@Rkieferbaum: The camera coords aren't quite accurate - they place it on the trail, rather than on the corner of the abutment. I normally add {{Location}} manually for my own photos, since I can place it more accurately than the internal GPS in most devices. However, in this case I couldn't remember which side of the bridge I was on, so I just used {{Object location}} instead. Best, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:17, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Jonteemil: That link only shows edits adding dab links, so you're just seeing my additions of {{Noalthist}} (before I fixed it) rather than all messages (which I do usually sign). That template is less an attempt to start a discussion and more a final warning before a block. I can start signing when I add it if you think that's best. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
@FarSouthNavy: You are correct that you have many productive contributions and F10 was not technically correct. However, it was out of scope, as are the vast majority of AI-generated images. I encourage you to upload real images rather than speculative works. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:41, 28 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
It's OK, my only concern was to make it clear that F10 was wrongly applied to this case. No problem concerning the file deletion; even if I uploaded dozens of copyright-free images to commons, I was unaware of COMMONS:SCOPE---
2023 Picture of the Year: Incense plays an important role in Vietnamese life. It is considered as a sacred bridge to connect the visible life of human beings and the world of heaven, earth, and gods. Photo taken in Quang Phu Cau village, on the outskirts of Hanoi, Vietnam. In this picture, incense sticks are being set out to dry, after being dipped in the incense solution.
Dear Wikimedian,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2024 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year is the nineteenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2024) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.
I’ve removed my images from various articles that could have public artwork within them. For whatever reason, Wikimedia Commons wants me to re-login every time I refresh the page. Because of that I will take no effort to nominate those images for deletion. I don’t have near that much time on my hands. But they’ve been removed from various pages. I’ll leave the rest to you.
Side note, the fact that American agencies place interesting works of art in public places like train stations and then attempt to keep people from sharing said photos is ENTIRELY on brand lol. Lightmetro (talk) 23:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Here’s another one for you since you have all this time. That big “MAPLEWOOD” sign is a piece of public artwork. Get busy bud.
I agree that it's quite annoying; it's a less-than-ideal part of US copyright law (and not the fault of the transit agencies), but unfortunately one that Commons has to take seriously. Please understand that this isn't a slight against you or an attempt to erase your work; it's just the unfortunate reality of copyright law. In some cases, either the agency or the artist (depending on who the copyright was assigned to in their contract) are willing to allow use of a photograph under a Commons-compatible license.
Many uses of photographs of copyrighted art will still fall under fair use exemptions (such as personal use like posting a photo on social media). For articles where there's a description of the artwork, it may be worthwhile uploading the images there, as English Wikipedia allows fair use images in articles. Fair use images cannot be hosted on Commons, which is why I've nominated those three files for deletion here. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:17, 23 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Take a few days to think before you quit the project. I know it can be frustrating to have a few images deleted, but that shouldn't scare you away from contributing. You have uploaded many other useful images that don't need to be deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:37, 23 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
It’s more just a culmination of different things. The images were just the last straw.
Take the ridiculous light/semi/pre metro discussion on my own city’s light rail page and plenty of others. Basically a months long edit war that, to be fair, was finally recently rectified.
I’m sick and tired of trying to do my part to update these pages (at least as far as my community goes) only to find out 2 months later, or more, that I broke a rule lol. It’s not worth it.
I'm sorry to hear that, and I hope you decide to come back later. In general, Commons does not allow users to request deletion of their own works (except in the first week after uploading, as a courtesy), since Creative Commons licenses are irrevocable. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:20, 23 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
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!
You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2024) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2024.
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!
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!
I intended to nominate the map for deletion but submitted too early and thus the DR was in error (VisualFileChange does not appear to function well on mobile!). Now that I took a more proper look in front of the computer, I was able to properly review and batch files for deletion rather than just one. I never thought a transit agency would be able to claim copyright, but here we are; the way I discovered this problem was I saw a TikTok where a chain was without BART's permission selling BART themed merchandise. Aasim (talk) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for reverting my category-fuckup in unidentified train stations. I didn't realise, I changed the category of the category. I just wanted to change for a specific image. --Jenne1504 (talk) 09:50, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi @Pi.1415926535! Thanks for taking an interest in my photo. I’m far newer to Commons then you are and I really don’t want to step on any toes, but I would much prefer if my original composition was available for use. Your version is a 40% crop, which substantially changes the composition.
