User talk:Mysterymanblue

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2017 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2017 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in R2.

Dear Mysterymanblue,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2017 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the twelfth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2017) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top 2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2017.

Round 2 will end on 22 July 2018, 23:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 11:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

File:All US 50 State Quarters.png

File:All US 50 State Quarters.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!

A.R.M. 04:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

File:The Day of the Tentacle.jpg

Writing to tell you that i uploaded a file with the original camera resolution and aspect ratio of the Nikon D850 (8256 x 5504 pixels and 3:2). If you want, you can reupload your version with a crop the proper aspect ration (1:1) of your file. Cheers. Tm (talk) 19:30, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@Tm: Thanks for uploading this! I couldn't find the original resolution when I looked. I am filing for speedy deletion for my upload because I don't see a reason to keep it around.  Mysterymanblue  21:30, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

"Official duties"

What would the next step be? It's quite clear that this video (and likely many of the other things you mentioned) are not clearly in the public domain as there is reasonable doubt as to whether they qualify as "official duties". However, now two admins (and a bunch of people from enwiki) have disagreed with the reasonable doubt even though I think it was explained very clearly. Would a discussion on Commons:Village pump/Copyright be a good idea, or what would be the next step to resolve this disagreement? Berchanhimez (talk) 14:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Berchanhimez: An issue we sometimes have on Commons is that the people who want to keep their images tend to care the most, so they end up having the loudest voice in deletion discussions. You can mention it at the Village Pump if you'd like to try to get more representative Community input. That being said, I think it is best to let the process play out instead of trying to push too hard that we knock ourselves over. It's OK to be passionate about these things, but we probably shouldn't be too apprehensive about it. We're all trying to make this the best repository of free media, after all, even if we disagree.  Mysterymanblue  21:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Signature

Since the stupid encryption protocol upgrade in December 2019, I've had to do most of my Wikipedia editing with an indirect tool which is not fully 100% Unicode compliant (during April-October 2020, I had to do all of my editing this way, since I had no alternatives whatsoever at that time, see en:User talk:Baseball Bugs/Archive024#Ref desks edits). To fix the stupid encryption protocol upgrade problem, I would have to buy a whole new computer, and eventually I did buy a new computer -- but that only allows me to edit Wikipedia/Commons in a fully Unicode-compliant way for a few hours a week using public WiFi. To fully get around the stupid encryption protocol upgrade problem to edit Wikipedia/Commons in a fully Unicode-compliant way from home, I would have to replace my current Internet connection with a completely different type of connection which would permanently disconnect my old computer (which I still use quite frequently)... AnonMoos (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

@AnonMoos: Ah, my apologies, I didn't realize that you had so much difficulty with that. Don't worry about my dumb signature then!  Mysterymanblue  17:44, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Question

Can I replace some files with better images? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 22:30, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@ItsJustdancefan: Please see Commons:Overwriting existing files. In general, overwriting existing files is not preferred on Commons. Please upload a new file instead of overwriting existing files if you are making big changes. Thank you.  Mysterymanblue  22:32, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Coin

Hi, For the moment, I reverted your revert on File:2021 American Innovation One Dollar Coin New Hampshire Proof Reverse.jpg. I think it would be better to first reach a consensus on the discussion you started at C:VP. In your edit comment, you wrote "my bad". Does that mean you changed your mind about the orientation? Can you please explain in the discussion? -- Asclepias (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Asclepias: My apologies, I thought the only interested parties at this point were only myself and the rotation nominator. You can read my (one-sided) interaction with them at User talk:Fertejol#Your requested rotation to File:2021 American Innovation One Dollar Coin New Hampshire Proof Reverse.jpg. I will go to the Village Pump in a second and put in my two cents.  Mysterymanblue  18:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Complicated copyvio tagging

Hi, I noticed you tagged File:In the bleak midwinter (Harold Darke).ogg for speedy deletion. Please note that {{Copyvio}} is only for blatant copyright violations that are obvious to anyone (preferably accompanied with a link to a website with an older copy of the image), not detailed cases that require a complex understanding of copyright law. I have converted it to a regular DR. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:12, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: Thank you. I do not think that this case required a particularly complex understanding of copyright law. Criteria F3 for speedy deletion is "Derivative work of non-free content", which is what applies here. The file page and source page clearly mark "Harold Darke" as the composer of the piece. He is a notable British musician who died in 1976. Except in some exceptionally odd circumstances, his works are protected 70 years after his death, so none of them could possibly be in the public domain or freely usable right now. When the source essentially tells you that the work is derivative of non-free content (and even gives the copyright and publisher information), I think it's fair to call that a pretty obvious copyright violation.

