a pattern is complex or presented through allegory does not mean it lacks educational merit. I ask that you respect this creation as a serious conceptual artifact. In the spirit of the Commons, which seeks to preserve the diverse ways we visualize knowledge, these files should be retained as a unique resource for studying the intersection of architectural influence and systemic control. 1. Contextual Framework: Social Physics and the "Lattice" The files in question represent a multimedia study of Social Physics, a field pioneered by Auguste Comte and recently modernized by researchers like Alex Pentland at MIT. The "Lattice" described in The Quiet Engine (Page 3, "The ledger exists beneath every step") is a direct visual and narrative allegory for Stochastic Modeling—the mathematical study of how individual "nodes" (people) create predictable patterns in a large-scale system. 2. Psychological Precedent: The Panopticon and Administrative Oversight The "Marginal Affairs" office and the "Ledger" (Page 16) function as a narrative exploration of Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon. This is a real-world psychological concept used in sociology to describe "the architectural machinery of surveillance." By hosting these files, Wikimedia provides a primary visual source for how architectural layout (The City of Garrens) facilitates psychological behavioral nudging, a concept studied by B.F. Skinner in his research on Operant Conditioning. 3. Engineering Precedent: Cybernetic Feedback Loops The "Quiet Engine" itself (Page 50, "The hum stabilized... forcing it to absorb the cost of its own humanity") is a mechanical representation of Cybernetic Homeostasis. This relates directly to the work of Norbert Wiener, the father of Cybernetics. Your files illustrate how a system "corrects" a "fractured" node to maintain balance. 4. Comparative Academic Literature: This work follows the tradition of "Systemic Fiction" used in academic settings, similar to: Edwin Abbott’s Flatland: Used to teach multi-dimensional geometry. The "Beer Game" (MIT Sloan): A fictional supply chain used to teach System Dynamics. Borgesian Library Theory: Used to teach Information Science and Database Theory. Conclusion of Merit: The "City of Garrens" image and "The Quiet Engine" PDF are not merely "creative content." They are diagrammatic representations of complex systems. They serve the mission of Commons by providing a visual framework for abstract theories of interconnectivity, administrative pressure, and systemic resilience. I request the retention of these files under the following educational. categories: Category:Cybernetics Category:Systems theory in fiction Category:Sociology of architecture Category:Conceptual models

Devon93 (talk) 04:55, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

It appears that you've already made these comments on the deletion discussion page. They do not need to be duplicated here. Omphalographer (talk) 05:01, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Cappelletto

This is the link to orginial picture - https://www.venetostoria.com/dagli-stradioti-ai-cappelletti-qualera-la-differenza/i ~2026-92210-0 (talk) 07:40, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of media? Okay, but how to do it?

Hey there Mr. Omphalographer, I was given a speedy Deletion by you stating the F10 criteria of CSD. I got the part where it say "Global Contributor", but how to speedy delete the file? or say how to code the file to initiate speedy deletion? Atharv Chandel (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Vanishing Account = Full Account Closure, Yes or No?

I've been trying to delete my Wikipedia account from past 4 years, the closes What I always see find is Vanishing Account option, I get it that is all because of the Licensing reasons, But How to completely delete my account anyways? HOW? Atharv Chandel (talk) 18:04, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) There's no way to delete an account. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 18:28, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Vanishing Point

Not to be untoward; however,"((CURRENT)) Site-Map, compiled against (N01 Mien)'s (CONNECTOME).jpg" has been Deleted(?) The ETA being-----11:18, 15 February 2026 // 05:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)-----Well, The File is gone now. And no, it was not AI generated. . . So? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Almanac of Knowledge (talk • contribs) 05:27, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Question about adminship

I think you are an outstanding contributor to Commons. I frequently see your name on DR's and administrators noticeboard etc. Are you planning to run for adminship? I want to nominate you. Kadı Message 21:26, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm humbled by the offer, but I'd prefer to continue contributing as a user for the time being. Omphalographer (talk) 22:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:WERSOW.png

What I meant was that there is no license in the YouTube video. Userski (talk) 07:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Amazing job

Amazing job finding unmarked AI images, just from a random walk around Commons? RAN (talk) 03:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I find most of them through a Quarry query that I run periodically. Omphalographer (talk) 03:58, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Omphalographer: Grifter, abuser, erroneous deleter.

Under the guise of legitimately removing improper media, 'omphalographer' (a rather ridiculous and odd name to attempt to look 'cool') removes images people upload for educational, informative, and instructional purposes all for the odd emotional sensation of appearing legit on a wikimedia/wikipedia website. If they remove this or try to deny this, it inevitably proves the point and evidence will be uploaded (however likely improperly removed as well in an attempt to cover their own back). DOCTOR ACE1 (talk) 08:11, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@DOCTOR ACE1 You seem to be referring to Commons:Deletion requests/File:ACE BELKA - Making Connections 1 Brain Infographic.png where the deleting admin is Rosenzweig. All Omphalographer did was nominate it. They cannot delete files. You expressed your opinion at the deletion discussion. Thank you for doing that.

Please do not make threats to anybody here. If you have some sort of evidence, please make a formal report. I suggest you use Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems.

If you feel the fie was improperly deleted you may request retrieval at Commons:Undeletion requests. Note, ease, that civility is required at all times.

We welcome constructive comments, but your approach here is not constructive, and is deprecated. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:35, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@DOCTOR ACE1 My mistake. The deleting admin was Krd and the deletion discussion was Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Psych course infographics (temporary). There are a great number of files in that discussion, and more than one may have been uploaded by you. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:40, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

It looks as though it was just that one file; the other files in the batch nomination were all uploaded by other users.

In any event: given that this file was deleted over two years ago, I don't recall the exact details, but all of the images in the batch were unused on any Wikimedia project, and were unlikely to be used. You're welcome to take the issue up at an undeletion request, but insulting me isn't going to get you what you want. Omphalographer (talk) 23:25, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

My infographic contained no clip art from others and was my own artwork and creations.

The information on it was also useful. This was wrongfully labelled as part of some class.

Why delete? DOCTOR ACE1 (talk) 04:42, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

@DOCTOR ACE1 As stated in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Psych course infographics (temporary) which was actioned:

Out of scope: unused, low-quality infographics, most of which are additionally unsourced derivative works.
Based on the descriptions, I'm pretty sure there's an introductory psychology course at some US college that's giving students an assignment to create an infographic about one of a list of topics, most of which are areas of the brain, and upload it to Commons. Unfortunately, the course doesn't appear to cover copyright, so most of the resulting uploads, like these, make extensive use of unsourced clip art and stock photos. They're also typically fairly low in educational value; the facts covered in the infographics tend to be very basic (the sort of thing that'd be covered in the introduction paragraph to an encyclopedia article), and frequently contain basic factual or spelling errors.
I've made some attempts to contact students who've uploaded these images in the hope of opening communications with the teacher, but I haven't had any luck yet. Anyways, here's the files:

This rationale was accepted by the deleting admin, and many similar files were deleted. That was the reason. You may make a formal request for undeletion. Omphalographer is not an administrator and can do nothing for you here. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:42, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Logo del Frente Jujuy Crece.jpg

Why is this image is considered missing authorization, but File:Vamos Ctes Logo.png, File:SER Santa Cruz logo.png and File:Logo Hacemos.png are not? Half-Time919 (talk) 23:02, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

The first one of those contains only text and is probably below the threshold of originality. I'm not certain where the threshold lies in Argentina, but the complex circular design in the Jujuy Crece logo is almost certainly above it; I'm not sure about the other two, and I haven't specifically looked at those images. Omphalographer (talk) 23:26, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Re: File:Michael Levinson - Independent Director and Strategic Advisor.jpg

Hello — I've posted a Keep response at the deletion request for this file. The copyright is fully resolved via VRT ticket #2026032710014023 (CC BY-SA 4.0, authorized by photographer Lindsey MacDonald Photography), and the file is in active use as the P18 image on Wikidata entity Q138568694. Happy to answer any questions. — M7evinson (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

File:Traci-brown-inclusai.jpg - Contesting CSD F10

Hello Omphalographer. I am writing regarding the CSD F10 tag placed on File:Traci-brown-inclusai.jpg.

I am the subject of the photograph and the copyright holder. I uploaded this image myself and have explicitly licensed it under CC-BY-4.0 as my own work. I have updated the file page accordingly and removed the speedy deletion tag, replacing it with a formal contest.