I’ve reverted to the original so it remains available as uploaded. Is it possible to re-upload your crop under a separate name or make it available as a separate version which does not overwrite the original?
Of course, I have no issue with your cropped version being used wherever appropriate, and understand it isn't my place to control the use of the image so long as it meets my set CC license requirements... it is just the overwriting thing which I do not 100% agree with.
Wishing you all the best and if I have misunderstood how things work here I appreciate your patience!
@Fourthords: That works well enough. It looks like {{SD}} is probably the template to use in the future rather than {{Speedydelete}}, since SD autofills the deletion criterion and puts the second parameter inline with that, but there was nothing wrong with what you did. Best, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:47, 28 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
My initial logic for adding the 109 as a subcategory of Washington Street was that the 109 runs the entire length of Washington Street in Somerville, so I figured it may make sense adding it in. After some further thought it makes sense to leave it out - in theory most images of Washington Street do not contain the 109, and most images of the 109 do not contain Washington Street, so there's no good way to capture one as the subcategory of the other despite their relation. 4300streetcar (talk) 05:25, 22 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
@4300streetcar: Yeah, it's a tricky problem - not entirely dissimilar to separating rail services from rail lines, which Mackensen and I have been slowly doing for a while. The hierarchical category structure of Commons is good for a lot, but it doesn't handle things like this as well. For bus routes that run (almost) entirely on a given street - and where we have pictures on that street and not just at terminals - I think it's okay to have it as a subcat of a street. For a multi-street route like the 109, if we end up with a sufficient number on a given street, we can always create an intersection category like Category:109 (MBTA bus) on Washington Street. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:50, 22 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Pi.1415926535, OathOn (formerly Sunolafjagtenben-hur)'s recent uploads are still no category. I don't think the user has learnt a lesson from previous block. A1Cafel (talk) 16:26, 24 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 months ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Pi.1415926535, this user has requested unblock via VRTS (ticket:2025121610007313), and they gave a copyright release at ticket:2025121610007199. I don't think the username is problematic, we allow organisational usernames on Commons, plus they verified it by sending us an email. IMO as long as we remove the problematic categories from the file description pages (and not undelete the categories), we can mass undelete. The descriptions aren't that bad to be honest, like they don't say "Call PHONE-NUMBER to buy a house". What's your thoughts? —Matrix(!)ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 16:38, 19 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
What's wrong with having images of interiors of rooms, is that not in scope? As long as there's no direct advertising in the file name or description I see no problem. If we still disagree we can go to AN though. —Matrix(!)ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 17:21, 19 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Matrix: We have plenty of photos of modern American vernacular architecture; I don't think there's no any additional educational or historical value to having these. They're just generically decorated houses, so they're not likely to be a useful illustration for that type of facility. At most we could keep a handful of representative images; we certainly do not need all 118. IMO, keeping any of the images (unless they are deliberately renamed and re-described to remove all information about the business) is just giving the spammers a foothold.
I have zero tolerance for anyone trying to use Commons to promote their business, and double so if they won't even admit that their purpose is to advertise. Given that this is a non-notable business, I don't see what they could possibly offer us that would be worth unblocking the account. I also consider this a promotional username per COM:IU. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:50, 19 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I'll tell them on VRTS that Commons isn't a place to advertise, etc. then I'll ask them what contributions they plan to make. I'm pretty sure we allow company names in usernames though, per the policy you linked. —Matrix(!)ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 12:08, 20 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
THis is the response I gave FYI:
Thank you for your reply, I see the copyright release and associated files. However, the file descriptions seem to be overly promotional, with promotional categories. For instance, one file (File:All-In-Solutions-California-Male-Sober-Living-Outdoor-Workout-Area-School-St-Simi-Valley-01.jpg) had the description:
"Exterior photograph of an outdoor workout and recreation area at a male sober living residence operated by All In Solutions on School Street in Simi Valley, California. The space includes fitness equipment, shaded seating, and a nearby pool, supporting physical health, structure, and community connection as part of a holistic sober living environment."
The last sentence is promotional and doesn't describe the file. A better description would have been "An outdoor space with a pool, excersise equipment, and a wooden rooftop". The categories are also unnecessary - you do not need to create Category:All In Solutions and related subcategories.