Of course, there's no real point in arguing about this. I thought this was an obvious copyright violation that warranted deletion, you disagreed. You unilaterally opposed the speedy deletion, as is your right, and changed the copyright violation tag to a DR. The system works as intended. Commons lives another day.

While I should and will keep your advice in mind that speedy deletion is only for obvious, non-controversial cases (and, truthfully, I have messed up on this front in the past—just not, I think, in this case), I will continue to copyvio tag files similar to this one unless there is a policy/guideline/consensus somewhere that what I am doing is out of line. If you (or literally anyone else) ever disagrees, all it takes is a few presses of the button to start a regular DR. Not exactly a big deal.  Mysterymanblue  05:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

PD-because: where do we go from here?

Thank you for your kind remarks, MysterymanBlue.  :-)

Are four people in favour enough?

How does an administrator or template editor get involved in modifying the template?

Given the length of our discussions, I'd be happy to write a short summary to minimise their reviewing time.

Advice would be appreciated. Best wishes, Simon.  —  SCHolar44 (talk) 00:43, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

@SCHolar44: Once discussion has died down (which it has), you can make a new edit request on the talk page for PD-because, linking to the discussion at Commons:Village pump/Proposals. Writing a summary of the discussion should not be necessary, though you should describe the changes you want to be made and why. Five people in support (your support counts as well!) should be sufficient to change the template, especially given how long the discussion has remained on the proposals page. Thanks again for taking the lead with this and being very open to feedback.  Mysterymanblue  01:39, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

👍🏻 SCHolar44 (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for making the fantasy flag DR category

There are many more to be added, in particular I would like to alert your attention to "Commons:Deletion requests/File:VPP-flag.png", "Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Vietnam Reform Party.png", and "Commons:Deletion requests/File:VRP flying-flag.gif", where user "AnonMoos" (from "Commons:Deletion requests/File:Abbasid flag.png" fame, which for context I do think was a good DR) actually provided photographic evidence for these flags and the nominator literally replied with that photographs of events by the political organisations concerned aren't good sources. I really hope that this "fantasy symbol hysteria" will go away as it's actively stopping people from educating others about these fake flags. Thanks for tagging DR's with that category. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:20, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: It's my pleasure... I hope to consolidate all these DRs into one place so people who are interested in them do not have to search out each one individually. Thank you for adding the category to a few other pages—since I am busy in real life right now, it's really helpful to have someone else categorizing these DRs. As for the cases you've pointed out, they're pretty interesting. I wonder why the closing nominator closed them as they did (the lack of a closing summary is a bit annoying). Have you looked at COM:UDR for these files?  Mysterymanblue  18:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh man, I wish that I had infinite time, I mostly just started looking through the uploads by user "Namkhanh02" and noticed that most were nominated with basically the same nomination and by the same user. I have advocated for categorising Deletion Requests for years but people seem unwilling to do it, at the English-language Wikipedia all new Articles for Deletion are bot-sorted into categories (including "open" versions so people can watch their expertise) but here (some) people seem actively hostile to the thought.

As for undeletion, well my experience is that an administrative action is often seen as "irreversible" and decisions are rarely reversed, regardless of evidence or argumentation presented (heck, look at the comments by user "AnonMoos" in the original DR's), honestly I wasn't even planning on spending much time on the Wikimedia Commons but found out in the morning that the opportunity to simply look at a file at an UnDR I filed three (3) months ago was closes with a not done and an explicit statement that I should stop asking for a description of the deleted file (as I suspect that the supposed "fantasy coat of arms" was likely an accurate depiction of a military insignia, but as nobody would give even a simple description of what the file was I can't know). I even asked with illustrations if the deleted files resembled some images I found on the internet and got no response, well, not one other than "stop asking what the file looked like". Did I want to waste three (3) months of my life waiting for something that could have taken literally any admin three (3) minutes? Nope, but with how often I came across Việtnamese symbols that were previously deleted being actual symbols I found that the best solution is to just circumvent the whole undeletion process and re-upload them. Though in case of Viet Nam many fantasy flags circulate on the internet and I and a few other users are researching how to debunk them as they appear in prestigious academic publications (University of Washington) and in national museums of military history, yet because they are fantasies they keep getting deleted here, hence I can't actually illustrate which flags are fake.

