This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:
How to use Commons
Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.
Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. The latest archive is Commons:Help desk/Archive/2026/03.
Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
A lot of people have a hidden category with all the photographs they have taken. I have one too, at Category:Images by Panamitsu. I've been manually adding this category to photos that I upload which is tedious and I often forget to do it. Is there a way to do this automatically for own works? Panamitsu (talk) 05:54, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
I've similarly wanted something to automate this, but since not everything I've created is a "photograph" (since I've made a few icons and other SVGs) and I want to put different types of things in different user categories, I've settled on just doing it manually for now. But, you can search for any files that link to your user page (and thus probably were taken by you) and aren't in some particular category, with a query likeFile: linksto:User:Panamitsu -incategory:"Images by Panamitsu". That can at least help one detect possible images that could be in that category but aren't. PeterCooperJr (talk) 21:42, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Categories, standardising, templates on similar or identical media
Latest comment: 3 days ago6 comments2 people in discussion
I recently found a few files on here that depict the same thing, some with a template warning about its factual inaccurate, some without.
these images are all of the same concept, so in my view they should have the same disclaimer and be in the same category/categories. I will explain the situation below.
whereof the first (Larousse) includes an extensive description explaining the likely origin, and states that “all projects that use this file need to make this context clear”
It calls itself “own work” and links itself to the second example, while being a crop of another photograph (of a page in an old book) it references right under the second file.
The second file includes a template stating “the factual accuracy of this description or the file name is disputed” referring to a discussion on the talk page that appears to no longer exist.
This is followed by a template saying the flag is “fictitious, proposed, …” and includes in its description a similar or the same warning as in the first file. Also classed as own work, but acknowledges it includes elements taken from the first image.
It has a different copyright licence. (Public domain rather than CC)
The third firm is a png that appears very similar to the second file.
it however has no extended description, no caption or any templates referencing the potential issues with the file. It is also classed as “own work”.
On top of this divergence in descriptions, they also differ in their categories, which makes little sense to me since they seem to depict the same thing.
the first file is in categories:
Flags with one yellow six-pointed star (centered), Proposed flags of Israel, Proposed flags of Palestine, Zionist flags, Vertical bicolor blue and white flags, Historical flags of Palestine, Historical flags of Israel, Flags with the Star of David.
The second file is ALSO in the categories:
SVG special or fictional flags on top of the SVG flag subcategories corresponding to the four categories of “historical/Proposed flag of” mentioned above as well as the remaining categories mentioned above and “Blue and white flags of Israel”
(And several hidden categories)
Now the third/last flag is only in the category “Historical flags of Israel” when visibly it is almost indistinguishable from the second flag.
(and only in the hidden categories corresponding to its copyright licence/publishing)
In looking at these flags and categories, I also found several other flags in “Historical flags of Palestine” that appear to be the same, almost the same, or the same idea.
It seems to me that this entire thing needs to be reorganised. In general, the subject of Israeli/Palestinian historical flags seems very disorganised and at least somewhat inconsistent.
I am looking for some guidance on the policy here, to help me try to see what must be done/what I can do to make this all a bit better. I think also perhaps there should/could be a gallery on this subject. (If there isn’t already one)
PS: I also have another question related to these kinds of legal templates/notices that I placed yesterday. If someone could also look at that, that would be great.
@Slomo666: The license and (2014) date of File:Palestine flag in Larousse 1934.png are bogus. I'm not sure if anything there is copyrightable, but if it is, and if the 1933 date in the description is accurate, then it would be copyrighted in the U.S. through 31 December 2028 and should not be here. Otherwise, it should be {{PD-ineligible}}.
As for the descriptions: the only thing really wrong with the descriptions in the first two is, "All projects that use this file need to make this context clear." No, really, they don't. We don't get to tell other projects what they "must" do.
File:Flag of Palestine (1924).svg has a {{Fact disputed}} tag saying to see the talk page, and nothing on the talk page. That doesn't seem to be of much use. The caveat, "This flag is fictitious, proposed, or unofficial, although it may look similar to an official flag. Such flags should usually not be used in articles, unless they are in widespread unofficial use," is accurate, up to a point, but since clearly this flag was in widespread unofficial use as a de facto flag of the Yishuv, it adds up to nothing.