@Matrix: Thanks, that's a good response. It's odd that they're asking for unblock by VRTS. Before you posted here, they sent me an email that indicated they couldn't request an unblock on their talk page - but I didn't remove talk page access. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:41, 21 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
—Matrix(!)ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
@Андрей Романенко: I wasn't aware of the usage when I deleted. However, regardless of that, it is a possible copyvio and I believe VRT permission is needed. I will undelete but apply a permission-needed tag. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:42, 3 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
I will. The request is based on a misreading of the Dutch Copyright Act. The text is clear: The copyright in a work whose author has not been indicated or not in such a way that his identity is beyond doubt, expires after 70 years [...]. Vysotsky (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
I agree that this file should not have been deleted. You did not respond to the extensive discussion in the deletion request and the evidence that was presented about the Dutch Copyright Act, which is basically summarized by Vysotsky. "Per nomination" just is not good enough. - DonCalo (talk) 19:32, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
And the file description stating "Description English: An outbuilding at the Santa Clara Station (California) in Santa Clara, California, USA.". Normally, wouldn't an 'outbuilding' be categorized as part of the main category? Thanks Hmains (talk) 23:26, 10 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Hmains: I deliberately checked out that building when I took photos there last year. Despite the paint job and the faux-SP signage, it's of modern vintage (historic aerials indicate late 20th century) and doesn't seem to have ever been in railroad use. Small print on the signage reveals that it's actually a pump station for the city water system. I've edited the description and filename for clarity. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:51, 10 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
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!
Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, Pi.1415926535. I do have a decent amount of builders plate images, if some of the images can't be on the article, where else do I put them? I add builders plate images mainly because I want to prove this manufacturer built that train. TriStateGuy (talk) 02:42, 26 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
@TriStateGuy: Builders plates are generally not good sources for several reasons. While it's great to have the images of the builders plates on Commons, please find reliable published sources (such as news articles and books) for establishing facts like who built rolling stock. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:43, 26 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Colaagri: Please refrain from rudeness. I did read your comment, but it was not a valid reason to keep the file. This would be a very standard use of wikitables, and having tables be done in wikitext rather than as a separate file has significant benefits to accessibility and editability. I see you have uploaded a second version of this same file, which I will be deleting under speedy deletion criterion G4. Please do not continue re-uploading this file in any format. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:53, 30 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Sorry Pi, but next version is in picture .jpg format; so no reason for any possibility of viruses, malware, etc. Use of wikitable isnt appropriate form for content of this page at this case, which is has only complementary info. Hope its sufficient explainining for you and prevent next erase of it. Colaagri (talk) 10:26, 31 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
This table needs to go directly in the article. Do not simply link to this example version. All you need to do is copy the wikitext onto the relevant article, and change the citation templates to the cswiki versions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Ikan Kekek: My apologies, the mobile interface is clunky. The correct reason is "per William Graham" who correctly pointed out that these were uploads by an LTA (who is now globally locked). I've corrected this and the other DR. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:19, 30 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
But you should know you almost erased the only known image of the Ware & Brookfield Street Railway From The Internet. If I hadn't grabbed it from the bing cache it would have been lost because the seller took the listing down I guess when they found out how rare the image was. You should be more careful. Also the Ware & Brookfield ceased to exist in 1919 if you bothered to read my article on it so the author's life plus 70 years is more than sufficient for that. Even if a 1-year-old took that picture, it would be in the public domain, and you almost threw it away for absolutely no reason except you like to delete things for some reason. Alexbarbershop (talk) 00:46, 10 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Alexbarbershop: I do not control US copyright law. I recommend bookmarking Commons:Hirtle chart as a reference – I refer to it frequently to ensure that a work is in the public domain.
For US works where there is no verified publication prior to 2003, we either need to be 70 years postmortem (author verified to have died before 1956), or 120 years since production (taken before 1906). {{PD-US-unpublished}} is the template for these cases. The Ware and Brookfield Street Railway image that you uploaded had no verified publication date and did not fit any of these criteria, so we cannot host it on Commons. I understand it is frustrating to have your upload deleted, but I nominated it for deletion to comply with Commons policy about copyright, not because I "like to delete things for no reason".
