User talk:Bidgee

Best regards, -- Ooligan (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Happy New Year! As always at the beginning of the new year, I'm inviting you to share your most memorable shot of the past year. Which of your photos stood out in 2024? Which image created special memories that you'd like to share with others? On behalf of the Commons Photographers User Group I wish you, your family, and your friends all the best for 2025. Warmly, --Ailura (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 00:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Can you explain why you started making changes to City of Orange categories before the CFD was closed? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 00:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello is this photo from this website of the NSW State Parliament assembly allowed to be used on wikipedia?--Celco85 (talk) 08:06, 3 July 2025 (UTC)Celco85 https://www.flickr.com/photos/78821753@N03/23427266784Reply

No, license is restrictive (no commercial use and no derivative work). Bidgee (talk) 08:44, 3 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Since you want to report me, go ahead -- let's see who's actually right

KFC's trademark cannot be freely or arbitrarily used. If you use it without authorization, KFC can file a lawsuit Now, do you really think this fits the definition of de minimis?

The definition of de minimis is that as long as your photo contains something like the Colonel Sanders portrait trademark, it already falls into this category. Anyone who crops a picture and zooms in on the area with the KFC trademark is directly committing infringement

• Trademark, patent, or copyright--uspto.gov

(Protects the trademark from being registered by others without permission and helps you prevent others from using a trademark that is similar to yours with related goods or services. )

• KFC Corp. v. Cajun Operating Co., No. 4:24-cv-01000

• USPTO explains the differences between trademarks, patents, and copyrights

Think about it -- why do you think the KFC trademark image isn't uploaded to Wikimedia on Wikipedia?([1]) Moreover, this trademark image was originally published by KFC's official website!

• [https://global.kfc.com/images/logo.svg(archive.org archiving)]

• The images and videos contained in the Library are protected by copyright and other applicable intellectual property rights. Except as expressly permitted by these Terms, you may not download, copy, reproduce,publish, display, modify, adapt, or use any image or video in the Library, in whole or in part, in any way whatsoever
• As stated under "General Guidelines" above, all use of the images and videos in the Library is prohibited, other than the uses expressly permitted by these Terms. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following constitute specific prohibited uses of the Library's images and videos:

• You may not use images and videos from the Library in any context that disparages KFC or its brands, products, employees, franchisees, or affiliates.
• You may not sell, resell, license, or sublicense images and videos from the Library.
• You may not use images and videos from the Library for any commercial purpose not affiliated with KFC.
• You may not alter images and videos from the Library, except for cropping, enlargement, or reduction.
• You may not remove any notice of copyright, trademark, or other proprietary right from any place where it is on or embedded in any image or video.

YOintment (kokoniiruyo) 01:02, 13 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Starting from 21:04 (US. time) on July 12, if you have not responded by 21:04 on July 15, I will assume consent and proceed to add it. This is because you have not provided any favorable evidence proving that enlarging and cropping the trademark and uploading it to Wikimedia for arbitrary use does not violate intellectual property rights. YOintment (kokoniiruyo) 01:05, 13 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

{{De minimis}} is not for trademarks, the documentation states " Mark files with significant {{De minimis}} issues, especially cases that have been subject to deletion requests, to warn reusers." The photo in question doesn't meet that and the trademarks are less than 5% of the photograph. Please read Commons:Trademarks Bidgee (talk) 01:53, 13 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, Wikimedia never notified me that you had already replied.

Since you feel that way, I'll replace it with this:

You shouldn't have any objections now, right? YOintment (kokoniiruyo) 10:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

{{Trademark}} is a "trademark law" warning -- the trademark in the image are not to be used freely.

Are you satisfied now? YOintment (kokoniiruyo) 10:53, 17 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Template:Trademark:

Use this template only if the trademarked material is in the public domain or is under a free license: for example, if it is ineligible for copyright status, or has been specifically released by the owner under a free-content license such as a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. In most cases, the {{non-free logo}} template message should be used instead. Text that explicitly identifies the owner of the trademark should optimally be added to the image description page. See also Wikipedia:Logos. YOintment (kokoniiruyo) 11:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi

What was the problem of the problem of adding the link to the formal documentation of the sculpture? Shkuru Afshar (talk) 03:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello Bidgee, I saved the relevant subpages also in another webarchive because the Wayback Machine sometimes doesn't work. However, the linked pages (click on the image) are also important because otherwise the site operator could claim that there was a copyright notice. Therefore, four subpages had to be secured:

• https://archive.is/wBolD
• https://archive.is/AL2op
• https://archive.is/GqyjR
• https://archive.is/n5QZm

If you want to take action against these two violations you found, I can also send you screenshots of the four subpages I took a few minutes ago. Best regards to Australia! -- Wolf im Wald 15:27, 28 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Sent them an email requesting that they remove and cease any future use of my works but it is clear they do not care about the author(s), only their business (quite clear from that VP discussion), but will seek legal recourse if they fail to do as directed. Bidgee (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 7 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

NearEMPTiness (talk) 13:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

l`rby@ baaNlaa Deutsch English espanol francais magyar italiano Ri Ben Yu makedonski mlyaallN mraatthii Nederlands portugues russkii sicilianu slovenscina svenska Tagalog Turkce Tieng Viet Zhong Wen (Zhong Guo Da Lu ) Zhong Wen (Jian Ti ) Zhong Wen (Fan Ti ) +/-

--Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello Bidgee!

