User talk:Wilfredor/Archive 3

É uma pena 😞

Olá Wilfredo. É uma pena que, por causa de um voto de apoio, a sua imagem não se tornou uma imagem destacada. Vou tentar daqui a um mês novamente. E feliz aniversário! 😃 ArionEstar (talk) 20:58, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Obrigado @ArionEstar: , no entanto, esta seção é crescer como fotógrafo e não para recolher FPs. A idéia é aprender e melhorar, o dia em que todas minhas imagens são FP e que a seção não pode me ajudar a melhorar como fotógrafo. Eu sempre aprecio todas as suas mensagens e obrigado por ter tomado o tempo para escrever e felicitá-me no meu aniversário. --The Photographer (talk) 11:39, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Verdade Wilfredo. Se tem uma coisa que me aconteceu durante toda a minha estadia é que eu aprendi muita, mas muita coisa aqui. Eu absorvi muito conhecimento. Mas dê tempo ao tempo. Seria um injustiça a imagem não ser FP. Por isso, em breve vou nomeá-la novamente. As regras para FPCs dizem que só se pode renomear um imagem depois de um mês da primeira nomeação. Felicitaciones y tener un buen día. ArionEstar (talk) 12:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Template:Photo challenge rules

Hello The Photographer, we decided to try to enter new images at the top of the gallery this month and I forgot to change the third sentence in the checklist - I've done so now, can you please change that in Spanish, too? Thanks a lot for your help, --Anna reg (talk) 22:44, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@Anna reg: Please, let me know another change, for the moment I will go to take pictures of bad weather. A hug --The Photographer (talk) 10:35, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

alt

I think you should ping those who voted on the earlier version to say there is an alt. -- Colin (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Três nominações

Olá The Photographer, você tem três nominações no FPC, o que não é permitido. São elas: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Old Woman of San Juan Bautísta.jpg, a alternativa em Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Torre America Building Facade in Caracas, Venezuela.jpg e agora Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panoramic view of São Paulo city center.jpg. Eu sugiro que você apóie a alternativa em Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Torre America Building Facade in Caracas, Venezuela.jpg para que um robô feche a nominação, assim você terá duas, o que é permitido no FPC. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:50, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Oi @ArionEstar: . Son dois nominaçoes por usuario, eu solamente tenho 2 nominaçoes activas feitas por mi, mais não estoy seguro --The Photographer (talk) 18:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

A alternativa em Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Torre America Building Facade in Caracas, Venezuela.jpg é uma foto nominada sua. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:06, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Eu acredito que não, e simplemente uma alternativa de uma nominação --The Photographer (talk) 20:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Phalanta alcippe by Nayikayam Thattu.jpg

Hi Wilfredo, thanks for your suggestions. I tried to cloned them out. Let me know, if my edit created any artifacts, as I'm very poor in editing. Thanks, Jee 16:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Much better, attention is now focused on the insect. --The Photographer (talk) 16:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Jee 16:42, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Transport in São Paulo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI. --C messier 14:39, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Crocodylidae in São Paulo Zoo.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI, but, why so small? --Poco a poco 18:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC) I dont remember, maybe some noise or problem in full size, let me search the raw file and upload it to commonsarchive --The Photographer 20:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Panoramic view of São Paulo city center.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Amazing, ignoring the "prefetura" inscription and the Brasil flag. –Be..anyone 05:27, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Poor house of Isla Margarita.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 12:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

hi

I just wanted to find out, why am I so unmotivated about assessing your pictures at QI.

You are nominating a lot, but you don´t give anything back. But you are not the only one. Who, do you think, will do the work?

Therefore, I won´t assess your pictures. --Hubertl (talk) 09:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@Hubertl: You are right. Thank you for your honesty. I helped a lot in the past, however, my connection problems (Blessed edit conflict) have stopped. I'll nominate new QI and only I will nominate the same amount that I reviewed. thank you very much --The Photographer (talk) 11:27, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

• @Hubertl: (a page watcher's observation) This is not the way how reviewing should be done. We should review as per our area of interest/expertise; not of who reviewed ours. Otherwise it will end up a "like for like". Jee 10:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Jkadavoor: The Photographer has really a very Photographer wide range of expertise and interest . A lot wider than most collegues here, which make efforts to further development of good images. Not just their own.--Hubertl (talk) 14:41, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes Hubertl; he is very talented. Mine was just a quick and passive response; glad to see he expressed his real difficulties (connectivity issues). Jee 15:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Jkadavoor I too think, that this may be a comprehensible reason! We, here in europe, we may not forget, that other countries have to manage other difficulties, those, we don´t have! Have a good day! The problems we have, is more with the weather... cold, wet, stormy and sad... :-( --Hubertl (talk) 16:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Obviously this is just an excuse. All elements are circumstantial. However, these elements should not be used in excess --The Photographer (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

It is featurable?