I don’t really want to get into a Dee discussion on this, but where do you see that this flag was in “widespread unofficial use as a de facto flag of the yishuv” ? Slomo666 (talk) 12:48, 19 March 2026 (UTC).Reply
I don't have anything citable. I'm pretty sure that I'd seen pictures of this flag over half a century ago in what were already at the time older magazines, etc., that my paternal grandparents had. I certainly don't have access to them now. Probably a worthwhile research topic for someone. Either way, {{Fact disputed}} with no clear statement of what is at issue is useless. - Jmabel ! talk20:41, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Wow, half a century. I can’t say I have memories going back that far ;). I believe you though. I think a good place to start looking would be the Israeli national library/archives as I think they have the largest collection on the history of the yishuv. Slomo666 (talk) 20:54, 23 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 days ago16 comments4 people in discussion
Без объяснения причин удалены размещенные мной фотографии "Портрет Эмиля Гилельса", "Эмиль Гилельс", "Эмиль Гилельс. 1970-е.Все авторские права указаны, фотография "Эмиль Гилельс" сделана моим отцом и принадлежит лично мне. В результате страница "Эмиль Гилельс" в Википедии осталась без фотографии великого пианиста. Верните фотографии, там нет никакого нарушения авторских прав. Елена Федорович (talk) 07:33, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Removal of Emil Gilels' photographs posted by me
The photographs I posted, "Portrait of Emil Gilels," "Emil Gilels," and "Emil Gilels. 1970s," have been removed without explanation. All copyrights are indicated; the photograph "Emil Gilels" was taken by my father and is mine. As a result, the "Emil Gilels" Wikipedia page is now missing a photo of the great pianist. Please return the photographs; there is no copyright infringement.
For the record, a large number of files are involved. It looks like some, but not all, were listed at User talk:Елена Федорович. If you need a complete list in order to sort out permissions, the files involved were:
Я специалист по творчеству Гилельса и автор книг о нем. Сайт, с которого взяты фотографии, сделан с моим участием, и владелец фотографий Феликс Готлиб дал мне разрешение на любое использование всех фотографий с этого сайта. Поскольку я не сумела правильно отобразить это, то согласилась с удалением фотографий. Но я точно знаю, что фактически имею право их размещать. Я не ставила целью вводить в заблуждение и не виновата в том, что программа сайта не включает разные ситуации, такие, как ситуация с этими фотографиями. Моей целью была дать более полные материалы, по поводу которых точно не возникнет никаких проблем. Елена Федорович (talk) 17:19, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
В апреле 2025 года я загрузила фотографию пианиста Эмиля Гилельса. Фотография сделана моим папой дирижером Нариманом Чунихиным в 1966 году. Я единственная наследница моего отца и имею все права на эту фотографию. Но фотографию удалил Komarof. Страница великого пианиста осталась без портрета. Когда я перехожу по ссылке для восстановления, я не нахожу ситуации "единственная наследница правообладателя". Мне предлагают указать, что я автор, но автором был мой отец. Моей ситуации нет. Мне грозят блокировкой, если я снова опишу фотографию неправильно. Я не знаю, как называется моя лицензия и кто должен выдавать лицензию дирижеру, который сделал фотографию пианиста. Но у меня есть единственный бумажный подлинник этой фотографии с автографом самого Гилельса. Я прошу дать мне возможность загрузить снова или восстановить эту фотографию. Елена Федорович (talk) 11:50, 16 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Looking at the archive linked above, it's easy to see that Emil Gilels gave his inscribed photographs to many people, including this provincial conductor. But this doesn't mean that the people who received these photographs from Gilels actually took them themselves. Perhaps she simply likes thinking so. Komarof (talk) 20:31, 16 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Форма этой переписки не позволяет мне загрузить материалы, доказывающие, что именно мой отец сделал эту фотографию: программки с именем Гилельса и дирижера - моего отца, Концертографию Гилельса, включающую концерты с моим отцом, а также доказать, что я имею единственный бумажный экземпляр фотографии, как и то, что мой отец имел премии на советских фотовыставках как фотографирующий на профессиональном уровне. Поэтому я также соглашаюсь с удалением этой фотографии и неразмещением фотографии моей книги. Но мне представляется странным, что мои гарантии, профессора и автора многих материалов о Гилельсе (их легко найти в интернете), совершенно игнорируются и все слова подвергаются сомнению, как если бы я была случайным человеком. Я думаю, специалисты по темам Википедии имеют право на уважение. Мне очень жаль, что я не могу по этим причинам улучшить страницу Эмиля Гилельса. Завтра я попытаюсь написать на указанный адрес, как мне советуют. Елена Федорович (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Вы "изучили архив" и считаете, что вы лучше меня знаете обстоятельства биографии и фотографий Гилельса. При том, что я доктор наук, профессор и 40 лет изучаю эту тему, написала две книги и много статей, в чем легко убедиться, набрав мое имя. Сайт www.emilgilels.web.de, одним из авторов которого я являюсь, в качестве основы включает биографию Гилельса, написанную мной, что тоже легко проверить. Я знаю происхождение каждой фотографии на этом сайте, я сама отдавала фотографии для этого сайта, в том числе ту, по поводу которой вы обвинили меня в неправде. Оттого, что я отдала принадлежащую мне фотографию для публикации на этом сайте, я не утратила права на нее. И мне предоставлены права для публикации любой фотографии этого сайта, права на которые которой, хорошо известное мне, позволяет это сделать. Вы написали мне "не пытаться учить вас правилам". Я тоже очень рекомендую вам не пытаться учить специалистов тому, в чем вы не специалист. Я делюсь с сайтом информацией и материалами, за законность происхождения которых я ручаюсь моей профессиональной репутацией, подтвержденными званиями и книгами. В ответ я получила такое количество оскорблений, какого не получала за всю свою профессиональную жизнь. Я прошу снять с обсуждения мои файлы, потому что я больше не хочу делиться фотографиями с вашим сайтом. Елена Федорович (talk) 19:43, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Елена Федорович: Поразительно, что у вас хватает энергии на всё новые многословные комментарии, демонстрирующие вашу обиду, но никак не хватает решимости после десятка напоминаний сделать единственную простую вещь, которую от вас ждут. Вам недвусмысленно объяснили, какие именно обстоятельства мешают на данный момент загрузке этого фото, и предложили несложный способ решения этой проблемы. Как только вы перестанете демонстрировать комплекс жертвы и пойдёте по предложенному пути, ситуация разрешится благополучно. Komarof (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Komarof: and it's astonishing that, despite her making a pretty plausible case that what she was offering was legitimately hers to offer, you seem more interested in using the talk page to browbeat her than help work things through. I got out of the way here on the assumption that a Russian-speaker could help her better than I could, not that they would start unnecessary arguments and result in the user probably not coming back. - Jmabel ! talk23:09, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Jmabel, I'd appreciate it if you refrain from using words like "to browbeat" in the future. The only standard template warning on her talk page was left before she even joined the discussion. After that, I dealt with two images that weren't of Gilels, uploaded a new one — a nice portrait by a professional photographer, notified her about moving the file with the FOP issue to the local wiki, and each time suggested to use the VRT permission option. In response, I received arrogance and promises to "appeal to the global community." Unlike you, I'm not playing "rise above the fray" by relying on the emotional statements of only one side, and I hope you'll stop trying to pin labels on me based on a machine translation of the conversation. Komarof (talk) 23:50, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Komarof: I misspoke with "the talk page." What I meant was what you wrote here on the help desk. If you want to be "in the fray", this place is generally a poor choice of place to do it. - Jmabel ! talk05:24, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Не пишите обо мне того, что не было. Я не обещала обратиться к мировому сообществу, я писала о моей обязанности проинформировать музыкантов, что на странице великого пианиста нет его портрета. Я поблагодарила вас за удаление ошибочных фотографий, которые долго были на странице Гилельса, но не увидела благодарности за найденную чью-то грубую ошибку, которой вы не видели. Я также поблагодарила вас за размещение нового портрета, хотя пианист изображен там в молодости, а не в возрасте достижений. Кстати, эта фотография тоже есть на сайте Гилельса, но ее почему-то можно размещать. Вам уже указали, что проще всего было бы показать мне, что именно, какое название лицензии нужно поставить, чтобы было все правильно, но именно вы предпочитаете многословные комментарии, причем оскорбительного характера: "подлог", "подделка", "абсурд" и даже негативные определения в адрес моего покойного отца ("провинциальный дирижер", "любительская фотография") и, наконец, обвинение меня во лжи с предположением, что мой отец всего лишь взял автограф на фотографии, сделанной не им. То есть вы учите меня, специалиста по творчеству Гилельса, его биографии и поправляете. Ваши комментарии недопустимым характером уже обращают внимание. Я обратилась с письмом по указанному вами адресу, я могу сделать только это в созданной вами недопустимой ситуации. Елена Федорович (talk) 07:37, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Hello,
I'm trying to update the main photo for Francesca Hong. The current photo is oddly cropped with not the best lighting. As Francesca is a current elected official, and she is a public servant, can I not upload her public-facing photo? I don't own the copyright to it... but I believe, as a public official, your public photo is inherently without copyright. Any assistance would be great! Thank you. Fadedfrancis (talk) 01:19, 16 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
I am unaware of any country where the fact that something is an official portrait of a public official would automatically place any image of you in the public domain.
