User talk:Super Dromaeosaurus

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Super Dromaeosaurus!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions 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 (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. 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 (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 15:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Please provide your sources.

Hello,
Just a small remark about your revert.
It is quite sad that you provide a source only in the revert.
On wikicommons, sourcing is more important than the accuracy of the classification.

• science works like this: proving is more important than holding the truth.
• Wikicommons is collaboration based. If I come after you, I need to know which sources your are following. That way I will be able to follow the same source.
• there is no universal truth: some biologist are in conflict and do not agree on the classification. In this case we need to choose one and explain the 2 possibilities
• A few times a biologist came here trying to enforce his new classification. I had to fight 3 cases already.

Please, don't change anything without telling which source you follow.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I did modify Planaterga to explain the 2 possible classifications. I did not use english phrases (which would be scientifically better) but {{Conflict}} (which allows automatic translation)

Regards Liné1 (talk) 16:13, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it's indeed sad. I'm going to ignore the last two points you've named because they're not the case. Prosomapoda is a little used but phylogenetically important clade. As I said in the editing summary and as the source says there, Prosomapoda is the sister taxon of Xiphosura (not even Xiphosurida), but it is NOT within it. That does not make sense, I do not understand what happened on that website. There is nothing more to say because it is a very obscure clade. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Please respect the sources

Hello,
about your revert:
When wikicommons sites an external source, it must be done with the respect of what the source says (this is pure science!).
Here Arthropoda Species File says †Chasmataspida and †Eurypteridea, NOT †Chasmataspidida and †Eurypterida.
Perhaps you think that ArthropodaSF is incorrect, but in no case can you change what they say.
PS: wikipedia is very criticized for its lake of sourcing. We have to source and respect what the source say.
Regards Liné1 (talk) 16:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

That type of web pages that try to collect MILLIONS of taxons and keep them updated always end up doing the opposite. Let's see both names:

• Chasmataspida is very commonly used, but the most recent document uses "Chasmataspidida". 2018 documents use both, but there are more using "Chasmataspidida" than "Chasmataspida" (3 [the only mention in the third is in a citation] vs 5). The truth is that I'm not sure which is correct but judging from the Wikipedia page, the paper cited above and that Chasmataspidida has more results than Chasmataspida in Google Scholar, I would say that Chasmataspidida is the correct one.
• About Eurypterida, this is clearer. "Eurypteridea" only has 4 mentions throughout history, while Eurypterida has 1,360.

I do not even know how to cite references without those templates that only correspond to outdated websites, so teach me how to do it and this disagreement will end.

And to finish, I do not understand your need to edit 5 times my discussion page or leave two messages. This topic could be discussed in a single message. Greetings. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Romanian Popular Party logo.jpg

File:Romanian Popular Party logo.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.

 

--EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

File:AUR party logo.png was recently deleted

File:AUR party logo.png was recently deleted by EugeneZelenko for reasons below. If you disagree with the deletion, you need to file an undeletion request.

Reason for deletion: Commons:Licensing: non-trivial logo

It's best to discuss with the administrator who deleted your file before filing an undeletion request. Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 14:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Liberal Reformist Party logo.png was recently deleted

File:Liberal Reformist Party logo.png was recently deleted by EugeneZelenko for reasons below. If you disagree with the deletion, you need to file an undeletion request.

Reason for deletion: Commons:Licensing: non-trivial logo

It's best to discuss with the administrator who deleted your file before filing an undeletion request. Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 14:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Please do not remove problem tags

---

Hi! It has come to my attention that you have removed a warning which says that a file doesn't have enough information about the source or license conditions. Nevertheless, it seems to me that this information is still missing and I have restored the tag. You may either add the required information or, if you think that required information is already given, put the image up for a deletion request so that it won't automatically be deleted. Thank you.

--Sealle (talk) 20:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

About LipovanFlag.jpg and some other images from the same user or from me.