It is good and featurable? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:50, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Acho que não, especialmente no canto superior esquerdo --The Photographer (talk) 20:55, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Frame your measures to tell the story you want 2.webm

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Frame your measures to tell the story you want 2.webm. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 23:26, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy holidays! 2015!

		* * * Happy Holidays 2015 ! * * *
		* Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! * Joyeux Noël ! Bonne année! * Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr! * Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом! -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:52, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Photo challenge translation

Hello The Photographer,
the January themes seem to be decided... we only have one new theme - Outlier, as Bad weather & Household items in use will be continued during January.
Best wishes and a happy new year, --Anna reg (talk) 19:49, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Torre América, Caracas, Venezuela.jpg

Félicitations ! Je l'ai classé à la main, car le bot ne l'avait pas pris en compte. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 14:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Re:Año viejo que se va.

Hola Wilfredo, gracias por tus deseos para este nuevo año. También yo te deseo a ti, a tu maravillosa esposa y a la nueva generación mucha salud para el 2015 y que se cumplan todos vuestros sueños. Un abrazo, Poco² 13:36, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Re: Vœux

Cher Wilfredo, merci de tes vœux. Je te souhaite à mon tour une bonne année 2015, pour toi, ta famille, tes amis, et ton pays. J'espère que tu nous régaleras encore de tes photos du Vénézuela, que j'aime découvrir avec toi. Fais-moi un signe si tu viens à Paris. Je t'écris en français pour que tu t'entraines !! Mille amitiés de France, --Jebulon (talk) 20:10, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Frame your measures to tell the story you want 2.webm

File:Frame your measures to tell the story you want 2.webm 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.

 

1989 20:15, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Feliz año nuevo

¡Feliz 2015, Wilfredo! Me ha gustado mucho ver tu mensaje, muchas gracias. Te deseo también que disfrutes de este año al máximo y que la alegría y la salud te acompañen todo el camino. Que compartamos muchas fotos. Un abrazo, --Kadellar (talk) 12:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Você gosta de viver aqui?

Eu sinto muito pela situação política do seu país. Mas você gosta de viver no Brasil? É um belo país, mas ele é cheio de violência, de falta de segurança nas nossas casas, assaltos, entre outros. A saúde aqui é um caos, a educação é um caos. Muitas pessoas não têm condições de comprar um pão para matar a fome, não têm acesso à água tratada, saneamento básico, não vivem com dignidade. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@ArionEstar: Evidentemente Brasil esta tomando um caminho complexo e difícil de conhecer, sim embargo, o problema que esta acontecendo na Venezuela e muito pior ainda que qualquer crises por a que há passado Brasil a o largo de sua historia. --The Photographer (talk) 10:40, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Olá Wilfredo, tenha um good day. O Brasil já teve ditadura. O Brasil tem, certamente, como qualquer outro país, pontos positivos e pontos negativos. O Brasil é um país paradisíaco, com belas e únicas paisagens, uma imensa biodiversidade. Estamos falando da sétima maior economia do mundo, do quinto maior país em área. Mas de um país de um IDH não muito elevado, com uma expectativa de vida menor do que a de muitos países e entre outros pontos. Mas, e você? Você consegue descrever este país? O que acha dele? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Oi @ArionEstar: , É sempre um prazer ler você, muito obrigado por você me escrever. Descreva o Brasil é quase como descrever um continente, cada estado tem suas diferentes particularidades culturais. Estive lendo alguns livros sobre a história do Brasil, sua cultura e economia.