Copyvio is fair. Our standard is "educational", not "notable", and absolutely not enwiki's notability guideline. Various other language Wikipedia projects have different notability standards. Wikidata's bar for inclusion is even lower. Fandom's bar for inclusion is likely also minimal, and Fandom uses mw:InstantCommons. - Alexis Jazzping plz05:33, 12 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, you deleted all nominated files per nom. May I point out that there where 2 keep and 1 nomination. Also all file where corrected and newly uploaded. Your thoughts? Regards, Harold Foppele (talk) 09:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Even after "corrections", all of these files contained basic issues like illegible text, fictitious concepts, and copyrighted elements. These issues are inherent to using LLMs to generate images. Please create diagrams yourself - in SVG format, using a program like Inkscape - rather than uploading broken images. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:05, 22 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
It's a bad LLM render of something you made up with no basis in reality. Commons (and Wikiversity) are for factual information, not your personal fiction nor nonsense chatbot output. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Pi.1415926535, I noticed that Category:Sightseeing buses in Mexico was recently merged into Category:Tour buses in Mexico, but I believe they should remain separate for the sake of accurate categorization. While they both carry passengers, they represent different vehicle architectures and service models. Tour buses are generally long-distance buses built for highway travel with under-deck storage, where as sightseeing buses are typically urban transit vehicles, often double-deckers or open-tops, used for city tours.
Keeping these categories distinct helps users who are specifically looking for city-scale tourism versus intercity transport. Would you be open to restoring the sightseeing category so we can maintain that distinction in the hierarchy? I appreciate your time. Anticeri (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Anticeri: The two terms seem to be used interchangeably - both the Category:Tour buses and Category:Sightseeing buses category trees have a mixture of both coach-style buses and city tour buses. There's also not necessarily a clear division; there's a continuous range of vehicle architectures rather than a strict bifurcation, and some operators simply use coach-style buses for both purposes. The various language wikipedias also only seem to have a single article each.
I'm not necessarily opposed to some kind of differentiation, but the current category structure simply doesn't work. My plan was to merge everything under the "tour buses" tree, and make subcategories on identifiable criteria (such as specific tour companies, double decker buses, open-top buses, etc) when useful. Does that sound reasonable? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:28, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the quick response. When I first searched the categories, I noticed that this was the primary difference and assumed the misplaced files would eventually be organized accordingly. But if you are committed to reorganizing all the subcategories across all countries, I’m totally on board. After all, this type of simplification will definitely improve the category structure and make it much easier to navigate. Thank you for your time and all your hard work on the project. Anticeri (talk) 02:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
This was the file information at the last revision prior to deletion nomination:
=={{int:filedesc}}==
{{Information
|description={{en|1=Re[resenting unconscience learning by showing aa magical realistic oil painting of a child who looks up to a tree with a monkey playing in it}}
|date=2022-12-31
|source={{own}}
|author=[[User:BeeBringer|BeeBringer]]
|permission=
|other versions=
}}
=={{int:license-header}}==
{{self|cc-zero}}
[[Category:Learning in art]]
[[Category:AI-generated images by unidentified software]]
[[Category:AI-generated monkeys]]
[[Category:AI-generated girls]]
[[Category:AI-generated images using unidentified prompts]]
@BeeBringer: Please consider why you felt it useful to upload an image where a monkey is hanging off a tree in a manner utterly inconsistent with physical reality, and why you think that illustrates the concept of "unconscious learning". Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello Pi.1415926535,
Thank you for your reply.
I understand your concern about whether the image effectively illustrates the concept. However, as far as I understand the Commons guidelines, the question of how well an image explains a concept is typically determined by the sister projects that use it.
Since this file is actively in use on Wikibooks, it seems to fall within the scope described at:
From that perspective, whether the illustration is considered logical or meaningful would be up to the communities of those projects, rather than a reason for deletion on Commons itself.
Could you clarify how this aligns with the deletion decision in this case?
COM:INUSE is not a suicide pact. We are not obliged to keep AI-generated nonsense just because you want to use it for decoration. If you want the file undeleted, go to COM:UDR and let the community decide. You are not going to convince me to undelete garbage. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:18, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello Pi.1415926535,
Thank you again for your earlier responses.
As I am still trying to better understand how COM:INUSE is applied in practice, I have opened a discussion at the Administrators’ noticeboard to ask for clarification:
[1]I hope that is okay. My intention is simply to better understand the policy and how it is interpreted.
As the discussion I started on the project scope policy did not lead to a clear change in written policy, but rather confirmed that COM:INUSE is still considered a standard everyone must follow, I am using this request to seek clarity. Specifically, I am asking the community to determine if an administrator's personal dislike of a medium (AI) can indeed override the standing policy that protects files in use on sister projects.
