User talk:Yann

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

---

/archives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 6364 65 66 67

• User:Yann/Valued images, 2009-2014, 2015-2016, 2017-2019
• User:Yann/Quality images, 2005-2014, 2015-2016, 2017-2023
• User:Yann/Featured images, 2009-2018, 2019-2023, 2024-2025
• User:Yann/Featured media

God is busy, may I help you? / Dieu est occupé, puis-je vous aider?

You can leave me a message in English or French, at the bottom. Click here. Yann 22:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Apology regarding copyright violation

I am very sorry for the copyright violations. I am a new contributor and I didn't fully understand the strict copyright rules here. I want to clarify that I had no bad intentions or any commercial purpose. I only wanted to provide visual context for the articles to help readers understand the topic better. I thought providing the source link was enough. I now realize that I was wrong. I promise that I will not upload any more images like this. I have learned my lesson. Please forgive my mistake and do not block my account. Thank you. L'empereur Napoléon (talk) 15:29, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Un peu à la bourre

...mais jamais trop tard (en janvier) !

🌟 Bonne année -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:34, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

A propos de File:Rainbowfish scale.jpg

Sur File:Rainbowfish scale.jpg que tu as supprimé, j'aimerais reprendre la discussion, si possible sur ma page où je t'ai répondu en détail. Mon argument est que c'est une illustration technique (technique d'impression et de façonnage), et pas artistique. Si tu n'es pas d'accord, j'aimerais si possible que tu argumentes, et qu'on puisse porter le débat ailleurs, en toute bonne foi. Je ne connais pas la procédure sur Commons, je ne sais pas s'il faut remonter à la Pompe, ou s'il y a un lieu plus adapté. Amicalement, GAllegre (talk) 08:11, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

@GAllegre: Bonjour, Les illustrations techniques ont aussi un droit d'auteur. Tu peux demander la restauration sur la page COM:UDR, mais je doute que cette image soit restaurée sans une licence libre de l'auteur. Yann (talk) 09:22, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Ce n'est pas une "illustration technique" au sens de dessin technique, mon expression était peut-être maladroite. C'est un scan illustrant une technique d'impression. L'intérêt n'est pas dans la création graphique (aspect artistique), mais dans le processus technique qui a permis son impression (le marquage à chaud). C'est le résultat d'une chaîne de production. En tous les cas, merci pour le lien, je vais sans doute effectivement demander sa restauration. GAllegre (talk) 12:55, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry and status of delist-and-replace handling

Hi Yann, I just want to say sorry for my somewhat confusing comment in this nomination. I asked Terragio67 how he wants to proceed, but I did not see that Terragio67’s photo was not nominated by him, but by you. So it was and is up to you to decide whether you want to proceed with the nomination (and do the delisting of the other version later), or to replace it by a delist-and-replace nomination; and it was unnecessary/wrong that I asked Terragio67. Sorry! But it seems now it is OK.

Apropos of this a little hint. I promised to you that I would implement the handling of delist-and-replace nominations in FPCBot in the autumn, but I could not complete the project at that time because people urgently requested other features first. Right now I still need to test another feature with must be added first. (I will tell you about that feature per e-mail when it is complete.) After that I will move forward to delist-and-replace nominations. I already have a proof-of-concept implementation and it works, but polishing it and testing will take a lot of time, because there is always the danger to break other things. But I hope that this spring we will finally see the bot handle delist-and-replace nominations. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 13:16, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

@Aristeas: Hi, No problem. Thanks a lot for your work on FPCBot. There are very few delist-and-replace nominations, so no hurry. Best, Yann (talk) 09:19, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Yasuyuki suzuki.png

Hi Yann, I'm beginner to Wikimedia. I've been asked by someone in a photo to include their photo on Wikipedia. What should I do? What license should I choose? Wikimedia is confusing and I'm having trouble understanding it. Tamarobi (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

@Tamarobi: Hi, Before adding a license, you need the formal written permission from the copyright holder, who is by default the photographer, not the subject. If you have this permission, please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:18, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate your advice

I've been trying to help the uploader with a draft on enWiki. I think I have now reached the maximum I can do. The final piece is very much their piece to put into position 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:05, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, It seems that this user is the heirs of the author, so there may be a way to get a free license. Yann (talk) 17:08, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I think they would appreciate direct advice from you. Compared with your knowledge I am an infant here! I try my best, but I am still learning. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:10, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Burkard Schliessmann in Paulskirche Frankfurt.jpg

You unfortunately have deleted this file. I confirm, that I'm the license holder of this work and therefore I ask to refresh this pictureǃ Elvirtuoso (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