Eu tenho cerca de seis meses vivendo no Brasil, para que eu pudesse dar uma opinião pessoal. Vou me concentrar na questão cultural, em vez de recursos naturais, que eu considero o melhor do mundo, especialmente por sua biodiversidade. Apesar de sua proximidade com os países da América do Sul o Brasil é incrivelmente diferente, tem uma proximidade com os países europeus mais do que os seus países vizinhos. O brasileiro é extremamente educado e cortez, muito mais do que qualquer coisa que eu já vi em todos os países da América que visitei. Eles são pessoas de boa vontade e sempre dispostos a ajudar, é o denominador comum. O brasileiro ainda não é capaz de ver o quão grande ele é e como é difícil conseguir o que ele construiu. As gerações passadas, após a ditadura, focado na construção de fortes Brasil e grande que agora está começando a minguar. O brasileiro também é profundamente inocente e manipulável, prova disso é o grande número de empreendimentos religiosos, tornando o Brasil um terreno fértil para o crescimento de governos populistas e corruptos. O futuro próximo do Brasil não é visto muito promissor, no entanto, devemos esperar que aconteça no futuro a longo prazo. --The Photographer (talk) 12:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Eu e todos os brasileiros devemos lutar por um país melhor, e isso tem princípio nas pequenas atitudes que tomamos como ajudar o próximo, pensar mais no coletivo. É a mentalidade do povo que tem que mudar. O brasileiro tem que pensar diferente. Ele tem que pensar em se desenvolver, em construir o seu futuro. E se preocupar em coisas mais importantes, e não em coisas fúteis, que não levam ninguém em nada. Devemos construir um nação com um povo inteligente, que faça as coisas (como saúde, educação e segurança) funcionarem corretamente. É por isso que não temos uma qualidade de vida boa. Digamos que "o Brasil tem a faca e o queijo na mão, só falta cortar o queijo". Ou seja, o Brasil tem tudo um país desenvolvido, só basta que nós façamos alguma coisa, só basta agir. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Tank by Leonardo da Vinci.jpg

File:Tank by Leonardo da Vinci.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!

-- RTA 11:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I didn't vote as I'm not sure of the copyright rules. Such a pain, though, if it turns out to be protected. :-( -- Colin (talk) 12:41, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@Colin: Please, you should not apologize for not voting, I very much appreciate your opinion. It is important to keep the project on the margins of legality. Thanks --The Photographer (talk) 12:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hong Kong Typhoon.jpg

Hi,

You just inputted this file but the title and description makes no sense to me. There was no typhoon affecting Hong Kong on June 13, 2013 (read en:2013_Pacific typhoon season). I thus had to remove the storm category. This seems just a cloudy day in Hong Kong unless you can give a reference.

Pierre cb (talk) 16:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Pierre cb: , thanks for your comment, this photo was after of Wikimania 2013 in July 20-22, the internal clock of my camera, unfortunately, was misaligned. I remember hearing typhoon alert and rain that day was a horrible storm. Thanks for your comment --The Photographer (talk) 16:55, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

OK. Maybe you could change the description to explain what you just wrote above. If ever you know what typhoon is was, we could add the category for this typhoon. The closest I could figure by your timing would be en:Typhoon_Utor and in that case it would be Category:Typhoon Utor (2013). Pierre cb (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@Pierre cb: Sure, Please do not stop writing, to any little thing you consider. I treasure these comments --The Photographer (talk) 10:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Cropping

I have reverted the edit to File:Interior da Catedral de Amiens by Jules Victor Genisson, 1842.jpg. If you think it a good crop, please do from your original raw or tiff files. If you no longer have them, then there are lossless crop tools and I believe there is a service on Commons to request it. Arion is clumsily editing these files and saving them with much information loss. See also File:Mural na Catedral da Sé.jpg which has been reversed (why?) with massive loss of filesize. Also File:Children by Karl Ernst Papf 1886.jpg is similarly damaged. Also File:Interior del Teatro Municipal de São Paulo.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 22:40, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@Colin: I have no doubt that his intentions are good, however, it is always best to ask permission courtesy and perform this operation from RAW to keep quality. I'll upload RAW files to commonsarchive (If you know any additional location, please participarmelo) and he can perhaps cut and make some version derived, without losing much quality. Thank you very much, I owe you one. --The Photographer (talk) 10:49, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree it is not vandalism but I have warned Arion multiple times about this and the message doesn't seem to be sinking in. At some point, a quiet word from an admin might be necessary. -- Colin (talk) 13:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Even if done from RAW there's no guarantee that another user could replicate the same result. Perhaps you can examine whether the crop and mirroring is beneficial and apply it yourself in Lightroom/Photoshop. I think the artwork restoration people dislike cropping any part of the painting, though black lines or frame could be removed. -- Colin (talk) 13:10, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Colin: Of course yes!. I agree with you, remove bits of backbone is not a good practice, I think there should be some kind of permission to do these things --The Photographer (talk) 14:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Woman of São Paulo in Pinacoteca.jpg

File:Woman of São Paulo in Pinacoteca.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!