Hello Superdromaeosaurus ! About [1] and the whole series, I can assure you that around 90% will be erased without sorting you suggested (Don't feel responsible for this: it would inevitably have happened sooner or later). It's not just about negligences on our part (you will find us here [2] but we are real scientists, archaeologists, biologists, geographers, historians, paleontologists). Unfortunately there is more:

• Cepleanu was brought up in communist times when there was no private domain or copyright, and when an artist paid by the state provided his photo, drawing, map or scheme, it automatically went into the public domain;
• He is delighted to live in a freer society than before, but does not admit that the current rules are applied retroactively to the works produced at that time (especially when it is by him);
• He claimed this openly in front of the administrators, and therefore became disagreeable to them;
• Him and us, we added missing details and modified a lot of Commons documents, but many administrators and some authors consider these documents as works of art, therefore not editable;
• Some authors refuse to have their work modified and ask us to create another variation of their work, but if we do, the Commons administrators may think we are plagiarizing these authors.

Now, today, we have just met between us by visioconference. The common of our team decision is made. We take note of the fact that we are no longer suitable for the collaborative work of Commons and Wikipedia. We mourn the documents by which we thought to enrich this encyclopedia, since they are not in legal order. We all wish to withdraw from it, and therefore ask the administrators to close our accounts [3], noi, [4], end the first one of us Ion Cepleanu (We were taken for each other's sockpuppets anyway). We wish you good continuation without us, in this cause generally useful, even if it is difficult to grant the contributors. Bye ! --Julieta39 (talk) 13:38, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

That's quite sad. After having seen your contributions, I see that you have helped Commons a lot. I really appreciate the effort you have put into illustrating many Romania-related stuff. I wonder if it would be possible for you (in plural) to make one last effort to save many of the images of Spiridon Ion Cepleanu. I have been removing the no source tag in many images where I have found the original one and I know that there are many others that can be saved as well. For example, I remember having seen the original map of File:MittelEuropa1919.JPG before, but I haven't been able of finding it, but the original author might know how to find it. Is there any chance of this happening? It would be a shame that around 100 files simply got deleted. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 14:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Super Dromeosaurus ! It's my turn to be indicted for "wrong licensing" by our colleague Sealle and it's not about a hundred images but over 250 in all, he really made a big effort especially on us. Ideally we should send 250 OTRS but Cepleanu is old and sick, and I'm working. I did what I could to explain. In a hand, the basic problem is that Sealle, and not only him, considers ANY image to be an unmodifiable work of art: so any image derived, corrected, enriched or modified is, for himand some others, a violation of copyright.
In the other hand, having noted many omissions concerning the history of the Balkans, Romania and Moldova, we filled this void, but we thus went against the dominant historiographical tradition, notably Soviet and Russian, and it would therefore be logical for an administrator, familiar with this tradition, to consider these additions or modifications as inappropriate. If so, this is an "edit warring" among many others.
It is very probably that the whole series of 250 images to be simply deleted by another administrator "per nomination". Our small group of scientists and historians have done what they can, our best for Wikipedia, and now we wish our accounts closed. As said a few centuries ago: "do what must and come what may".
Thank you very much for your encouragement, we appreciate your attitude. --Julieta39 (talk) 11:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, okay then... I understand that you can't do much. Thanks again for the pictures and may Cepleanu get healthy! Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 01:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Former Iranian regions.png

File:Former Iranian regions.png 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!

Fæ (talk) 20:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Morocco Spain Locator.png

Hi, I just wanted to let you know with regards to the new version you uploaded for this file, Western Sahara is not visible, if not barely visible despite being described as "disputed", I suggest reverting to this version which is essentially the same map but the striping for WS is slightly more visible. If someone came and added WS as solid colour, undisputed part of Morocco, it would be reverted almost immediately (which actually happened for this file). For the same reason, this controversial and totally un-neutral map should be reverted to the previous version showing WS as striped. Thanks. -- 100.14.89.197 21:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

I think you exaggerate a bit, the current version still shows Western Sahara as disputed, but you can upload it if you want, I don't have problem with it. I honestly don't remember if IP accounts can upload files or not so you can leave me another message if you want me to do it. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 14:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