@Elvirtuoso: Hi, The EXIF data says: Copyright holder: Stefanie Kösling Fotografie, so we need a formal written permission from her. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

How can we upload this cofirmation? Elvirtuoso (talk) 20:55, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

No, see below. Yann (talk) 20:59, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Burkard Schliessmann Interview.ogg

You want to delete this file. I officially confirm, that I'm the License Holder of this work. Elvirtuoso (talk) 17:46, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

@Elvirtuoso: Hi, We need a formal written permission from Burkard Schliessmann. Please see COM:VRT for the procedure. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:26, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

How can we upload this confirmation? Elvirtuoso (talk) 20:54, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

@Elvirtuoso: No, this has to be done by email. That way, a record is kept, and confidential information are kept confidential. Yann (talk) 20:58, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

I have done this and sent an email yesterday. I confirmed that officially I'm the License Holder of this file. Elvirtuoso (talk) 07:11, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

About the mass deletion in RFCU

Hello Yann, would you mind restore those photos that contain camera metadata? I noticed that some socks uploaded photos with complete EXIF data. They are unlikely to be copyright infringements. Additionally, according to the respective abuse logs, four accounts have their email confirmed, which seems somewhat redundant for sockpuppetry. I therefore suspect those may be different individuals using a shared network. Even if my judgment is incorrect, keeping them will also help identify any new sockpuppets. Thank you. 0x0a (talk) 18:21, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

@0x0a: Hi, If these come from different persons, then OK, but if they come from the same LTA, then no. I think that deleting files is the best way to deter sockpuppets for continuing their disruption. Yann (talk) 18:24, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

At least keep those good photos as samples; otherwise, it will be difficult to identify new sockpuppets. Because I can't see the deleted photos. 0x0a (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for cleaning up. You are very quick! It's a bit of pity Bhanusweety7788 is inconclusive. But I feel I have seen the watch before in the other socks' uploads (déjà vu). Would you have a look at those deleted uploads. I think this could be a breakthrough point. Thanks. 0x0a (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

@0x0a: Yes, I also had a look at Bhanusweety7788's uploads. I checked a few but couldn't find a copy elsewhere. They are very small without EXIF, so they are indeed suspicious. I let a warning with a message. If Bhanusweety7788 doesn't answer, a mass DR may be needed. Yann (talk) 17:30, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Bill-hill-headshot.jpg

Uploaded with the same title as the one you recently deleted. I *think* it's a different photo, but I don't remember anymore. It appears the metadata was altered so as to make that difficult to determine. One thing is certain, though: the background isn't what Alaska looks like in January, so the other details in the description should be viewed with skepticism. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 05:15, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Yes, it is the same picture, but cropped. Deleted, user warned. Thanks for reporting. Yann (talk) 07:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Gheorghe Surdu în tinerețe.png

Related DR: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gheorghe Surdu în tinerețe.png

Why do you close the UDR so quickly especially when two Romanians said that RAN was wrong User:Pafsanias and User:Turbojet? RAN presented no evidence that this photograph was published in accordance with Romanian law before 2009. Unless, there is some community decision that we only apply American pre-1978 publication standards to all pre-1978 photographs that I am unaware of, and if this is so, there should be documentation of this somewhere that is easy to find. Now I admit that I know little about Romanian law, but I do not understand this decision. Abzeronow (talk) 07:36, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

As a long-time VRT volunteer for the Romanian Wikipedia, I confirm that the statement "When the negative (the actual creative work) is copied to a print and transferred to the sitter, the creative work has been made public, and the copyright timer starts" is not the one in D321/1956, valid at that time, and the wording in D321/1956 does not have the meaning stated by RAN. Turbojet (talk) 09:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi, We usually assume that publication occurs when a photographer leaves the photographer's custody. I think that's the case in all European countries, and I don't see why it would be different in Romania. It is difficult to believe that a 1950 picture was not published until 2009. Also I closed the UDR more than 24h after Turbojet's last comment. Yann (talk) 16:34, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Could you provide quotations from any legal documents supporting this belief? Across Europe, the meaning is strongly influenced by EU copyright law, especially the InfoSoc Directive (2001/29/EC). Therefore, in most European countries, “publishing a photograph” means making it available to the public, not just leaving the custody of the photographer. In EU law, publication is about public availability, not loss of control. --Pafsanias (talk) 17:05, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

For what I could find, publication is defined as "copies distributed to the public". There is no lower limit of what constitutes the public. And unless it is specifically said otherwise, giving a copy to a customer constitutes publication. Yann (talk) 17:14, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry to insist, but this doesn't apply to legal terms. Kindly see: The transmission of a protected work as evidence to a court is not a 'communication to the public' Pafsanias (talk) 17:27, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

OK, but I think that RAN and User:Claudiupt have good and valid points in the DR. Overall, after considering all possibilities, the claim that it was never published before 2009 seems farfetched and very unlikely. And honestly, I don't understand your insistence to delete this picture when in most probabilities, it is in the public domain. Yann (talk) 17:52, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Nor do I understand the claim that this photo is worth restoring (except for the sake of the argument). It is not used in any article and the page w:ro:Gheorghe Surdu has been deleted months ago for lack of notability. But even if the image would be necessary to illustrate any other page on Romanian Wikipedia, we have the possibility to upload it locally under fair use, without risking to violate copyright rules. --Pafsanias (talk) 18:12, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but since RAN was the only one in the UDR who wanted restoration, it should have been left open longer. I know the policy of us generally assuming publication around creation, but this is also an exception in that the uploader (Claudiaupt) in the second DR said that they could not prove publication before 2009, and the circumstances seemed that this photograph was not made publicly available in the 1950s, but only in 2009. RAN's comments are also specific to a U.S. court case about pre-1978 publication and should be not construed to be legal in countries that have fully adopted the Berne Convention (something that my country, the United States, has not done). I deleted the photograph because due caution led me to believe that under European and Romanian law as related to by Pafsanias that the freedom of the photo was in significant doubt (and I set the undeletion terms to be consistent with EU law, 70 years after publication for an anonymous author). As an unpublished work until 2009, it would enter the US public domain in 2068 if 1947 was the date of creation. Abzeronow (talk) 00:16, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Since RAN and Yann are convinced that for European countries "communicating a photograph to the public" is equivalent to "leaving the custody of the creator", I think we should probably bring this question to the attention of the community at the Village pump/Copyright, in order to be discussed and a clear conclusion to be reached. It is a far too important issue, which obviously does not concern only the present case. --Pafsanias (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

If the date of publication only matters for URAA, it is even a lesser reason for deletion. It is to the nominator to prove that URAA applies. Yann (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

This is not about URAA, but about the right interpretation of the Romanian law. The arguments for undeletion were flawed. If there are no other good reasons, could you please delete the File:Gheorghe Surdu în tinerețe.png, and also its derivative work File:Gheorghe Surdu (1917-1983) portrait.png uploaded by RAN? --Pafsanias (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Suppose by a moment than it was first published in 2009 (which I doubt). What does it change? The author is unknown, and the copyright of a picture taken in 1950 expired almost everywhere (except in USA) according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Romania ({{PD-RO-1956}}): (c) artistic photographs taken before 1991. So yes, this is all about URAA. That's the sole remaining issue: whether it is in the public domain in USA. Yann (talk) 09:27, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

The document Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Romania, that you cite above, only says (erroneously) that the copyright tag ({{PD-RO-1956}}) should be used for artistic photographs taken before 1991, which is obviously not the case, and this is explicitly mentioned on that tag: Do not use this template for photographs! Use {{PD-RO-photo}} instead! According to the correct template, and especially according to the Romanian law (no. 8/1996), this photo doesn't meet the necessary conditions in order to be in the public domain in Romania. --Pafsanias (talk) 10:23, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

OK, I redeleted the files, mentioned this discussion in the DR, and removed this mention in the copyright pages for Romania, in English and French. Could you please check other languages? Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:12, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I am sure this will contribute to a better understanding of photograph copyrights in Romania. Pafsanias (talk) 21:20, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Sketches of ecclesiastical coats of arms

Hey!

I saw that you were the one to delete the Category:SVG sketches of cardinals of Italy yesterday. While i am not familiar with https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion, i do not see a reason why you would have done so. While the term "sketches of ecclesiastical coats of arms" might not have been 100% correct, i do not feel that it is the right way in a community project to simply delete the cat without any replacement while it was obvious what the intention of the cat was.

Just wanted to let you know about this. An answer would be highly appreciated. Cf. also https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kontributor_2K.

Best regards, Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 15:47, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

@Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü: Hi, This category never existed on Commons. I usually delete categories because they are empty. But there is Category:Coats of arms of cardinals of Italy. Yann (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yann My fault, you deleted Category:SVG sketches of coats of arms of cardinals of Italy. Anyways, the point i wanna make here remains the same: It would be cool if you could check whether it made sense that somebody emptied the cat before you simply delete it. Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 16:39, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Remove redundant right

Hi @Yann, plz remove JJPMaster's redundant autopatrol. I just granted them LR. Thank you. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 17:26, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. _signed, Aafi ^(talk) 18:03, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Admins from Indonesia?