I don't even get why I am now already waiting two (2) months for having a collection of multiple real flags undeleted as well, there are neither scope nor copyright © issues. (see "Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Out of process deletions by INeverCry (Uploads by 南文會館)" / Permalink) My issue is that the most commonly cited claim is that the Wikimedia Commons shouldn't deciding on things that other Wikimedia websites should be discussing about yet if a file gets deleted here it cannot be used (or even discussed) anywhere else. I don't get why we don't have templates like "{{User flag}}" or "{{User symbol}}" that differentiate between disputed files and files of certain user attribution. Though such a category would be a magnet for deletionists... --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:59, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

As for content disputes, a "Citation needed" tag is sufficient, like "{{Dispited coat of arms}}" "{{Disputed coat of arms}}", I don't get why so many people jump to deletion rather than tagging. Anyone who seriously researches a topic would find that tag, there are claims that "nobody reads those" but why even include copyright © notices then in the first place? Most arguments in favour of deletion tend to ignore any educational use cases and just go "If I can't see the value then it has no value". Another user told me why it's so hard to get museums and other educational institutions to donate to the Wikimedia Commons, it is because there is an ever-vigilant group of people always looking for more things to delete based on supposed "scope" issues, this is not only based on the file itself but also the name, descriptions, and categories and if a user does one minor thing wrong others jump in to nominate for deletion. I've seen 19th (nineteenth) century books get deleted because of "a bad source" (that wasn't even a bad source) and no admin ever double checked to see if the nomination was valid. Improving the Wikimedia Commons is an uphill battle, making it (even) worse is a snowball that just keeps rolling down the frozen mountain ⛰. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:09, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello Mysterymanblue,

Regarding removing flags from articlepace, I do it myself all the time, the whole reason I started getting into flags on the Commons a few months ago was because I was researching the legitimacy of certain flags, Wikipedia should not be hosting disinformation, but one thing I commonly found was that flags that were sourced on Wikipedia were successfully nominated for deletion on the Commons as “fantasies” which I found unsettling, especially since these files were locally sourced on Wikipedia but badly sourced on the Commons. At times I think that no party actually investigated what they were doing and I especially hate it how actual evidence of the usage of those flags, evidence presented by a user that has nominated their fair share of fantasy flags nonetheless, was ignored. I share your belief of what the Wikimedia Commons should be and in many ways this is already policy, but the way these policies are (selectively) applied is what unsettles me. We actually have tags for disputed files and tags for calling into question what is and isn't factual and local communities often have additional information in languages used to discuss those topics. A German user nominated a Vietnamese flag for deletion that was well-documented in French, why should the Commons have the final say here?

tThe strongest factor in what content gets and doesn't get uploaded here, personal tastes of admins and patrollers, copyright violations are rightfully deleted but it’s weird to me how many culinary dishes on Wikipedia have no files even if they are omnipresent, a simple web search reveals millions of images but none at the Commons. This is true for almost everything, shops, businesses, Etc. A lot of users consider uploads of companies by new users to be “spam” and “advertisements” but if a shop has a page on Wikipedia and no image then it is likely that such an image was deleted because of this mentality. We should be welcoming companies to donate, a few years ago an animation company donated thousands of animated figures and this was controversial at upload for anti-“spam” reasons and then the uploader wanted them deleted and a low resolution version was kept satisfying nobody. Dewiki even used a lot of these animations in templates. WC has no stock photographers, it has no stock music, it has almost nothing that modern educational presentations actually use because a lot of these images are wrongly considered to be “out of scope”. A stock photo of a young woman in a lab coat doing an experiment will get deleted as a “selfie” but when looking at science newspapers such images dominate the illustrations. Like with that barnstar, it was "COM:INUSE" and survived multiple deletion attempts, the nominator essentially said “I don’t like it” (I personally find it tasteless too) but this was accepted.

I copied these from my reply e-mail as I prefer to discuss such topics on-wiki, but I have no issue if you choose to reply via e-mail. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:04, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Also regarding the Vietnamese flags that were locally uploaded to the Viwiki, the Wikimedia Commons has a clearly stated mission to be the central media repository for other Wikimedia websites, but it's clear that a lot of admins don't want it to fulfill this mission and become "content curators" themselves. That is the trend that I've been noticing for years now, I believe that free files should have no business on Wikipedia's as local uploads, but if the Wikimedia Commons isn't fulfilling its duty to host free files you get this epedemic of local uploads of free files at other Wiki's. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment, It might be wise to split this category into "Kept", "Deleted", and "Restored" like similar categories, that way we can see which discussions are open and what argumentation was used in previous discussions and their results. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Threatening behaviour