IP's can't upload/revert files, that's why I left you a message asking you to do so. I also addressed a similar issue for this file which also should be reverted except Western Sahara was completely removed this time except being barely visible (as well as switch the colours for some reason). Either way, its a violation of OVERWRITE and NPOV so it should be reverted. Thanks. --100.14.89.197 16:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Done. It will take a while for the new version to show up. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 17:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The version one you have reverted to is not the long standing one and the "new" IP knows this all too well (check the file's history and the numerous sockpuppets that have been desperate to change until an admin intervened). I therefore reverted to the admin's version. M.Bitton (talk) 17:32, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't agree with this. I've already stated on a summary that the green and orange version is the most used one by far on these bilateral maps. The yellow and green one also has a lower resolution and it's inaccurate (South Sudan). I've reverted it to the version before this discussion started. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 17:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what it is that you don't agree with, but like I said, this particular file has been the subject of POV pushing for a while, so either we keep your version, revert to the original one or alternatively, we could also choose the second oldest one (which I doubt the new "IP" will be happy with). M.Bitton (talk) 17:40, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Looks like M.Bitton reverted it again violating the very thing he cited (COM:OVERWRITE), I'm not quite sure what his personal quarrel is with me and now followed me here and involved himself in the matter. Super Dromaeosaurus, I suggest reverting it back again because this seems to be disruptive and he wants nothing to do with COM:OVERWRITE, only to isolate Morocco from the disputed W. Sahara (see his comment here). This long standing version seems most approriate -- 100.14.89.197 17:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I meant that I don't agree with using the yellow and green one. I guess that we could use that second oldest one although I still see the version I reverted it to better but I am not going to fight over choosing between these two. The second oldest one is probably the one that will please this IP the most as they seem to be trying not to show Morocco controlling any part of Western Sahara. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

100.14.89.197, I don't wish to be part of this fight that has been happening over the file. I don't see why would that version be better than the current one. Just keep it as how it is. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 17:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Quite the opposite in fact, It would not please the IP as initially I started this discussion because W. Sahara wasn't visible enough/barely visible, not because I think Western Sahara should be completely isolated from Morocco. And I never intended in this being some sort of "fight" or conflict (until M.Bitton came along and involved himself). -- 100.14.89.197 17:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I really don't know what M.Bitton's problem is with this file, it is very similar to the original he insists on (both showing W.S. clearly visibly striped) but using better colour scheme (that you mentioned), zoomed in and cropped Sudan/South Sudan, all while keeping the striped. As the version he wants shows the wrong borders with regards to the Sudans. I really think it should be reverted again and ignore the POV pusher who got involved and claimed COM:OVERWRITE (contradiction). --100.14.89.197 17:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I have a new solution that would make all parties happy, to upload this long standing file as a PNG (and make it larger), as this one is cropped, uses the correct colours, and clearly shows W.S. as disputed striped. That SVG version seems appropriate. --100.14.89.197 18:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Sure, I agree with it. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 18:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Great, if you could get that converted as a PNG then upload it here, then I think this matter will be put to rest. Have a good evening. --100.14.89.197 18:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

If the issue if truly about colours, then that could easily be sorted by editing the stable version. M.Bitton (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done I have changed the colours of the stable version to green and orange. M.Bitton (talk) 18:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

M.Bitton, I mostly agree with your version but I also suggest adding the border for South Sudan to accurately reflect the UN map. --100.14.89.197 18:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Consider cropping it so the South Sudan issue and that huge space at the right part of the map dissappear. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 18:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree, just cropping it would be a good idea, to remove the issue regarding the Sudanese borders and also to show that there is a close proximity between the Morocco and Spain. Otherwise, it seems good. --100.14.89.197 18:53, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 18:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

One last thing. Maybe we could also add some space at the left at the Atlantic Ocean so Morocco and Spain are more centered. I could do this now but the new version did not load to me yet so I can't download it. It would also be good to add the Canary and other Atlantic islands (and Ceuta and Melilla if they are not shown) but I don't want to be too fussy so it's up to you. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 01:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Error in the Ottoman Empire map of 1899