-- RTA 11:37, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Where is this beach?

Hello The Photographer, can you tell me, even just roughly, where you took this picture? Thanks so much. Invertzoo (talk) 02:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Invertzoo: Hi o/, happy new year!!. This photograph was taken at La Restinga Beach on Isla Margarita, Venezuela. Thank you very much for writing --The Photographer (talk) 10:42, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

That you so much The Photographer and a Happy New Year to you too. Thank you for adding that to the description, for people who are interested in mollusks and seashells that is important info. :) Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 19:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

@Invertzoo: I invite you to see images in this link --The Photographer (talk) 13:27, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes they are superb images, aren't they! I know these already because the contributor was/is (like me) part of WikiProject Gastropods on the English Language Wikipedia. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 23:46, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge/2014 - December - Household items in use

I removed File:Typical Nordeste Brazil cuisine tools.jpg from the challenge because it doesn't show the tools being used. Are you able to take another photo with them "in use"? -- Colin (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

sorry @Colin: , this was taken at aprox 3000 km away from where I am and in a rural area 6 hours of dirt road. :( --The Photographer (talk) 14:11, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh well :-(. By the way, the "ping" thing only works if you sign the post in the same edit. If you add it afterwards, it doesn't create a notification. -- Colin (talk) 14:27, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

@Colin: Interesting, thanks for the tips, I would have never noticed --The Photographer (talk) 14:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Brasão de Cristal (Rio Grande do Sul) Foto.JPG

Licença indicada.--Paulo RS Menezes (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

@Paulo rsmenezes: Excelente, muito obrigado. --The Photographer (talk) 18:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Obrigado por avisar. Quanto as categorias de São Paulo, pode apagar todas as que eu tiver criado sem notificação, meu interesse é o Estado do Rio Grande do Sul.--Paulo RS Menezes (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

@Paulo rsmenezes: Obrigado para você, mais eu não posso fazer isso, você pode falar com outro usuario administrador, mais eu acredito que você falou --The Photographer (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Photographs_of_São_Paulo_city_by_genre

Category:Photographs_of_São_Paulo_city_by_genre has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Alan Liefting (talk) 05:31, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Isto é featurable?

Olá Wilfredo. Isto é featurable? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@ArionEstar: Eu acredito que você pode fazer a nominação, mais, pode ser que falem de problemas no céu com rasterization. Em este momento você conhece tanto como eu que coisa pode ser featured --The Photographer (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

RE:Espero...

Gracias!!!! Crees tu que pueda candidatearse a QI? Un abrazo!!!! Ezarateesteban 01:12, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

@Ezarate: Yo creo que si --The Photographer (talk) 10:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Picture in Commons Photo Challenge

Hey! Your photo "Facade of the Conjunto Nacional building" is amazing. Thank you very much for sharing it. It's already my desktop background, and it wasn't easy to force this one out! :)

really good job!

--Mercuri88 (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

File:You are next movie.jpg

Currently it's a copyright violation due to violating licensing terms of the originals - no author is named and an invalid license is used. Minimum license has to be by-sa-3.0. Please fix. --Denniss (talk) 16:24, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

@Denniss: Thanks, I was thinking do it this afternoon. Thanks --The Photographer (talk) 21:33, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Pinacoteca

• The Photographer, olá. Por favor veja Commons:Esplanada#Pinacoteca Municipal de São Paulo, um usuário faz uma solicitação especial e como li que esteve ou pretender ir na Pinacoteca, talvez se interesse em colaborar. Abraços para você e para Béria.Jo Lorib (talk) 16:34, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Amazing!! Thank you!! :) --Sailko (talk) 10:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Restauracion de imagenes Ramon Peinador Checa

Sr. Wilfredo:

El Arq. Carlos Peynador, hijo de Ramon Peinador Checa, le envió correo en el que le informó sobre los derechos que tiene él sobre las obras que subí en la página Ramon Peinador Checa, al saber que Ud. había borrado imágenes, con el fin de que Ud. esté enterado que no hay alguna violación de derechos y restaure lo antes posible las imágenes, mismas que solicité accediendo al contenido del link que indica en el correo que Ud. me envió sobre el mismo tema.

En el correo que me envió Ud no recibimos evidencia inobjetable alguna sobre lo que le pudo llevar al borrado de las imágenes, únicamente respuesta general y no solicitó información acerca de los derechos de las obras, para corroborar su criterio. Le respondimos informándole que el Arq. Carlos Peynador es el heredero de esas obras, pero hasta la fecha no ha sucedido nada. Es una lástima que pase algo así.

Las imágenes borradas son las siguientes:

 Perfumes de Oriente.jpg
 RamonPeinador HombreConSombrero.jpg
 RamonPeinador Pulqueria.jpg
 RamonPeinador MujerEnElEstudio.jpg
 RamonPeinador CabezaDeHombre.jpg
 RamonPeinador LaMujer.jpg
 RamonPeinador ElPaisaje.jpg 
 RamonPeinador HistoriaDelCine.jpg
 EsposaPeinador3.jpg
 Paisaje Acolman.jpg
 Ramon_Peinador_Checa_-_Acapulco.jpg
 Ramon_Peinador_Checa_-_El_Valle_de_Mexico.jpg
 Ramon_Peinador_Checa_-_Los_Dos_Guardianes.jpg
 Ramon_Peinador_Checa_-_Montanas_de_Taxco.jpg

Qué más se puede hacer para que puedas restaurar las imágenes?

Saludos @Jaime Cruz R: , de todo estar en orden, el mejor camino a seguir es utilizando este enlace Undeletion requests, muchas gracias por mantenerme informado. Por favor, no dudes en escribirme de nuevo cualquier cosa. --The_Photographer (talk) 11:05, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The Photographer huh :-)

I will expect only perfection from you now. ;-) why the name change? Diliff (talk) 12:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Courtesy notification

I nominated the bull you pictured as FP. --Hafspajen 05:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

• No bother at all. But I believe it is written that one should notify the author when possible - I thought it was standard procedure... --Hafspajen 23:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Hafspajen: I do not understand the negative vote. In the back of the animal are only two legs, wait a seccond....or surely this is a bull with genetic mutation with an interesting head in the ass. They forget that this was taken in a natural environment, inn a place inaccessible to 8 days of travel walking away from any civilization. --The_Photographer (talk) 23:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

• WEll, I say. Is this an area you took the picture? It can be added otherwise. And here probably, [1] .. --Hafspajen 20:49, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

These guys drive me crazy. Isn't ANY (Spanish would be FINE) source that you can add to this article that theses cattles are of feral Charolais breed? Like anything. Turist broshure is nothing else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charolais_cattle --Hafspajen 18:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

• Gguardarlacalmatodovaaestarbien. --Hafspajen 18:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Guantalameraguajiraguantalamera :) --The_Photographer (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=644550205&oldid=644511909:

Dear Jimbo,

I wanted to write to you with the greatest respect you deserve as any user. Due to the recent actions I have felt a great fear about global locks some great friends, so. […]

[…]

God bless you --The Photographer (talk) 13:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

"Greatest respect"? Don't you realize that Jimbo supports the bans given to your "great friends"?

No, I have nothing to do with it [Russavia's global ban]. I wish I did as it was richly deserved and long overdue.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:30, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

You don't owe Jimbo anything. Yes, we technically owe him, but only as much as we owe Apple or Microsoft. He, like Apple or Microsoft, doesn't deserve our allegiance. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Michaeldsuarez: I think maybe I need to improve my ability to be sarcastic --The_Photographer (talk) 15:46, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Alright, sorry. It's difficult to determine whether one is being sarcastic or not on the Internet. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Dcoetzee

Hi, The Photographer, I noticed your edit, hence my question, do you know why Dcoetzee was globally blocked? Lotje (talk) 08:04, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@Lotje: You will find your answer reading this page --The_Photographer (talk) 10:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