There are a few governments (most notably the U.S. federal government) where photos taken by a government employee (though, in that case, not a contractor) as part of their official duties would be automatically in the public domain. Since imaginably something like that might apply, do you know anything about the authorship of the photo?
I'm going to guess this is referring to the person described at w:en:Francesca Hong, the legislator from Wisconsin, USA. As Jmabel notes, a photo taken by a federal government employee as part of their official duties is in the public domain. However, since the subject is a state legislator any official photo would presumably be taken by an employee of the state government. Wisconsin does not appear to be one of the states where government works can be presumed to be in the public domain (further discussion). Anon126 (✉⚒) 00:49, 21 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Miraitowa963: Pretty much anything over 120 years old is in the public domain. There are a handful of exceptions, but none of them would go back far enough for Ancient Greece.
However, if someone other than you took a photograph depicting the columns, the usual considerations would apply for their photograph of a three-dimensional work: the photograph would be copyrighted just like any other photograph. Jmabel ! talk 16 March 2026 20:02 UTC
I ran this through Google translate, but I don't see a coherent question here. Seems to be asking whether some unspecific set of photos they took will cause problems in the future. They don't have any edits on Commons other than this question (no deleted edits, either). - Jmabel ! talk05:20, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
At the bottom of c:Data:Mapping of national parties members of European parties to lower and upper houses.tab are a pair of buttons: Export to CSV and Export to Excel. I can click Export to Excel and save the file on a local drive and then edit the spreadsheet with Libre Office Calc and save the changes. Then back at commons, I click edit and there is a text box that has 'A .csv or .xlsx file to import' and a Select a file button. So I click the button, select my edited spreadsheet and the file name (without drive and path) appears in the text box at commons. Then nothing. I cannot edit that file name to add the drive and path to the filename. And even if I could, there is nothing to suggest what I should do next; no instructions, no load-this-file-into-the-editor button; nothing.
In the editor, there is a dropdown menu called 'Edittools'. Clicking that does nothing (no menu appears).
So the question is: does the spreadsheet-import work? If it does, how do I make it work for me?
I tried this for myself, and when I upload the file, the new data is automatically populated in JSON format in the edit box. I can view my changes by clicking "Show changes" at the bottom. This works for both CSV and Excel, but strangely only a CSV import updates the "sources" field at the top. Anon126 (✉⚒) 00:35, 21 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. I hadn't tried csv. I can import a csv file but not xlsx. Don't know if that is because the .xlsx file that Libre Office Calc creates is somehow unacceptable to the importer it not being a 'pure' Excel-created xlsx file.
en este artículo que corresponde a mi persona, he subido tres fotos de mi propiedad pero no se si lo he hecho bien. En cualquier caso son de libre disposición.es que previamente no las di de alta en creative commons y ahora no se como hacerlo.
cross-posted: @Powelljcb: We do not have articles in Wikimedia Commons; perhaps you are looking for Wikipedia in some language? Also, though, as far as I know, none of our sister projects allow uploading articles. All of them expect you to edit within the system, though of course you can copy-paste content you've already got in a file. - Jmabel ! talk17:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
When I went to add an image to the wikipedia article I was updating, I had to submit some kind of request via a separate link. Where did these requests / images go and how will I know if they are approved to be added? Tlasko (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Tlasko: no idea about the Wikipedia side of this; you'd have to ask on the relevant Wikipedia (I take it from your global contributions that would be the English-language Wikipedia). Your question here is literally your first edit on Commons, and you have no active or deleted content on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk23:14, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Hello, I need to add all files of few categories to my watchlist (after me accidentally clearling all watchlist).. Is there a script to do it..? --Gpkp (talk) 07:03, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Gpkp: I believe petscan has a method for this, though I've never used it. If that doesn't work for you, please come back here & see if someone else can give a better answer. - Jmabel ! talk21:32, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Per above, you can use PetScan to generate a list of all images in the category, and you can directly add the list of file names (in plain text) into the watchlist using the "Edit raw watchlist" page. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 22:15, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Jag lade in en bild på författaren Carolina Angelis för ca en månad sedan. Den ingick i Wikipedia-artikeln om henne. Nu är bilden borttagen och jag kan inte hitta något spår av den på Commons.
Jag var övertygad om att jag följt alla regler. Var hittar jag motivationen till att den tagits bort?
Hur gör jag för att hitta bilden igen? Kan ni ge mig en länk?
Can I find the deleted image somewhere, including the information I previously provided or should I start all over again until it is accepted? BraheKepler (talk) 11:58, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@BraheKepler: please do not re-upload, go through VRT. It looks like you said permission was pending, but no one sent an email to VRT. You indicated the author as Författaren Carolina Angelis, which would be accurate only if Angelis took the picture herself. If that is the case, that is who needs to send email to VRT; have her cc you so that you are in the loop on the correspondence. - Jmabel ! talk21:45, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@~2026-17176-99: there is a lot to unpack there for such a short question.
COM:PCP doesn't apply to tasks, it applies to files. It applies to all files on Commons.
There is nothing particularly tedious about nominating the contents of an entire category for deletion, if that is what you mean: we have tools for that, and also for deleting all the files in a category. However, assuming you are talking about half a dozen or more files, I would strongly suggest that it would be a lot easier to address this question intelligently if you would say what category and what might be the issue. - Jmabel ! talk21:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
What I meant is if a category that contains a lot of files is discovered that it may contain copyright violations, with the tedious task being combing through every single file one at a time to make user that there isn't one. ~2026-17176-99 (talk) 23:05, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Agree with Jmabel, it is better if you can provide an example of what you are referring to.
Sometimes COM:PCP may apply to multiple images at once if we suspect the uploader is license laundering or it is obvious copvios.
However, if you nominate or tag images for deletion, at the end of the day someone has to do the "tedious task" of "combing through every single file" anyways, whether it is the nominator, users participating in the DR, or the closing admin.
So, if you are unwilling to do the tedious task yourself, you are just making other users do the tedious work, and often it is more tedious for others to do (e.g. reverting a invalid copyvio tag).
And yes, even a COM:Mass deletion request is something where the deletion requester is expected to comb through every single file. It may not be a very in-depth probing, but at least a cursory check for e.g. FOP issues is needed for every file that is to be included in a DR. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 02:04, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion
There is a Wikipedia page for my grandfather (Tadeusz Czeszejko-Sochacki) which shows an incorrect photogragh of him. I tried to add what I know to be the correct photograph copied from a family album, but was prevented from doing so. I can find no easy way of making the correction and would welcome advise as to how this might be undertaken. Thanks Richard Czeszejko-Sochacki (talk) 06:53, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello all,
I'm on the Wikipedia page for Moche Culture, and there is a figurine listed here described as a seated prisoner. The Walters Art Museum this is sourced from says it's a seated man, or shaman/deity. I've managed to change the title of the work everywhere but the photo page itself to Seated Man Stirrup Vessel. I tried to contact the photographer, but it seems to have been uploaded by a bot, who was operated by someone whose profile page says they've retired from editing. I'm a bit of a edit gnome, I don't usually make huge changes like this (and it's okay if it's not possible!) so any help would be greatly appreciated!
File:Moche - Seated Prisoner Stirrup Vessel - Walters 482840 - Left Side.jpgJellybean213 (talk) 20:38, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Jellybean213: It is perfectly reasonable to edit the file page to echo what the source site now says, and to request a move accordingly (either the "move" tool or {{Rename}}). Given the nature of the bot, though, it is almost certain that this means the source site has changed their description, not that the bot was in error at the time it was run, and when editing the file page it might be worth overtly noting that apparent change at the source. - Jmabel ! talk20:55, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Files from Gallica have been amended. Who is to take action at Commons?
There was a mix up regarding two books of sheet music by Couperin, "Les Premier et Troisième livres ont été intervertis", as BnF put it in correspondence with me. This resulted in corrupted btv files coming through to Commons. The error has now been corrected at BnF, and the btv file has the appropriate images from Book Three. It would be good to see the Commons files replaced.