I can't help but shake the negative feeling for that link you shared with me in that e-mail, that sounds like a direct threat and especially with libelous claims that I am a "serial trouble-maker" and "trolling on the interwebz" because I called out admins that ignore policies like "COM:INUSE". This sounds like they are preparing an indefinite block over challenging their actions, also note that he got involved because I rightly pointed out that deleting in use Wikimedia project images would make other such images liable for deletion because the exact policy the Teahouse logo is allowed under is "COM:INUSE", if someone uploads a Teahouse logo nobody uses it will likely get deleted. The issue I have here is that insults are 100% (one-hundred percent) acceptable when they come from admins (even towards other admins) but I have seen regular users get permanently banned for less (for example Alexis Jazz got banned over an "Old Betsy" joke). I find it odd that they claim that I am "not here to educate" while I have uploaded tens of thousands of files and specifically questioned their actions based on the interpretation of policy, yet these users that are actively working against making the Wikimedia Commons a central file repository for the other Wikimedia websites with their Deletionist tendencies are considered to be "educating". 10.000.000+ edits user "Fæ" left after similar insults from another user. To me it is clear that these people are not here to educate, which is why they don't engage with users and can only speak in deletions and blocks, I would argue that such behaviour is a net negative for the project and I wouldn't be surprised if they are the reason why this website isn't seeing a growth in users to be expected for such a large project.

But I won't file an undeletion request for that barnstar, even though it's notable enough for Wikipedia and was legitimately used for almost a decade on around a dozen user talk pages and consensus was against deletion for years, but of course questioning admin action is "trolling". Yes, I know bullies like them win if you give in, but I don't want to risk being able to upload Classical Chinese works or finish the project on cash coins for a barnstar I find personally disgusting 🤢 to look at. My issue isn't that users like them are around, it is that they are essentially above all rules, they don't have to be civil, collegial, AGF, or justify their deletions if they breach policies. This website is best to just avoid people like them altogether unless you're forced to deal with them. Although I am sure while them insulting me is perfectly fine, saying these things will likely be seen as "unacceptable" behaviour for simply questioning their actions or reasoning. I also find it odd that another admin can be called "stupid" without consequences, I genuinely wonder if such language would be acceptable from a new user or basically any other user. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:48, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Offensive and rude, yes, but I'm not sure about threatening. I think if they're planning on banning you, you'll hear about it first. I think they're just upset—especially since it sounds like someone recently suffered a personal loss. So I wouldn't expect anything to come out of it.  Mysterymanblue  02:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

It was a clear threat, "serial trouble maker" I would ask her to point to even a single Administrators' Noticeboard thread where I was the issue, admins don't need actual reasons to block people and people like them. Why are admins exempt from civility? Admins don't actually care about contributions or educational content, the system only rewards those that seek deletion. I wouldn't be surprised if their definition of "educational" is deleting content. Why do you think that this website which has images seen by billions of people only has a few thousand contributors, this is by design, by people like them. Why should I tolerate such insults with the knowledge that people like them are above the rules? Criticism is not tolerated, asking why admins don't actually follow policies is "trolling". Why do you think "Fæ" left? It's because content creators are disposable while deleters are valuable.

This is a threat, they want me to leave this website forever for pointing out that they don't follow policies and ignore consensus. "I think they're just upset—especially since it sounds like someone recently suffered a personal loss." in other words admin feelings are important but no other users'. "Wikimedia Commons is not therapy" for everyone else. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:50, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

My issue with a lot of this is that I have more than double the number of edits of both those people combined, I have had historians, scholars, and museums thank me for uploading valuable historical works to the Wikimedia Commons, yet I am the one who is "not here to educate" while literally their only "contributions" to this project is deleting stuff and insulting people, yet I am "trolling people on the interwebz"?! "COM:CIVILITY" is just a suggestion to these people that only applies to others. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 10:59, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I have seen people like Alexis Jazz get bullied away for criticising admin action as well. Excuse me, but I simply can't let this go, this is a clear threat and why shouldn't I perceive it as such? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 11:02, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Undeletion requests

If you want to file undeletion requests for the flags discussed above you can, by preference I don't want to deal with that page unless I have to. I requested undeletion for a file with a literal source that described a file, an admin closed it essentially saying that I shouldn't ask admins how the file looked like, then another admin tells me that it looks exactly like the source I provided. Of course questions for justifications get ignored (remember that admins are never accountable for their actions and don't have to answer to anything), which is why I highly doubt getting those files undeleted is worth the time investing in. If no admin bothered looking at the photographs user "AnonMoos" provided then, I highly doubt that the same arguments from a DR would hold up in an UnDR. This is why it might be best for the Vietnamese-language Wikipedia to host these files locally, slmething which I principally oppose, but the culture here essentially forces it to do. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 20:53, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: I will probably not be nominating them from UDR because I don't have time, and it tends to just inflame tensions and get nothing done. Even though I disagree with the rationale in many cases, it's a battle I'll have to fight another day.  Mysterymanblue  02:03, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the great pleasure I received while working with the audios you uploaded on Wikimedia Commons!