I am a new contributor and was not aware of the proper licensing format at the time of upload. The file page has now been corrected with full Information template details including description, date, source marked as own work, and CC-BY-4.0 self-licensing.

This image is actively linked to my Wikidata entity Q138898807.

I respectfully ask that the deletion tag not be processed and that the file be allowed to remain. Thank you for your time.

TraciBrownInclusAI (talk) 04:40, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

The Death Row Sessiions EP

Hi,

Wikipedia wouldnt allow me to make a reply on the recent matter of the deletion of crucial evidence I provided, so I have no choice but to reach you here.

How else am I supposed to provide proof on the recent edits I made? The PDF of this forum post is crucial evidence that backs up my changes and shouldn't be removed.

Please respond so we can resolve this, thank you. TheManDede (talk) 05:30, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

If the forum post is your source, then reference that forum post directly, not a printout of it. It may not be considered a reliable source at Wikipedia, but that's neither here nor there. The content of the printout is not freely licensed and cannot be hosted on Commons. Omphalographer (talk) 05:37, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

AI insights

I notice you are doing a lot of AI patrolling, which is awesome. Is there some particular tool you use to quickly assess whether an image has been edited with AI? IronGargoyle (talk) 05:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm using a combination of a Quarry query to find likely AI images, exiftool running on my local computer to check for C2PA tags, and SightEngine to evaluate images for signs of AI usage. (I'm not using the latter to back up my own guesses - I'm not just blindly throwing everything into it and trusting its responses.) Omphalographer (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Trump Jet video.webm

File:Trump Jet video.webm has been nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Trump Jet video.webm 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!

Yacàwotçã (talk) 22:03, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

File:Mickai logo.png — F10 tag

Hello Omphalographer, I am the uploader of File:Mickai logo.png (now deleted under CSD F10 after your tag) and I wanted to leave a respectful note for the record rather than to dispute the deletion itself.

The file was a corporate logo: the registered figurative element of UK trade mark UK00004373277 (proprietor: Mickai, Companies House 17166618), uploaded by me as the trade-mark proprietor for use on an article. CSD F10 (personal photos by non-contributors) is the speedy criterion for personal photographs by non-contributors, which I would respectfully suggest does not quite fit a corporate brand mark uploaded by the rights holder.

I have re-uploaded the brand mark at File:Mickai brand mark.png with {{cc-by-sa-4.0}} and {{Trademark}}, with provenance to the UK IPO register and to Companies House on the file page. The file is now in use on en:Draft:Mickai, an AfC submission currently in the review queue.

If anything about the new file's licensing, sourcing or categorisation would benefit from refinement, I would be glad of your feedback before any further patroller action. The intention is to follow Commons policy carefully.

Thanks for your work patrolling uploads. Micky1990 (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Your draft on the English Wikipedia is going to be rejected once it's reviewed. Generally speaking, a newly formed company like yours cannot possibly meet that project's notability criteria (w:Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)), as it has not received independent coverage by secondary sources. Primary sources such as corporate filings are not secondary sources and do not contribute to notability.

(As an aside: your trademark application is simply for the wordmark "Mickai", not the logo, and it is a pending application, not a registered mark.)

Omphalographer (talk) 21:30, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Title: Opposition to File Deletion Opinion: SongChangRyeolSubak2.jpg

Title: Opposition to File Deletion Opinion: SongChangRyeolSubak2.jpg

I strongly oppose the deletion of this file. This image is not an "out-of-bounds" image generated by artificial intelligence for ambiguous purposes. It is a highly important educational resource documenting the techniques of Subak, a Korean traditional martial art facing extinction.

Authenticity: This image captures Master Song Chang-ryeol actually practicing Subak. Subak was announced as a transmission discipline by the Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism in 2018 as a result of research on the Traditional Martial Arts Promotion Act, underwent field surveys in accordance with the National Heritage Administration's National Intangible Cultural Heritage Survey Plan in 2019, and is scheduled for deliberation on intangible cultural heritage designation by the Committee on the Five Northern Provinces under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety in 2026.

Purpose: This image contributes to the educational mission of Wikimedia Commons by visually documenting rare cultural heritage introduced on the Korean public broadcasters KBS and EBS (Educational Broadcasting System).