User:Gzen92Bot, operated by User:Gzen92 did these uploads, and presumably we could delete the current content and re-run the not. Is it just files that were wrong, or metadata? If the former, it would probably make even more sense to do this as a series of overwrites, and skip the deletion entirely. - Jmabel ! talk19:27, 20 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello. Sorry, I don't understand the problem. If there are any new files, I can upload them. Otherwise, you'll need to rename the files (and modify their contents?). On Commons, it is impossible to upload the same image twice (even after deletion). Gzen92 (talk) 08:47, 21 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for not making myself clear.
1. The Commons category I quote for the original files has been renamed by me (as "...mixed books"). These files are of little or no use because they are mixed up.
2. The Gallica url I quote has been recently updated with the correct version of the files, as in the original book (not mixed up).
Okay. I looked at the 144 Gallica images and the 144 Commons images, they are the same, in the same order. This hasn't been corrected on Gallica yet? Gzen92 (talk) 14:28, 21 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for looking at this. Gallica has been updated at least as regards the description of these Couperin pieces. However, it has been updated less than I assumed when I first looked at the "new" version of these files. There still seems to be some material from Book One even if Gallica's revised heading (Book Three) is mostly appropriate. For example, an allemande, “Premier Ordre – Allemande L’Auguste”, which does not belong to Book Three, is mentioned in a table of contents towards the beginning of these files. I was told:
Les Premier et Troisième livres ont été intervertis ; vous trouverez le Troisième Livre, sous la description "Premier Livre", à cette adresse : https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10879790h
Nous allons corriger cette incohérence (l'affichage se mettre à jour sur le site Gallica lundi prochain).
As there is still some incoherence and I am rather out of my depth, I am writing to BnF again. I apologise for bothering the Help Desk prematurely.--Thoughtfortheday (talk) 10:58, 22 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I'm into computer programming, and I've heard that wikimedia commons recently archived most of their images, but now none of them show up on my webpages. I don't know how to input images into my HTML code anymore. Dragonstudios36 (talk) 14:24, 20 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Dragonstudios36: this might be related to mw:Common_thumbnail_sizes where only the listed standard size thumbnails work. If you have a hotlinked image to Commons thumbnail that is not one of the standard sizes it may have stopped working. Note that even non-standard thumbnails seem to work, but it might a few tries before the thumbnail image is generated. MKFI (talk) 07:42, 21 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
I want to add images to the Wikipedia page for the PBS Satellite Service that come from a 2015 report from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting regarding implementation of a new public television interconnection system. For examples, see pages 31 and 32 of the report, found here. These are not my own work, so I'm unsure how to proceed. PBS921 (talk) 00:41, 22 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@PBS921: Hi, and welcome. Please read COM:NETC. This is a report by twhite of Cognizant, which has no free license. Furthermore, for the hosting, I see no free license at https://web.archive.org/web/20260217151725/https://cpb.org/ - therefore, you will have to treat that report as non-free, making fair use of it on enwiki per en:WP:NFC and eschewing use here per COM:FAIR. As “A Private Corporation Funded by the American People”, CPB does not benefit from any copyright exemption. Neither does Congnizant. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:02, 22 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@PBS921: They can't copyright the information, or the topology; they probably can't copyright the layout; they certainly can copyright the particular visual representation of all of those. As long as you don't borrow any specific graphics, you are probably OK. Credit them as a source in the description, but not as the "source" in {{Information}}, which is concerned with the specific image. - Jmabel ! talk23:21, 22 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
No. When a government employee makes a work that derives from a copyrighted work, that in no way abrogates the original copyright. Here on Commons, the same rules apply as to any other derivative work. - Jmabel ! talk23:23, 22 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! I received a notification about winning the Wiki Science Competition 2025 in Kazakhstan. However, I am unable to open it. The message is not clickable. Игорь Улитин (talk) 14:21, 23 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
One year from now, actually, but I agree. No indication of any loss of copyright (e.g. through lack of renewal), so it would presumably have a year to go. I'll start a DR. - Jmabel ! talk17:33, 23 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Whyiseverythingalreadyused: it's not at all obvious to me why you referred this person to that particular page. It is unlikely to help them.
@Therussianbearfr0msiberia: I assume you mean the English-language Wikipedia (en-wiki), since that is the only one your global contributions say you've edited, but dthere are literally hundreds of Wikipedias in various languages, so it helps a lot to be specific.
Are you are having trouble uploading a picture, or adding a picture that has already been uploaded to a Wikipedia article?