 Mysterymanblue , I've decided to continue our conversation here. I'm so glad to read your comment on my work! Thank you for that! I just finished the transcription for the last (but not least!) audio file uploaded by you - Final of II act from "Die Fledermaus" by J. Strauss. And some words and phrases are again missing. I hope with the time some people will fill the subtitles up.

Also, I would leave a comment about the audio files placement on the Wikipedia pages I've noticed FYI. I didn't dig much deeper onto the situation, but I noticed that some audio players with your audio are limited of functions (for example, "CC" button) because of reduced size when placed in some templates or for some other reasons, I don't know, actually. Probably, in this situation some users could even don't know about CC availability if there is no "CC" button.

Thank you for uploading the United States Air Force Band performances and requesting closed captioning. I really enjoyed learning them and working with them! Please have a wonderful end of the week!

All the best, Pacha Tchernof (talk) 05:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Pacha Tchernof, sorry for not getting back to you sooner. Thank you so much again for all your work on adding these subtitles! I am glad to see that you enjoyed the music files. I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to with the missing "CC" button - I am able to access captions on every sound file that has them. Could you give an example of what you mean? As for File:King Champagne - Singing Sergeants - United States Air Force Band.mp3, I just fixed up the lyrics. Best,  Mysterymanblue  01:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Mysterymanblue, I'm that sorry for my delayed responce on your message that no one could ever image how much! It was extremly hard to find an example of the file in the small-sized media player I've mentionned above! But I've found. In German Wikipedia, for example, you can see it for the song "My Country, ’Tis of Thee", and the "CC" button is missing, although the subtitles appear when the "Play" button is pressed. The button doesn't appear even after changing the whole page percentage display.

I'm remembering that my wonder in the situation with the s-s media player was about the situation when any file has several bunches of subtitles. Would the button still not presented in the small-sized media player? If not, how to switch the language of subtitles. It seems that I was struggling in this kind of situation, but it probably was a way too far ago. — Pacha Tchernof (talk) 19:19, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Pacha Tchernof: When I go to that article on the German Wikipedia, I see the CC button. Does this have to do with the new HTML5 video player, which you can turn on or turn off in your settings under "beta features"?  Mysterymanblue  21:57, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mysterymanblue: , nope, the new HTML5 video player is not involved (and isn't turned on for me). It was about the old one (MediaWiki player 2010). I'm going to check all about the new HTMPL5 player. Thanks! — Pacha Tchernof (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

thanks!

Thanks for adding comments to several DR's such as this. Being a still beginning admin an not an expert on US copyright, this helps a lot in making the final decision. I asked for help earlier on these DR's, but nobody responded. Even the nominator said he did not have enough knowledge. So you are being very helpful! Elly (talk) 14:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

FM Promotion

Play media

This file has been promoted to Featured media! The file File:Jennifer Doudna Nobel Prize medal presentation.webm, which you nominated at Commons:Featured media candidates/File:Jennifer Doudna Nobel Prize medal presentation.webm, has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another file, please do so.

/FeaturedMediaBot (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

FM Promotion

Play media

This file has been promoted to Featured media! The file File:Lift Every Voice and Sing - United States Navy Band.webm, which you nominated at Commons:Featured media candidates/File:Lift Every Voice and Sing - United States Navy Band.webm, has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another file, please do so.

/FeaturedMediaBot (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, Dear Patroller!

---

Counter Vandalism Unit

Hi Mysterymanblue,

You now have the Patroller right and may call yourself a patroller! Please take a moment to read the updated Commons:Patrol to learn how Patrolling works and how we use it to fight vandalism.

As you know already, the patrolling functionality is enabled for all edits, not just for new-page creations. This enables us to keep track of, for example, edits made by anonymous users here on Commons.

We could use your help at the Counter Vandalism Unit. For example by patrolling an Anonymous-edits checklist and checking a day-part.

If you have any questions please leave a message on the CVU talkpage or ask for help on IRC in #wikimedia-commons.

rubin16 (talk) 06:51, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

MOTD Notification

Play media

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐ File:Jennifer Doudna Nobel Prize medal presentation.webm, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:01, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

MOTD Notification

Play media

⭐ A file you uploaded is on the main page! ⭐ File:Lift Every Voice and Sing - United States Navy Band.webm, that you uploaded, is on the main page today. Thank you for your contributions to this project.

//EatchaBot (talk) 00:00, 11 November 2021 (UTC)