Considering the historical and educational significance of this image, I request that the suspicion of it being "generated by artificial intelligence" be re-examined. Jun-ho Song (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Assuming you mean File:Song Chang-ryeol subak2.jpg, this image was listed for deletion because it is extremely unclear. Even after looking at the image closely, I can barely tell what is happening - is it a man kicking a tree? What are the long white things behind him? Why does the image look like it was taken underwater? Omphalographer (talk) 17:21, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Response to the concerns regarding the clarity of "Song Chang-ryeol subak2.jpg":

I understand the concerns regarding the visual quality, but I would like to clarify the context of this historical record:

1. Historical Authenticity: This image is a rare scan of an old analog photograph from the 1970s-80s, documenting the late Master Song Chang-ryeol. The "water-like" texture and "blurry objects" are typical artifacts of aging film and low-resolution scanning of that era, not a lack of authenticity.
2. Context of the Action: The image captures a specific training method of Subak, where the practitioner maintains balance and power while engaging with natural surroundings (the tree). The "white objects" in the background are part of the natural landscape or traditional training equipment common in rural Korea during that period.
3. Academic/Educational Value: While the resolution is low by modern standards, its value lies in its uniqueness. This is a verified record used in the research that won the 2006 Research Award from the Korean Sport & Olympic Committee. It was also referenced in the EBS Documentary to prove the existence of the lineage.
4. Irreplaceable Record: As the subject (Master Song) has passed away, this specific moment cannot be re-photographed. Under the Commons policy for historical importance, such rare documentation of an endangered cultural heritage (Subak) should be preserved despite its technical flaws.

I kindly request the committee to consider the irreplaceable historical significance of this file over its technical clarity. Jun-ho Song (talk) 17:31, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

The academic research paper I uploaded to the Cambridge University Press database also contains a photograph taken by Mr. Song Chang-ryul at the same location (the third photo from the top of the paper). I have provided a link, so please check it out.

Cambridge University Press: https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/64423dafdf78ec501523372b/original/tracing-the-inheritance-line-of-subak-a-traditional-martial-art.pdf Jun-ho Song (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

File removal

Hello there! Recently the file Igor Lemos Moreira, pesquisador.jpg was removed, as it was considered CSD F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)

In 2022, Igor was a member of the Mais Teoria da História na Wiki public history project, which you can learn more about here. His picture was uploaded so we could include it in the banner of our 2022's team: Integrantes do Projeto Mais Teoria da História na Wiki em 2022.png, but we were not able to before the picture was removed.

If the deletion is reversed, we will quickly categorized this picture as belonging to an ex-member of Mais Teoria and upload the new version of the banner, with Igor's picture as one of the sources.

Could you kindly re-upload the picture so that I can make the necessary adjustments?

Best Regards Ana Vitória Farion (Projeto Mais+) (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Please make a request at Commons:Undeletion requests. I'm not an administrator, so I cannot restore the file myself. Omphalographer (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

My photo

Keep. I am Ghaouss Yazbek, the artist who created this portrait. I drew this portrait of my uncle Nasim Yousef Yazbek (1904-1961) by hand. I am the sole copyright holder of this original artwork and I release it under CC BY-SA 4.0. This is not a photograph — it is an original drawing created by me. Gmyazbeckk (talk) 19:07, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Delitions

Hello there. I saw your message in my talk page. I wonder what is the reason all I have uploaded here recently been nominated for the delition? What seems to be the problem? Thanks ماني (talk) 05:38, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Files

I invite you to calm down because you deleted the files with reasons that are clearly false. I have filed a complaint Here MarioeMary (talk) 10:14, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Exchange Row image Mansfield

Hi There,

Please can you advise me why you have nominated my image for deletion? I hold copyright for the image. Do you know Mansfield or live there? I live in the town and know what things look like?

Please explain?

thank you MatthewDavid41 (talk) 05:18, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

You've uploaded a number of images generated or modified by AI which you've described as e.g. "this is a new adapted image", "the image made slightly different", etc. If these are retouched versions of photos already on Commons, you need to link to the original images for attribution. Omphalographer (talk) 06:00, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I’ve removed the images of the pages now, I can’t be dealing with the hassle. Thank you MatthewDavid41 (talk) 06:01, 18 May 2026 (UTC)