@Jmabel: what I saw was that they had less than 10 edits on English Wikipedia and had thus not achieved autoconfirmed status, which a user needs to upload files there
@Whyiseverythingalreadyused: Then you should have said as much, rather than linking to a long and rather confusing section on an information page. But you also presumed that they were trying to upload, something that they did not say at any point in their question. - Jmabel ! talk06:13, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Therussianbearfr0msiberia: you attempted to upload a very low resolution image as a new user, which was stopped by an automated filter. Also, based on the description the image is from World War II, but you have still claimed that it is your own work, taken in 2026 and licensed CC-BY-SA. For a historical image these claims seem very unlikely. You must provide accurate information about the images you upload. MKFI (talk) 07:46, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Before I upload a photo of this building at Dollywood with a butterfly on the facade, I wanted to ask if this would be fall under COM:FOP US. The butterfly appears to be part of the building and not a sculpture. APK (talk) 05:36, 24 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I am having difficulties updating the information and musical biography of my band, including historical details and related content. I am not sure how to do it correctly according to Wikipedia’s guidelines.
We are currently developing a project related to my latest book, and I need to have the Wikipedia article ready.
As a musician, I hold the rights to my images, music, and artistic work.
I would appreciate any guidance or assistance you can provide. Please contact me or help me understand the proper way to proceed. Mauriciomejia44 (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
This is not Wikipedia. You are asking this question on Wikimedia Commons. We are a sister project of the English-language Wikipedia, but so are many other sites (including Wikipedias in several hundred other languages).
Generally, you should not be writing about yourself in Wikipedia. See en:WP:COI and en:WP:AUTO. If there is already a Wikipedia article about you or your band, the latter has some very concrete information about what you may and may not do in terms of the content of that article. (If there is not, then about the only legitimate action you can take toward that end would be to submit a well-sourced request at the appropriate page under en:WP:Requested articles.)
If you have further questions about this, I suggest you ask them on the English-language Wikipedia, not here on Commons.- Jmabel ! talk05:45, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
నేను చిత్రీకరించిన ఒకవీడియోని ఫోక్ లోర్ ఫోటోగ్రఫీలో పాల్గొనేందుకు అప్లోడ్ చేయడానికి ప్రయత్నిస్తే అభ్యంతరం అని వస్తోంది. Mp4 ఫార్మాట్లో ఉన్నది తీసుకోవట్లేదు. దీనికి పరిష్కారం ఏమైనా ఉందా ? ఉంటే తెలియజేయగలరు
Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments2 people in discussion
నేను చిత్రీకరించిన ఒకవీడియోని ఫోక్ లోర్ ఫోటోగ్రఫీలో పాల్గొనేందుకు అప్లోడ్ చేయడానికి ప్రయత్నిస్తే అభ్యంతరం అని వస్తోంది. Mp4 ఫార్మాట్లో ఉన్నది తీసుకోవట్లేదు. దీనికి పరిష్కారం ఏమైనా ఉందా ? ఉంటే తెలియజేయగలరు Suryajyothi Sampara (talk) 03:59, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 day ago5 comments4 people in discussion
I have no idea where nor even quite how to ask this question. Is there a way to check commons for similar images? I found the image to the right by sheer luck tinkering with search terms, but am now wondering if we might possess a colour image of the figure on the right. It is a wooden statue head of an unknown princess of the Egyptian Twelfth Dynasty that is held by the Cairo Museum/Egyptian Museum apparently in gallery 49 and its catalogue entry number is JE 39390. No idea if any of that information is useful. Mainly, do we have something like 'reverse image searching'? Mr rnddude (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
I found out only in the last 48 hours that there is process under way to add International Standard Contents Codes (ISCCs) to files, with exactly this sort of purpose. But, no, we don't currently have a way to do this. I've had some back-and-forth with Ainali at User talk:AinaliBot#International Standard Contents Code; someone else would be very welcome to pick up the thread there and start creating some useful documentation of the intent of this. - Jmabel ! talk23:41, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Demo from from the hackathon two weeks ago.There are some demo tools available that could help with this. However, just a fraction of the images on Commons have a perceptual hash yet so it's unlikely it will find something now. In the video to the right, I show how it could help during upload, but we could of course imagine setting up tools to use on request as well. Ainali (talk) 07:40, 26 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
How do I upload someone else's photography found on a blog post on a forum as an image to Wikimedia Commons?