I have also noted in the request that your dismissive tone and the labeling of used content as "garbage" or "nonsense" is unhelpful for cross-project collaboration and undermines the trust between Commons and Wikibooks. I hope the community review will provide the consistency that is currently lacking. --BeeBringer (talk) 05:58, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
There is no policy prohibiting the use of translation or language tools to facilitate communication between projects. As a non-native speaker, I prioritize clarity and professionalism. If you find an error in the facts or the logic of my argument, please point it out. Otherwise, attacking my choice of tools is simply an attempt to avoid discussing the actual policy violations I have raised. BeeBringer (talk) 06:28, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Do not ever post here again unless it is in your own words. If language is an issue, post in your native language and let me translate. Using an LLM to argue with me, and lying about only using it for translation, is incredibly rude. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Omdat je zo nadrukkelijk aasngeeft dat ik alleen in mijn eigen woorden mag reageren en je aanbood om zelf te vertalen, zal ik je hierbij de volledige context geven in het Nederlands, zoals die ook op het Administrators' noticeboard en de overlegpagina van de Project Scope aan de orde is gesteld.
Het echte probleem is dat de geschreven policy (COM:INUSE) stelt dat Commons het redactionele oordeel van zusterprojecten niet overrulet, zelfs niet bij bestanden van een lage kwaliteit. Jij kiest er echter voor om dit beleid een "suicide pact" te noemen en bestanden te verwijderen die actief gebruikt worden, enkel op basis van je persoonlijke afkeer van AI-gegenereerde beelden ("garbage", "nonsense").
Dit is geen kwestie van taalgebruik, maar van machtsmisbruik. Door bijdragers van zusterprojecten neerbuigend te behandelen en te eisen dat zij zich verantwoorden voor artistieke keuzes die door die projecten (zoals Wikibooks) al zijn geaccepteerd, beschadig je de samenwerking binnen Wikimedia. Op de Nederlandse Wikibooks wordt nu zelfs officieel geadviseerd om Commons te omzeilen vanwege deze onvoorspelbaarheid (b:nl:MediaWiki:Uploadtext).
Ik heb, zoals je zelf aangaff, een undeletion request ingediend. Ik heb eerder de gemeenschap uitgelegd waarom de symboliek van de afbeelding voor het boek "Onbewust leren" relevant is. Ik ga ervan uit dat je, zoals beloofd, de vertaling op je neemt en de discussie daar nu op de inhoud voert, zonder verdere persoonlijke aanvallen over mijn taalgebruik of de tools die ik gebruik om mezelf professioneel uit te drukken. --BeeBringer (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Dear Pi.1415926535,
You removed this file, while it was in use on nl.wiktionary and despite a decision to keep this picture per COM:INUSE last year. The stated reason for your decision "incredibly poor quality" is an opinion you are entitled to, but not a sufficient reason for removal. Looking at the guidelines that form the basis for our cooperation I kindly request you to restore this file. --MarcoSwart (talk) 09:31, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, the block on User:151.36.0.0/16 looks too long (in terms of time) and range. It's a common range in Italy, and many users are affected. I reformulated it "for IPs only", in order not to block innocent users. If there are specific LTAs on this range, we can find a solution (e.g. a filter). Best! Ruthven(msg)13:56, 4 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
2024 Picture of the Year:Mundari man polishing the horns of one of his Watusi cows using a mixture of cow urine and ash as a ritualistic and protective practice in a temporary cattle camp in Terekeka, South Sudan.
Dear Wikimedian,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2025 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year is the twentieth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favourite images featured on Commons during the last year (2025) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just five images to become the Picture of the Year.
Latest comment: 1 month ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, Pi. I noted that several Boston-area trolleybus photos you uploaded a few months ago were uploaded with the license {{PD-scan|PD-US-no notice}}. Use of that licensing template requires the inclusion of information about when, and by whom, it was published, or else the statement that the photo was published between 1931 and 1977 without a copyright notice cannot be verified, and is thereby meaningless. Examples include:
At least the first of those was published in 1970 in Bradley Clarke's book Trackless Trolleys of Boston, which did carry a copyright.