There is an error in the Ottoman map of 1899. The Sanjak of Novi Pazar remained under Ottoman rule between 1878 and 1912. The Austrians stationed a few garrisons (which were pulled after the Bosnian crisis in 1908), but the presence of the Ottoman Army in Novi Pazar continued between 1878 and 1912 and it remained both "de jure" and "de facto" an Ottoman sanjak. The situation was different in Bosnia, where there was a much larger Austrian military presence and occupation between 1878 and 1908. Hoeppala (talk) 14:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Hoeppala, I am not the author of the map. The author is Userd898 (talk · contribs). Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 14:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Шипинська земля.png

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Шипинська земля.png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work. While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

 

Yann (talk) 18:17, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Ленківсье городище.gif

File:Ленківсье городище.gif 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!

Yann (talk) 18:24, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Update request for Russia

Hello.

Can you update

• File:CouncilOfEurope.PNG,

and create a new color bar and label for the former member Russia, which does not exist yet in this map for this new situation?

Can you create a new color bar and label Russia in

• File:Carte du Conseil de l'Europe.png,

for the same reason?

Today, on 10 March 2022, Russia has withdrawn from the Council of Europe.

Here is a source from the Russian state-owned news agency TASS: https://tass.com/politics/1419627

Yours sincerely, 31.200.20.40 20:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello.

I withdraw my request,because all the aforementioned maps have been updated.

Yours sincerely, 31.200.20.40 18:33, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked

You have been blocked from editing Commons. The reason for the block is available in the block log as is the name of the administrator who blocked you. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:01, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Magog the Ogre, thank you a lot for dirtying my block log! I assume you preferred that a version which showed to me as nothing but literal white color which messed up the format of the file be left on such a widely seen image. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 20:05, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey, sorry about that. I've unblocked. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:19, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Reminder

Hi Super Dromaeosaurus. I noticed that you've made malformed deletion requests. Here, {{Delete}} is not for speedy deletion, please see COM:DP. When you want to delete a page by manually using the {{Delete}} template (rather than the automatic Nominate for deletion tool in the Tools menu on the sidebar per COM:DR#Starting requests), you must follow the instructions in the template, including the "Click here to show further instructions" portion (or Commons:Deletion requests/Listing a request manually policy), otherwise you will create a lot of work for other people.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 15:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Apologies! You could have told me how to do it properly and I would have fixed the requests so that you didn't have to. Thanks for your time and effort. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 15:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

There are multiple ways; the way I chose was {{SD|G2}}; see {{SD}} and COM:CSD#C2 for details.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 18:10, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Medical masks donated by China to Moldova.jpg

File:Medical masks donated by China to Moldova.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!

219.78.191.204 07:56, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. Abzeronow (talk) 16:50, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Re:Erettopterus

With regards to the misspelling, the Erettopterus diagram is one of my older ones which needs updating; I do not know when I'll have time to get around to it, but I should definitely be able to start work on it by mid-December, so I can use that update to fix the typo (alternatively, if you think it's important enough I can immediately upload a typo-corrected version and still create the new silhouettes in December anyways). Also, if you don't mind me asking, are limbs II to V known for Erettopterus or should they be filled in with something like Pterygotus? Thanks, --Slate Weasel (talk) 20:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I do not mind if you upload it later, do it whenever it is the easiest for you. Regarding the walking legs, I do not remember myself very well, Erettopterus was my second eurypterid article and I was still pretty unexperienced, some pterygotid articles (that I didn't write) say that a feature of Pterygotidae was that "Their walking legs were small and slender, without spines, and they were likely not capable of walking on land", so it should be fine to use the same as Pterygotus'. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I see that you've updated recently some of your old eurypterid size charts, feel free to ask me anything anytime if you need it, though frankly, my eurypterid knowledge has gotten quite rusty. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

File:View from above of the St. Sotir Church in Korçë.jpg

File:View from above of the St. Sotir Church in Korçë.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!

Albinfo (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Aromanian St. Sotir Church of Korçë.jpg

File:Aromanian St. Sotir Church of Korçë.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!

Albinfo (talk) 20:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Aromanian Church St. Sotir.jpg

File:Aromanian Church St. Sotir.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!

Albinfo (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC)