User talk:Ellin Beltz

Welcome! - Replies may not be instant, this user also sleeps, eats, works & goes to school all year.
Hi! I'm one of the admins and bureaucrats here on Wikimedia Commons. If I can help, please leave a message here!. I work in a spirit of COM:AGF with Commons images for deletion, as well as categorizing and sourcing images. Please do not be offended if your images were nominated for deletion or even deleted. There are processes to provide copyright permission and undelete even images which have already been removed. If you need a really fast response to a general question, please write at the Village Pump. To contact me, please leave your message
This user is an administrator on Wikimedia Commons. (verify) This user is a bureaucrat on Wikimedia Commons. (verify) ~~~~ Ellin Beltz signs her posts and thinks you should too! This user believes in assuming good faith and civility. This user is a geologist. en This user is a native English speaker.		Medieval Wisdom You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. John Lydgate (1370–1449) source: BBC	Archives Pre-Feb. 2014 ~ 2014 February to December 2014 ~ 2015 January to June 2015 ~ June to December 2015 ~
Please leave a messages by clicking Add topic above for new conversation or use the [Edit] to add to ongoing discussion. If you wrote before but cannot find the conversation, please see the Archives. >>>>>>

Why did you delete File:Smuggling cigarettes inside a statue of Buddha.jpg ? I put a message on the talk page explaining that it had a CCBYSA licence when I uploaded it. Such licences are permanent even if the source page later disappears. It was also reviewed by the Flickr bot which confirmed the licence I believe. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Philafrenzy: It failed the Flickrbot review: "3 February 2016 . . FlickreviewR 2 (talk | contribs | block) (480 bytes) (FlickreviewR 2: flickr_not_found)" The file was not found at the source given, and thus the license could not be reviewed. The file was uploaded in January, so one would assume the flickr link would have been findable (even if the photo had been removed), but that was not the case, it simply 404s. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but the point is it was there when I uploaded it, I checked the licence and it was CCBYSA (2.0 I think) and once released under that licence it doesn't matter if the page later goes dead. The release of an image under a creative commons licence is permanent. Could you please reinstate it. I said where I got it from and the licence it was under when viewed. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:14, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wish we were neighbors; you could scan my negs and slides, I could pay you in pills... Welp, the deed is done, the teeth are gone, along with a chunk of bone from my sinus. They told me if it doesn't heal right I may shoot water out my nose when trying to drink. It only took 4 months, 4 ER visits, 2 dentist visits, and about 30 phone calls and a few letters...

The oral surgeon was young, strong, and quick with it all, though he could've taken his time, cuz I was somewhere in orbit laughing. It turns out that Medicaid doesn't cover full general anesthesia, but half wasn't too shabby. It's like the regular visit, except you feel half-drunk. I was cautioned not to use expletives, (about Medicaid of course), but I didn't give a fuck. It was raining when I went down there for 9AM, and it's now 2PM and hailing on and off. Forgive the image quality; I hope it's decent for a 5-year-old Coolpix. And forgive the rambling - I just thought I'd stop by and say привет! Хорошего дня! INeverCry 22:21, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:06, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please correct your mistake, please correct your approach. The image that you deleted was taken by the US Army, and was published in the work s:The Ardennes: Battle of the Bulge (1965) by the US Army. The file has been online at Commons since 2006, and after only seven days with a tag it would appear that you have not sufficiently undertaken enough research, nor paid attention to the information on the work. Your deletion reason was completely insufficient for any appeal to be undertaken except by someone with advanced rights. To delete it outright as copyright without alerting the enWS community to this matter is a short-sighted and an inconsiderate approach by you to the community using that image. As a bare minimum you should have turned this request into a deletion request and alerted the enWS community to this request. As a bare minimum your should be providing sufficient information to allow for a review of your decision. I look forward to this being quickly resolved by undeletion, and if still uncertain then your opening a deletion discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:26, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi billinghurst: This image was nominated for speedy by Diannaa. I do not know who took this photograph but without more information, such as is provided on http://www.gettyimages.ca/license/76982359, I have to assume that it is now represented by Getty. The permission on our copy was |Permission={{PD-USGov-Military-Army-USACMH}} Published by U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives Collection of Foreign Records Seized (RG 242) and no URL. If this were a "Foreign Record Seized", then it's not a US Army photograph. Obviously, every item in the National Archives not free of copyright. Google search led to the Getty page which says it cannot be used for commercial purposes making the license obviously incompatible.

I'm sorry to fail your expectations. I would have given your request at least as much consideration - if not more - without your personal attacks. Following them, I have to recuse from additional decisions on this image as they might be seen to have been made under duress and bullying. Please take this to COM:UNDEL where you will receive a second look and possible/probable overturn of the deletion. As Jim wrote recently: Paraphrase Admins here are not necessarily right all the time, but we are open to the process of determining the best outcome for all cases. I'm sure you will receive adequate assistance at COM:UNDEL. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:05, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I give up with Commons admins. Pointing out to you what you should have done, and what you need to do is not bullying; it is not duress; and it is not a personal attack. Requesting that you undelete and convert to a DR is quite reasonable. I would and have done it without hesitation when challenged. But don't worry about it. I will undelete it and move it to enWS then redelete it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

billinghurst: I suggest that discussing the situation in a rational fashion without the negative personal remarks might have resulted in a different outcome and highly recommend it in your future dealings with others. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Billinghurst: could you please stop being mean and harsh every time a wiki soucre photograph/file/etc is deleted? (For example.) Natuur12 (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have handled a number of photographs of German troops in WWII, and as we are all aware that Getty pay no attention to public domain rationales when they can make cash instead, I'll take this to UNDEL. The image has a good footprint on interesting internet sources, so it's fairly easy to trip over more data. --Fæ (talk) 11:16, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Fæ for working through the process! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You think the North Coast Inland Trail picture is a copyright violation? When I read the upload form, it said that any image taken from Flickr is automatically not copyrighted. Philmonte101 (talk) 21:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, most of the images you marked for deletion serve as prominent images on the encyclopedia, so by deleting them it is hurting the encyclopedia in a major way. This makes me angry. Isn't there at least some way to ask all these sites for permission to use them here or something? Philmonte101 (talk) 21:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And calling my work "doodle art" is also insulting! Philmonte101 (talk) 21:39, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you add a lot of offensive comments. You do think extremely hard about how to find pictures to delete, but you don't think for a second about how to keep from offending people on the site! Philmonte101 (talk) 21:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be better off reviewing COM:FLICKR, COM:L, and COM:CB. That would be more productive than coming here and trying to bully and berate Ellin for enforcing copyright rules. It's up to you to be sure your uploads conform to Commons policies, not Ellin. She's not your mom. INeverCry 01:05, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall ever bullying anyone. I just came here saying I was offended by many of the things she said in the deletion tags, such as the degrading of art that took me 30 minutes to an hour or more to make. Philmonte101 (talk) 01:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]