User talk:Billinghurst

"Da mihi basium"

This user has an alternate account named SDrewthbot.

If you are looking to get my attention, you can use a {{Ping}} that will trip my Notifications place a {{Talkback}} at the bottom of my talk page. This is big and bold and will ensure that I see it and respond.

Archives 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

deletion request

Dear Billinghurst,

please delete File:Megabunus_sp_♂_adult.jpg and First_Local_Verified_Observation_Record

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elena Regina (talk • contribs) 18:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Question about closure of Mother of the seals

You recently closed a deletion discussion about a photograph taken by a colonizer of a likely coerced nude indigenous woman in favor of keeping the image by stating [t]he dignity standard would not apply to a historical photo. I would like to ask for clarification about how you arrived at this interpretation, that the guideline doesn't apply to historical photos. COM:DIGNITY does not seem to mention exceptions for historical photographs and emphasizes that that portion of the guideline is not about the legal complications that pertain to the privacy rights of living individuals but rather about how decency and respect for human dignity may influence the decision whether to host an image above that required by the law. This seemed like a case in which the provenance of an image may taint its use irredeemably. Hydrangeans (talk) 18:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

The wording of that guidance is for contemporary and personal submissions, please read and cite the whole guidance in context. As an administrator I have to assess the guidance against the purpose. The image is widely available in the public domain, we are not talking a sole copy of the image. It is not our job as administrators to reinterpret and censor history, and as such we have to look at the image in the corpus of the collection with its like works.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I have added to my closing remark special:diff/867574829 in light of your request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Italian discussion

Hi, can I ask you for your opinion on this discussion? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bar_italiano#API_e_IP The two categories were moved without consensus, and furthermore (as explained in the discussion) for reasons that personally seem wrong to me. I'm asking you, because you had already intervened for another category shift without consent, and no one else intervened in the discussion. I would like to have an administrator's opinion regarding both the method (lack of consensus) and the motivations (a more subjective question, which deserves further opinions). Moxmarco (talk) 13:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Moxmarco: I think that getting one of the administrators who is fluent in Italian to that page would be more appropriate. You can find someone via the list on Commons:List of administrators by language.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion request

Please @Billinghurst: , kindly assist in closing the deletion nominations for these two photos: File:Ann Jane Arko Anny Photoshoot in Yellow Top in April 12 2015.jpg and File:Anny (Ann Jane Arko) on the Runway of Mercedes Benz Fashion Week.jpg Both photos in question portrays a model who lacks notable recognition or relevance within Wikipedia’s scope. They don't contribute meaningfully to any relevant article or topic. The photographer remains unknown or not an established artist in the industry as well. The the photo was uploaded for self-promotion. Moreover, it's a copyvio. Several photos uploaded by the user have been already deleted. Wikipedia aims to provide accurate and valuable information to its readers, and including images of individuals without notable recognition detracts from this objective. Newrobertsparks (talk) 14:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Newrobertsparks: Please don't prosecute the case on my user talk page. They have DRs, and that is enough to get the community's attention and processes.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Elena Regina

What did she do? Trade (talk) 22:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Problematic only. User keeps top loading here requests for action that don't need to be put on an admin's user talk page (as collectively managed by our processes). I'm away and don't have the ability to babysit. Seems non-English as first language and may need someone in her language to explain what I couldn't, when I tried.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

File:Industrieschool de Wiekslag aan de Talingstraat, 1956.jpg

Hi Billinghurst, thanks for all your work here. I wonder if you could reconsider this refert. I uploaded the same image twice from the same source, the original (6.5 months ago) and the trimmed version (I uploaded yesterday). There seem to be no reason to keep the untrimmed version, but maybe I am mistaken about the Wikimedia policy. -- Mdd (talk) 10:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@Mdd: The file does not qualify for speedy deletion as duplicate for numbers of reasons. You can nominate it for a standard deletion per the polich, though I don't see any issue with both versions being available and letting users decide which they wish to use. Free choice is a marvellous thing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanx, this is fine with me and I will keep this rationale in mind. Best regards, Mdd (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Removal of files from Category:Höltigbaum

I placed the files intentionally in the disambiguation category that they can be found and maybe identified and sorted into the correct category. Now they are totally uncategorized. GPSLeo (talk) 18:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@GPSLeo: Please do not categorise to disambiguation categories, that is totally against the practice. The purpose is to empty those categories. If required, please create the category for where they belong. If it is not known to how they should be categorised, then they probably are lacking educational purpose and should be considered for deletion. If you cannot get them exact to such a term, then look to use the other aspects of the country which apply.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @GPSLeo: Or you can create a maintenance category somewhere appropriate under Category:Unidentified locations. - Jmabel ! talk 01:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion requests

Why is File:Bradley square mall entrance 1991-2012.jpg and related images not eligible for speedy deletion? As the original uploader, I'd like them deleted. Bneu2013 (talk) 23:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Bneu2013: 2017 files. Please reread Com:CSD for the criteria for speedy deletion, it fails. Take-backs have a very short shelf-life.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok. I thought I've had another one from that time deleted. The issue is, I think they may be copyright violations. To the best of my knowledge, they came from Flickr (I probably incorrectly attributed them to myself), but someone else has determined that a lot of my uploads from this time belong to Google. I can't confirm that, but I couldn't find them on Flickr anymore, and there's no reason to have this many images of these subjects anyway. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Bneu2013: I doubt they belong to Google. They are not eligible for speedy on the criteria you provided. Com:Deletion requests is the process now.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Another user has since confirmed that all of the Greenway photos have come from Google maps. Since I can't find evidence of them being freely licensed elsewhere, they need to be deleted. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Why did you delete this file?

Hi, you deleted the file at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dom Jones.jpg. Why? What do you mean, "no suitable license to keep at Commons"? The file is my own work. It's from a video I took. I linked the full video to prove that. What's the deal? Was there a rule change that I'm not aware of where people are no longer allowed to upload their own work to Commons? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 22:04, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @BottleOfChocolateMilk: : are you saying that YouTube user alethiology is you? Because https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfTBAVeyNbo doesn't offer a free license, and https://www.youtube.com/@alethiology8321 doesn't give any indication of being connected to your WMF account. If you fix one of those two, then the image can presumably be undeleted. - Jmabel ! talk 22:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Yes, that account does belong to me. I have added a Creative Commons license. Note that the video is unlisted and has 9 views. It's my video and my channel. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@BottleOfChocolateMilk: thanks! @Billinghurst: may I assume that as the deleting admin, you would now be willing to undelete this, instead of making this user go through a formal UNDEL request? - Jmabel ! talk 05:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@BottleOfChocolateMilk: : undeleted File:Dom Jones.jpg and amended the deletion discussiopn. Please update the license to use {{YouTube CC-BY}} and please update the source to point to the work at youtube. This will also allow us to validate the license as being at youtube at the time, so if it ever is removed, we can utilise our verification process. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@BottleOfChocolateMilk: just to be clear, you should like link your YouTube video as the source, and you should include the license of the YouTube video as at least one of the available licenses. - Jmabel ! talk 14:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

File deleted by mistake - not a copyright violation

Hello. The File:Peter Jordan em 2022.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation and was deleted, but it wasn't a copyright violation. I linked the YouTube video source, which is under a Creative Commons license. I specifically put in the license which the image was under, both in English and in Brazilian Portuguese, so that this wouldn't happen. Pato ilógico (talk) 01:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

@Pato ilógico: I checked the file at YouTube and there was no permissible licence showing. When there is a suitable licence, please use the undelete process to have the file retrieved.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)