You are receiving this message because you are one of our esteemed members of the Commons Photographers User Group.

You are invited to the next virtual meeting of the Commons Photographers User Group! This is a great opportunity to connect, discuss important updates, and plan for the future of our group. Please register for the event using the link below!

Agenda:

1. Welcome and CPUG Updates
2. Upcoming Election
3. Commons Conference
4. Community Updates
5. Other topics

• Date: Sunday, October 12, 2025
• Time: 4:00 PM UTC (Check your local time)
• Venue: Online (Google Meet link will be shared closer to the date on Registration page)
• Register here: Sign up on Meta-Wiki

We look forward to seeing you there!

Thank You, -- Suyash Dwivedi () 19:20, 2 October 2025 (UTC) - (Chair, CPUG)Reply

Hello Bidgee,

On November 12, temporary accounts will be enabled on Commons. The IP of unregistered users will then be hidden for most users. You, as a patroller or license reviewer, are eligible to request the new temporary account IP viewer right, if you need it to continue fighting vandalism and abuse on Commons. If you want to request the right, please file the request here. Please be aware that you also have to accept the Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy in your preferences. For more information about temporary accounts, look at the project page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:34, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

l`rby@ English kyrgyzcha russkii +/-

Hello, Bidgee. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Commons:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! GPSLeo (talk) 20:57, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

the 2025 board election is starting soon.

The timeline for the 2025 election will be

• November 25 - December 2: Applications for the election committee
• December 2 - December 15: Vote for election committee (if necessary)
• December 16: Election committee starts work
• December 20 - January 4: Nomination phase for candidacies
• January 5 - January 11: Elections
• January 15: Results announced

In the first step we ask you to be part of the election committe. Please add your name on the Election Page.

We are very much looking forward to hearing from you. Please use this talk page for your thoughts.

All the best

--Ailura (talk) for the CPUG board

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

thank you for your interest in our board election.

This week we ask you to vote for the election committe.

Please support up to three candidates on the Election Page by December 16th, 00:00 UTC.

We are very much looking forward to hearing from you. Please use this talk page for your thoughts.

All the best

--Ailura (talk) for the CPUG board

Every other category is spelled "organization". Even Category:Organizations of the United Kingdom. See Commons:Categories#Universality_principle:

Identical items should have identical names for all countries and at all levels of categorization. The categorization structure should be as systematical and unified as possible, and local dialects and terminology should be suppressed in favour of universality if possible. Analogic categorization branches should have an analogic structure.

Deltaspace42 (talk) 20:03, 4 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Why should other countries who do not use US English by forced to use US English, when they do not even use it. Even the name of organisations has the local spelling. Bidgee (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Bidgee, I created CfD. Please read universality principle carefully: The categorization structure should be as systematical and unified as possible, and local dialects and terminology should be suppressed in favour of universality if possible. Since "organization" is more popular than "organisation", "organisation" should be suppressed in favor of "organization".

Motivation is that if every category uses the same spelling, like "organization", there are way fewer instances of accidental duplications of categories. Duplication is a huge problem, since it becomes very difficult to find topics under particular category and it causes clutter in the category space. Forcing to use the same spelling solves this problem. Deltaspace42 (talk) 20:11, 4 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

I have read it. Organisation is far more common than organization outside of North America. Bidgee (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello Bidgee!

As we step into a new year, we're happy to invite you to take part in "Your Most Memorable Shot 2025."

Since 2018, photographers from across the Wikimedia community have come together at the beginning of each year to share the photographs that meant the most to them over the past twelve months. Now in its eighth iteration, this tradition continues to be a space for reflection, storytelling, and celebrating meaningful moments through photography.

Whether you are a member of the Commons Photographers User Group or not, you are warmly welcome to participate and invite others too. Every image carries a story, and your perspective helps enrich this collective showcase.

Whenever you're ready, please select your most cherished photograph from 2025 and share it on the designated page.

The deadline for submissions is 28 February 2026, so we hope you'll join us before then.

We look forward to discovering the moments that made your year memorable and to continuing this wonderful tradition together.

Warm regards, -- Suyash Dwivedi () 22:36, 4 January 2026 (UTC) (CPUG)Reply

There seems to be a campaign of using only Amerian spelling, which I have just undone. I'm 100% with you on this issue, if you are able, can you keep a watch on this?

Let me know if you see any more such renames. I don't consider them to be reasonable, we are our own people group with our own spelling conventions. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 12:18, 28 January 2026 (UTC)Reply