Latest comment: 2 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
trying to add an image of the rear view of a car to an article about the car and the front view picture found in the article is from the exact same source as the rear view picture but I can't upload it to Wikimedia Commons as you can't upload someone else's work Parespeare (talk) 13:31, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Uploading the work of others is permitted on Commons if the copyright licence is compatible — see Commons:Licensing for details.
You need to know the copyright resrtictions of the other photographer's work. First of all check if the copyright restrictions have been published alongside the photograph.
If the photograph has was as "copyleft" or "Creative Commons", it is OK to copy it, giving credit where credit is due. If there are no published restrictions, then copyright is automatic and you need to contct the original photographer to get a waiver. I did that with this image. The permissions box in the image description has the relevant links. Note that in this case the Meccano modeller owned the copyright of the design but I owned the copyright of the phtograph. Both sets of copywirght were waived. Martinvl (talk) 14:30, 25 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 23 hours ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I need help in resolving the Licensing status of the subject file because there is a note from Wikipedia that says, "Unless the copyright status is provided, the file could be deleted seven days after the upload (26 March 2026)."
How do I resolve this or edit the copyright/licensing/trademark status of this logo? Can we upload an internal memo? Or does it have to be something publicly accessible information that the logo is officially CAAP's?
This logo is the correct logo of the agency and is found on it's website. It is uploaded by a legitimate member of the agency.
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:29, 26 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@ODC-SIERRA-LEONE: also, in case it is not clear, you can overwrite your own upload by using "Upload a new version of this file" on the file page. Just make sure that what you upload is another version of the same work (e.g. not a different photo of the same subject). - Jmabel ! talk04:23, 27 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
File:2 EUFOR RCA Mission in Central African Republic in 2014 EUROGENDFOR.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright
@PPIOJOSE2025: Hi, You have apparently uploaded documents which are not made by you, and which are not under a free license or in the public domain. Please do not do that again, or you will be blocked. Please read COM:L. Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:09, 26 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 22 hours ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello! I am writing to ask for permission to use the cover image of Sabrina Carpenter’s latest album on Wikipedia. The image would be used in the article about the album for informational and educational purposes. Wikipedia is a free, non-commercial encyclopedia, and the image would be used in a limited, low-resolution format with proper credit. If possible, permission to use the image under a suitable license (or confirmation of its use under fair use conditions) would be greatly appreciated. Please let me know if you require any additional details. Thank you for your time and consideration. Andria Gagua (talk) 17:35, 26 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Davidlarson1234: Just curious as to why you think File:Gelbvieh.jpg gives off a bad impression of en:Gelbvieh. Is the photo of another breed of cattle? As someone not very familiar with different cattle breeds, the photo looks OK to me. Is there some technical reason why the photo is bad? The photo seems to be being used with out issue by several different Wikimedia Foundation projects; so, it's not clear why a change is needed. Of course, if you're able to provide a better photo, then please do; however, it's not a guarantee that all the projects using the current one will automatically agree to switch to a new photo, absent a really compelling reason to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 27 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 hours ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi! I'd like to find all charts from Our World in Data that are used in the Spanish Wikipedia. Is there any tool that will list all files in a category (such as Category:Our World in Data, and ideally subcategories) that are currently being used in a specific wiki (such as eswiki)? Thanks! Sophivorus (talk) 11:34, 27 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
License for third-party logos not officially available on the internet
However, I can't upload the file as it's not my work. The currently uploaded version is marked as 'own work' by JiaqiDerKrasse - which is most likely wrong as well (EDIT: I just looked at their discussion page, they have uploaded a lot of logos that have been deleted because they were marked as 'own work'). There is also no version of this logo hosted on their own domain, as it is rendered with an animation on pageload.
OK, that would mean that these images are copyrighted by the news photographers. Thus, they aren't suitable for Commons - it's highly improbable that a photographer working for AP, Reuters or a freelancer selling their images to CBS etc. will grant a free license. If you're writing on the English Wikipedia, you may fall back upon their local unfree media rules: en:WP:NONFREE. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 15:16, 27 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
.svg/20px-Pictogram_voting_comment_(orange).svg.png)
Comment, the category for the event already exists, and it is Category:Gold rushes. I agree renaming the category Category:Gold Rush to another name and then turning Category:Gold Rush into a disambiguation page, as it is evident that some users getting confused between the two categories. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 18:41, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
![[1]](http://archiv.emilgilelsfoundation.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/121_2.jpg){kind=link}
_–_Triftbach_–_Rothoren.jpg){kind=link}