As uploaded, these do look like scans from a book or magazine (i.e. published), rather than scans of photographic prints, but where is the proof that they were published without a copyright notice? Steve Morgan (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Steve Morgan: They're scans from Co-operation, as listed in the source field. That links to the full scans on Internet Archive, which show there was no copyright notice. I'm not sure what you're referring to. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favourite images featured on Commons during the last year (2025) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of five images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2025.
This image [2] and [3] shows the tunnel entrance from the northern platform under the existing stairs. Note the sign. Although, [4] says it is a tunnel to the surface platform.
That archway was not the exit to the surface station; I don't think it was an exit to anything at all except maybe a storage closet. The 1918 plan clearly shows that the stairs to the surface station were well east of the main stairs. If you look at the 1962 photo, you can see a high turnstile in the background; that was the actual exit. Note that the sign for the surface station is behind the further sign for the main Mass/Boylston exit.
I do need to correct the pedestrian tunnel slightly. This document (page 76 of the PDF) shows that the angle of it under Mass Ave is a bit different than I'd indicated. (Note: for future use, that plan is not accurate for the new portion of tunnel on the west side of Mass Ave, as the elevator was placed in the north building rather than freestanding.)
There do appear to be door(s) on the east side of the surface station in that photo. They certainly were never public entrances, and the 1918 diagram indicate they wouldn't have connected to anything. My guess is that they were maintenance/storage access to the mezzanine level between the surface platform and the subway station. From the BTC description, that level seems to have been hollow rather than filled in, and only a small portion of it was occupied by the stairs between the levels. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:41, 21 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Pi.1415926535 Thanks for the reply. Great finds! Lyrics presentation p. 5 shows that the exist is facing south like the drawing I mentioned earlier. You have sharp eyes to notice the turnstile in the background on the 1962 photo. The archway is a mystery (I wish they didn't the brick wall there) I'll dig around to see if I find more information. Solarapex (talk) 06:12, 22 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 27 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello,
the file File:Location United States of Biafra, West Africa.svg was deleted by you that few weeks ago. May I kindly bring to your attention the nomination for deletion of the file was solely based on sentiment. Consider the demeaning comments of the nominator. The map uploaded was not a violation of copyright per commons policies on deletion. I uploaded the file because it was due IMO. The file was uploaded based on credible events per sources here and here. I request for the media file to be undeleted based on this facts that it is not in violation of any copyright. I hope Wikimedia upholds and still uphold that policy. Thanks for your attention to this matter. War Term (talk) 21:56, 24 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
This year the U4C requires candidates to hold administrator rights on at least one wiki, which is why you are being contacted as you appear to hold this right. There are other requirements, such as candidates must be at least 18 years old and may not be employed by the Wikimedia Foundation or other related chapters and affiliates. You can find more information in the call for candidates on Meta-wiki. Additionally, the committee's working language is English; some ability to communicate in English is required.
The election opens on 18 May, if you are eligible and interested you have until 10 May to submit your candidacy. There will week between for candidates to answer questions from the community. Voting takes place privately in SecurePoll, successful candidates must receive at least 60% support. More information is available on the 2026 Elections page, including timelines and other candidacy information. If you read over the material and consider yourself qualified, please consider submitting your name to run for the committee. If you think someone else in your community might be interested and qualified, please encourage them to run.
Latest comment: 12 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi everyone,
Wikimedia Commons is pleased to finally announce the winners of this year's Picture of the Year 2025 contest! We had some truly incredible finalists to choose from, but the community has spoken.
Here are your top three winning images:
First place: The aftermath of an Israeli airstrike in Gaza City on October 9, 2023, leaving widespread destruction in the Rimal area. Attribution: WAFA (Q2915969) / CC-BY-SA 3.0
Second place: Baby cape fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus) sleeping at Cape cross, Namibia. Attribution: Giles Laurent / CC-BY-SA 4.0
Third place: A gigantic jet photographed from the International Space Station by astronaut Nichole Ayers. Attribution: public domain
You can view the full results and see where all your favorite images placed here: Full 2025 Results
I also want to highlight what an incredible turnout we had. In the second round, we saw a massive jump in both the number of users voting and the total votes cast. We had exactly 13,979 votes cast by 3,509 users! To put that in perspective, last year we had 7,403 votes from 2,837 users. It is amazing to see that level of growth and community engagement.
Thank you to everyone who voted, helped organize, and generally made the contest such a huge success this year!
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_with_editor_notes.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_January_1962.jpg){kind=link}