Are there any here? I cannot figure out the language at all and images from Indonesia go without categories. Krok6kola (talk) 19:50, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

@Krok6kola: Please see here: Commons:List of administrators by language. Yann (talk) 20:23, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Then the answer is "no". Indonesians upload many images; it is a large country. On Meta Indonesians have their own system of organizing images and do not interact with the Commons. Krok6kola (talk) 21:27, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Unban request

Yann. Hey Yann, I got File:Clinton on his birthday deleted and I was inquired as to whether or not I could be unbanned?

-Bdblakely29 Bdblakley29 (talk) 05:04, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Starting to re-read Gandhi.

Definitely been thinking about Gandhi a lot over last few days, and reading Gandhi's thoughts on violence and nonviolence in light of the state murder of Alex Pretti. I probably will go through Young India since Gandhi gives a lot of his thoughts in that book, any other recommendations as far as Gandhi's works? (I definitely do admire Gandhi as a philosopher). Abzeronow (talk) 05:40, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

@Abzeronow: Hi, Great to know! Gandhi wrote a lot. Do you know that I had started to published the whole on Wikisource: s:en:The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. Now on hold. I am too busy on Commons. ;o) His autobiography is very interesting. His economic philosophy is thought-provoking. Also I love the film. Best, Yann (talk) 11:11, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Deleted in error?

I notice that you deleted this file, but there was already a deletion discussion here - the uploader seems OK to me; I cannot compare the file because I don't know what it looks like but judging by the title and subject matter I think it sounds reasonable to keep it. The ip and what loks like a related one added numerous nuisance deletion notices, particularly on photos of Indian cars. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 22:33, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

@Mr.choppers: Hi, Yes, that was a mistake. It was wrong tagged as Copyvio by Special:Contributions/93.148.92.108. Actually all edits by this IP are vandalism. I will investigate. So I undeleted the file. Apologies, and thanks for your message. Yann (talk) 23:06, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

That was too easy. Thanks! mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 01:18, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Where did I go wrong?

Yann, plz help me with where did I go wrong with these nominations. Like this one, File:Maharajkumar of Vizianagaram Lok Sabha.jpg. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 16:36, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

@Shaan Sengupta: Hi, This is in the public domain in India, so it is not eligible for speedy deletion. Yann (talk) 16:38, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

So URAA violations go through DR? And before opening them, are they URAA violations? Afa I know, the file published in 50s can't be. Plz answer both and then I can proceed. Thanks for the help. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 16:41, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, URAA issues go through regular DRs. I think the issue is who is/was the copyright holder. If it is the government, I would keep it. Yann (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

4 out of the 5 comes from Parliament which holds exclusive rights on its works. Then? Shaan Sengupta^Talk 16:45, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

I am sorry for that i didnt put the images under the correct license

i am sorry, and i can correct the images if you list them out, but i think that saying i am a vandal and threatening to ban me from wikimedia is too much. Anonymsiy (talk) 20:13, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

i have changed the licenses of some images to {{PD-USGov-NASA}} , could you please revoke threatens to be blocked now? Anonymsiy (talk) 20:39, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

OK, thanks for changing the licenses. Yann (talk) 21:58, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Speedy on CSS file

Bonjour Yann, je viens de voir que tu as supprimer avec raison une page que j'ai proposé en speedy. Le modèle {speedy} the fonctionnant pas dans Template:Lingua Libre/Team/style.css, je viens te demander directement ici la supression de cette page css.

Par ailleurs, merci pour tes contributions sur Wikimedia depuis 2003(?). Treana, Jastrow et Hégésippe ont été mes mentors en 2004. Je croise régulièrement depuis ton pseudo dans différents logs sans t'avoir rencontré aux évènements WMFR. Je profite donc de cette rare interaction pour te transmettre mes remerciements.

Bien à toi Yug (talk) 15:47, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yug: Bonjour, Apparemment, la page a déjà été supprimée par Túrelio. Merci pour ton message ! Yann (talk) 21:06, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Nelson Mandela 1M banknote.jpg

File:Nelson Mandela 1M banknote.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.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Copyright on graphic, and current claim that this is a public domain work by the Federal Reserve is incorrect. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Trivialist (talk) 21:37, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

FP Promotion

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Fernand Léger Still Life with Candlestick 1922.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fernand Léger Still Life with Candlestick 1922.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2026 (UTC)