TL;DR Lotje (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

That was my reaction too. :-) I don't care about the politics, just wanted to know in a few sentences or less why he and Russavia were blocked. Diliff (talk) 17:42, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

When you see your neighbor's fences burn, put your fences to soak. Some people prefer to just keep being used because they have laziness of read a long text. Or just they are thinking - this never will happen to me-. --The_Photographer (talk) 18:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

It's not so much laziness as not having the interest in spending hours reading through it all. We don't need to read dozens of academic treatises on the Roman empire to know that they once ruled much of Europe, or get a degree in physics to understand that gravity affects us all. Likewise, I don't want to study the internal politics of Wikipedia - I have no interest in it. :-) I just wanted to know why it happened. A basic understanding is enough to satisfy me. I did attempt to read the link you provided but it quickly became clear that everyone was discussing it like it was already obvious what happened, when it clearly wasn't. Diliff (talk) 19:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Dcoetzee had confessed at EN and the immediate block was executed by his friend. So I think he was treated as best as possible to protect his reputation. Nothing more I know. Jee 02:28, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

@Diliff: @Lotje: Russavia uncovered serious abuse of the CU tool by User:Herbythyme and has continued to press for answers, both in relation to the CU abuse, plus the additional issue of his CU log being leaked to someone who shouldn't have it. The OC and the WMF has tried to cover this up, but he continued to make an issue of it, and still continues to pursue it. Because of the severity of the issue, the WMF is at legal risk, and hence they banned him and hence they banned him. Which is typical, given all he wanted was straight forward and honest answers. --The_Photographer (talk) 19:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I see. Lotje (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

@Diliff: @Lotje: I would like to comment that there are to my knowledge no verifiable facts substantiating the claim that Herbythyme has abused the CU tool, nor that the global ban of Russavia is related to that. There is no evidence presented in the tl:dr thread either at COM:BN. @The Photographer: if you have off-wiki evidence for that claim I think you should consider what kind of objectives your source(s) could possibly have to try and sell that version of the "story". I have received information which point in a different direction, but I would never go as far as state any other version of that story as any kind of fact, because 1) it is based on private communications, 2) it is not verifiable. I think it is quite naive to blindly believe that the WMF and the Ombudsman Commision would make some huge cover-up operation. It is, as I see it, just a conspiracy theory, which would be a convenient representation of the events passed for some users. You may call me blind or biased as well, but personally I find Herbythyme 100-fold more trustworthy than Russavia after many years of interaction on Commons. I have a hard time thinking of a user who has shown more integrity with the project. -- Slaunger (talk) 15:24, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

We can always ask the WMF, or not? Lotje (talk) 16:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Jee 16:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

@Lotje: : See also User talk:Philippe (WMF)#Global bans, especially this comment. -- Slaunger (talk) 16:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

@Slaunger: , I am most happy with that reply and leave it for what it is. Thank you. Lotje (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

@Lotje: . You're welcome . -- Slaunger (talk) 16:55, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I am the best cook in the world, however, for security reasons, I can not prepare a meal for you. --The_Photographer (talk) 19:33, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I second Slaunger's opinion (though don't know Herbythyme so can't vouch one way or the other). This inability to accept that some things must remain undisclosed (for ethical and legal reasons) either reflects some naivety about how the adult world works, or is an underhand misdirection by Russavia and his friends. The word "confidential" is a standard, everyday request/assumption, not a reason to suspect evil. -- Colin (talk) 08:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

For me this issue is very clear because I know in depth what is happening inside WMF and community as well. The matter was done with malice aforethought. I sit now to see this baseball game where the ball is lost. The course has been lost and I wake from this dream and utopia. --The_Photographer (talk) 10:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@The Photographer: are you confessing now? Lotje (talk) 10:17, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Lately you're very funny :) --The_Photographer (talk) 10:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

You are have been funny, someone confessing the sins of others (as you labelled the file) ..., that is what I call funny. Lotje (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

This is not an interpretation is exactly the response I received. Reply who can not speak here because they are locked for "completely coherent and reasonable" reasons, however, still remain unanswered, even for those who have been locked, unable to replicate and explanation, with the excuse of protecting themselves. BTW. Now my talk page looks more and more like a place to meet friends --The_Photographer (talk) 12:38, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

For what it's worth I replied to the false accusations about me here. I would also like far more factual information to allow me to really rebut these accusations they are still made despite the OC findings. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:04, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

