Bobak

I'm easier to get a hold of at Wikipedia: en:User talk:Bobak.

---

Welcome to the Commons, Bobak!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Gaborik Photo

Man, I wish I could've been there. Nice photo too, by the way. :D —Zachary ^talk 19:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Fargo vs. Winnipeg

Ughhh - I've done that before. Sorry, I ought to have checked your user contribution list first before leaving such a whining edit summary. These last few months, I have encountered a number of instances where people have categorized images really carelessly, so I was a little quick on the draw here. --skeezix1000 (talk) 13:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 2008-0913-USCOSU-Pan01 3000px tiltfixed.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments well done --Ianare 07:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

File:2009-0617-statue-Wakefield.jpg

File:2009-0617-statue-Wakefield.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

-- Deadstar (msg) 07:56, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

File:2010-1014-PillHillRHD.jpg

I have extracted into 4 the File:2010-1014-PillHillRHD.jpg because it had the {{Extract image}} template. --Robot8A (talk) 20:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

File:09-02-06--ChristofOzarks.jpg

Hi! You've mentioned three different licences for this picture: GFDL, CC-By-2.5 and CC-By-SA-2.5. I'd just like to make sure if this is indeed what you want, or of there's been a typo somewhere. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 15:31, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

My early photos (which I uploaded to Wikipedia) were all eventually moved to Commons with these sorts of shotgun licenses--I assume because of a bot or something trying to convert licenses. All my work is basically supposed to be CC-by or Cc-by-sa. I've gone ahead and made the fix. All the best. --Bobak (talk) 18:51, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

File:112307-BritishMuseum-Badari.jpg

Technically, you first uploaded that picture under both "GFDL" and "CC-BY-2.5" (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:112307-BritishMuseum-Badari.jpg&oldid=12160122 ), and you can't retroactively withdraw either of those licenses. "GFDL" had "CC-BY-SA-3.0" added to it because of the great license migration, but that doesn't remove anything else. The display of the resulting templates may look visually messy, but what you changed it to was not accurate (and Wikimedia Commons places accuracy in legalities far above aesthetics). AnonMoos (talk) 11:30, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

• And this one too[1]. You are not allowed to remove licenses. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 14:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Here's the situation: I only recently became aware that, at one point or another, someone changed the license tag on one of my older photos without my permission and added that GFDL tag. That photo was my copy/paste template for all the generic info I didn't want to repeat on later photos, so it was copy-pasted into all subsequent tags before I would just changing the description and date information. In fact, my oldest images on here (and Wikipedia) don't and never had that GFDL tag. There was never any intent on my part to release under that license and now that I've become aware of it and learned of a manner to correct it, I did. It came up because someone using my photo (a lot of them get used) emailed me to clarify what was going on in the tag and that's when I realized there was confusing jumble caused by someone taking actions they should not have. I've previously had people copy my images from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons with only a GFDL tag. I've learned to not blow up about it and make the fixes when they come up, I didn't mean to cause issues here, but the bottom line is the tag was not created by me and my intent is an important element of all of this: why would I create that jumble of tags that appeared on my image? If I had the time I would look through all however many hundreds of photos and figure out who added a GFDL tag to my tags but it's easier just to fix the damage. --Bobak (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:112307-BritishMuseum-Badari.jpg&oldid=12160122 reveals that you added the "GFDL" tag in your original upload of that image. If some scripting bot did something you didn't originally intend, or if you didn't really mean GFDL, then you need to go to Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard and explain yourself and request a licensing change. Your current unilateral nonsense violates Common policies and technical license legalities, and really doesn't help anything. As for a "jumble of tags", that means absolutely nothing at all in the context of Wikimedia Commons discussions, since here an unsightly "jumble of tags" which is LEGALLY ACCURATE is greatly preferred to any inaccurate aesthetically-cleaner version... AnonMoos (talk) 07:21, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

File:052707-017-GeorgeTirebiter.jpg

File:052707-017-GeorgeTirebiter.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

GrapedApe (talk) 12:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Did I just see you write

"If mine had to go, so does this." What sort of attitude is that? Einar aka 22:40, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Not enough of an attitude to chase peeps down to their userpage. --Bobak (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is true that I have an attitude about this sort of thing. I was once pulled out of geometry class, by the hair, by a vice principal and tossed out of school until I got a haircut (this was long ago). It seems that when this same administrator had told someone else to get a haircut, that person had replied, "Well so and so has longer hair than me." and that was it for me. If you believed that your original posting should be saved then you should (in my opinion) be fighting to save the other posting not get it deleted. Again, in my opinion, this is what user pages are for, to talk about this sort of thing. Carptrash (talk) 03:49, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