If indeed there was/is a leak, might it have been (unwillingly) caused via the mailing list? Lotje (talk) 17:13, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

My recollection (& it is two years ago I think) is that I did not post any actual information to the list - in general I preferred not to do that except in the case of vandals/spammers. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:17, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: Maybe you want tell us why you ran the CU on russavia on 27 April 2013. And please bitch dont come back with nonsense about CU being private for a reason --The_Photographer (talk) 17:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

(multiple ecs) I have never run CU on you to the best of my memory. The only possible explanation would be that you were using an IP associated with multiple accounts at that time. However I was not aware of you are a user until I had the notification of this discussion. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

My edit conflicted with yours and the version I saw indicated you thought you had been checked by me.

At the time of the Russavia check there was considerable traffic on the CU list about puppetry (on en wp and elsewhere). As such the check was valid (as agreed by the OC). --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: you what time GMT you did the check on commons ? --The_Photographer (talk) 17:38, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea at all and I have no log access (I could not have even told you the date). It might have been early morning however I really am not sure. I never kept any records at all (for privacy reasons - even if you don't believe that). --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: "As far as I (and the plwiki CU tool) was able to tell, Russavia holds no alternative account on pl.wikipedia. And Hortensja Bukietowa, whom I have come across many edits, is definitely unrelated to Russavia. Seleucidis coincides with Hortensja, but this seems not so much valid. Wpedzich (talk) 08:40, 19 April 2013 (UTC)" --The_Photographer (talk) 17:44, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I regret to say I have no idea what this post means. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: is ok with the public release of the date and time of the check? --The_Photographer (talk) 17:46, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

As I've stated I have no idea what the date or time was. My understanding of the tool is and always has been that no information should be released about it. Personally I would very much like to know what was released, when and where & facts not supposition. The OC would also like that information. I'll be offline until tomorrow now. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:58, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: oh really? the OC would like to know, nice!. More obfuscation. you realize you're enabling Russavia to circumvent his ban, yes? and more important just like I ask people to tell Russavia what I've said, so as to circumvent his /ignore  ? "the other issue was also a leak of the log - which is against privacy rules of WMF. We got the copy of the log from a user, who should not have access to it". --The_Photographer (talk) 18:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

OK - I've re-read this now I'm back online and I realise that whatever I say will not actually change your mind about anything - you have obviously decided what happened and are not interested in anything else. As such I'll leave this thread now and not return to it - as anyone who has been here a while knows there is always more work to do than people interested in doing it so I'll use my limited time to help Commons where I can.

I will just restate that I have not breached any privacy in this case or any other in the years I had the tools across projects and I still respect that privacy. It is not possible to prove someone does not have puppet accounts using the tool so it is far better that there is not breach of privacy at all to prevent speculation that cannot be eliminated.

I would also like real facts about this leak if anyone has them and, equally I'll be happy to talk to anyone on Commons who has an open mind about the issues. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:19, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: I didn't meant you, I just thought aobut a mailinglist in general. Lotje (talk) 20:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

File:User Wilfredor Venzuela flag.jpg

Hi, The Photographer, is that you? If yes, I would add the [[Category:User page images]] to it. Lotje (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I can't answer the question for security reasons --The_Photographer (talk) 10:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I see. Lotje (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Lucia Bot

Hi Wilfredor, I just stopped your bot doing unconsensual changes of licensing, because of course you may change e.g. a GNU to CC or a CC to PD license but you may NOT replace any license by a more restrictive one (like here CC-zero by CC-BY-SA 3.0) I'm sorry, but this is part of Commons policy and you'll may get blocked in case of repeated violations. --A.Savin 11:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@A.Savin: Thanks, however, look https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Venezuela, they are creating this now --The_Photographer (talk) 12:05, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand your reply. Once you have released it as CC0 that's it effectively in the public domain forever. You can't even add a CC By-SA licence that licence is only for works that aren't in the public domain. Please arrange for the bot to revert what it has done. -- Colin (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I know that, however, this was a Beria way. --The_Photographer (talk) 12:11, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

So Beria need to be de-admined if she don't know the basics. :) Jee 12:16, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Typical of you, another WMF kissass --The_Photographer (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