---

Thank you for participating in Wiki Loves Monuments 2012! Dear Bobak, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments 2012, and for sharing your pictures with the whole world! Thanks to the participation of people like you, the contest gathered more than 350,000 pictures of cultural heritage objects from 36 countries around the world, becoming the largest photography competition to have ever taken place. You can find all your pictures in your upload log, and are of course very welcome to keep uploading images and help develop Wikimedia Commons, even though you will not be able to win more prizes (just yet). If you'd like to start editing relevant Wikipedia articles and share your knowledge with other people, please go to the Wikipedia Welcome page for more information, guidance, and help. To make future contests even more successful than this year, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in a short survey. Please fill in this short survey in your own language, and help us learn what you liked and didn't like about Wiki Loves Monuments 2012. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 notification system on 22:13, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Bobak. You have new messages at Stefan4's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stefan4 (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

File:2009-0617-statue-Wakefield.jpg

File:2009-0617-statue-Wakefield.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

Stefan4 (talk) 13:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

File:2009-0805-Mapleton-CarnegieLib.jpg

File:2009-0805-Mapleton-CarnegieLib.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Philly042107-014-RockyStatue.jpg

File:Philly042107-014-RockyStatue.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Yours sincerely, The Haz _talk 15:22, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

This is a non-obvious case as the photos is a part of a scene and not the center of the photograph. This has already been debated and allowed. This calls all of your decisions as an editor in question. Thanks. --Bobak (talk) 15:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. 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!

Affected:

• File:120207-LA-SugiharaMemorial.jpg

Yours sincerely, Rybec (talk) 23:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

File:2010-1218-BerkleySquare.jpg

File:2010-1218-BerkleySquare.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

Amitie 10g (talk) 02:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Philly042107-014-RockyStatue.jpg

File:Philly042107-014-RockyStatue.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

2A02:C7C:1018:6E00:3161:5743:507:874B 12:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

File:GordonECole1860.jpg

File:GordonECole1860.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

76.14.73.36 14:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:2022-0426-MyWhip-2022 BMW M8 Competition Gran Coupe.jpg

Copyright status: File:2022-0426-MyWhip-2022 BMW M8 Competition Gran Coupe.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:2022-0426-MyWhip-2022 BMW M8 Competition Gran Coupe.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 00:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

File:2023-0109-CFPtitlegame-Stetson Bennett.jpg

File:2023-0109-CFPtitlegame-Stetson Bennett.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

File:2023-0109-CFPtitlegame-Brady Quinn.jpg

File:2023-0109-CFPtitlegame-Brady Quinn.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. 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!

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:28, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh boy, I'm going to be trying to avoid getting banned for what I'd honestly want to say to this. --Bobak (talk) 03:48, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Let me suggest that when someone asks a question, you respond with an an honest answer, rather than a series of personal insults. I'll presume you're able to have a civil discussion, and make some comments: If you watch deletion requests much, you'd find out that it is unfortunately common for people to take snapshots of television, jumbotron, other video screen and claiming it as "own work" while it is actually a copyright violation by Commons:Derivative works. If I see something I *know* is a copyright violation, I can delete it on sight. Some things I *don't* know, but wonder about, so I'll bring them to deletion requests, so others - with luck the uploader - can give more information. I see your image, I wonder "is that a video chyron at the lower right? Maybe?", so I ask. You evidently consider this a horrible thing to have asked. Please be aware, as Will Rogers said, "Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects". I've had images of mine listed for deletion for reasons including that someone didn't know that pre-digital film camera photos didn't have EXIF, and an image taken through a screen window that someone thought was a "screenshot" (maybe it could be called that, but that's not what the term usually means). In all of those cases, I gave an explanation, the person who nominated them learned something, and the images were kept - no insults were exchanged. I suggest you look at Commons:Civility. However, on the other hand if you sincerely believe the accusations you have made against me, that I don't "put in any effort in making [this] reckless assumption", am "disingenuous", I "don't assume good faith", "just harass and post frivolous deletion attempts" etc, I suggest you list me at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems - while I don't see my actions that way, I certainly acknowledge that anyone who that is an accurate description of certainly should not be an admin, and what's more should probably be blocked from the project. Thanks for your attention. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

I stand behind all my comments. You could have asked me here. You could've handled it better. No, you instead treat a nomination for deletion as a learning opportunity? I shouldn't have to educate you because you got bored while categorizing people using microphones...and didn't bother to see that I take lots of sports photos. Folks like you are why I stepped back from being heavily active. People who try to use procedures to bully folks who are just trying to contribute to a project; thankfully I'm not some new user and am quite able to stand my ground. The nice thing about the Wikimedia universe is that we can do our own thing and not have to keep running into each other. Thank goodness. 😑 --Bobak (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your reply. How specifically would you suggest I could have handled it better? How should I have asked my (honest) questions and gotten honest answers rather than insults? (BTW, your repeated assumption that I didn't bother to look at your other uploads before nomination is not correct; I simply nominated what looked to me like two possible cases.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)