It's always possible to add another license, nothing prevents the original author from doing this. This is regardless of what CC claims to be correct or not.--Denniss (talk) 12:17, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes; technically you are right even though people can use CC 0/PD neglecting the other one. Jee 12:22, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@Denniss: File:Craftsman_Street_in_Olinda_edited.jpg as a copyright violation ? --The_Photographer (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@Denniss: I don't believe you are correct. It is possible to add many licences to a work for copyright that you own and have rights for. But once you release a work as CC0 it is no longer a work of copyright. And you no longer have any rights to licence it. Hence "no rights reserved". It is technically as invalid to offer CC BY-SA for a CC0 image as it is to offer the Mona Lisa under CC By-SA. See CC0 FAQ. -- Colin (talk) 12:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Colin, this is a derivate work from a RAW (not in cc0) file not from a Wikimedia Commons site file. BTW, Commonsarchive is a site from a global locked user Dcoeetze and @Denniss: @Colin: Please see source licence --The_Photographer (talk) 13:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

This starts to get very complicated. I think Colin is right though, that if you have released an image as PD, it cannot be re-licensed as anything else... Nothing physically stops you from re-licensing it, but I don't believe you have the legal right to do it because you don't own the image anymore and cannot legally impose a restriction on it without adding 'creative input' of some kind to create a new claim of copyright. Technically, the PD image is derived from the RAW file which is not PD but I don't think that is enough to be able to restrict the re-use of the PD image. If you were to use different RAW settings and re-process the image, you could probably license the new version with CC-BY-SA, but it would not affect the previous PD version. This is getting into really murky water now though. I wonder if there is even any legal precedent for this exact kind of situation. Diliff (talk) 13:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

There's a difference between invalid re-license (original license replaced by anmother) or adding another license. Adding is always possible, removing is not possible unless replaced by a less restrictive license. And BTW the image claimed as source was uploaded later than the Commons version here thus the license given there later does not apply to the Commons version. --Denniss (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't think you can add a new license that conflicts with the previous license though. If my license states that you cannot restrict it further, and then you go ahead and restrict it, you are breaching the original license. It's not exactly identical in the case of PD, because if I understand correctly, PD isn't actually a license, it's the absence of a license. But once something is PD, copyright cannot be reclaimed on it, which means you are not eligible to add a license unless you modify it creatively to justify ownership of copyright. This is just my understanding, IANAL obviously. But I don't think you're right about this. Diliff (talk) 13:35, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Denniss, you need to re-read what I and Diliff wrote. Your statement "adding is always possible" only applies to works of copyright for which you have retained rights. An image that was declared CC0 is no longer yours to licence. The CC licences make it clear they cannot be applied to public domain works.

Diliff, CC0 is not a licence. It is a release into the public domain. It is possible for an image to have conflicting licences (e.g. GFDL 1.2 and CC BY-SA-NC-ND) because it is up to the re-user which one licence they pick for reuse. The issue here is that a CC0 image is no longer a work of copyright and no longer owned by the creator, so no licence can be offered. -- Colin (talk)

Adding a license is an either or usage option, no license restricts the other. As I said above, what CC writes in this case is clearly irrelevant as it restricts the original author in his freedom to apply licenses as he wants. He can't insist on using the restricted license if the PD/Zero license was applied earlier though, neither is it possible to revoke such a license.--Denniss (talk) 13:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

(Before I unwatch this page) let me repeat. CC0 is not a licence. It isn't something that can be chosen or not chosen by the re-user like licences can. The "original author" has publicly revoked his "freedom to apply licenses". The CC licence on such an image is not only something that may be ignored, but is legally dishonest and invalid. Our image description pages should not offer licences on CC0 images just as we don't offer licences on images that are PD due to age. It is not really legally correct for us to do so. -- Colin (talk)

The_Photographer, I'm disappointed in you. I just don't know what to make of your edits recently. This seems to no longer be a project where you are interested in creating and promoting free content, but just a battleground. I see in the previous discussion some obvious meatpuppetry for Russavia. This fiddling with CC0/CC By-SA just seems to be playing games with the file history, some of which has been erased. I'm going to unwatch here. I suggest a wikibreak and hope that a certain globally banned user will have got a life by then and moved on. -- Colin (talk) 13:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@Colin: History certainly has been hidden, the same reason Russavia been blocked, unknown reasons, yet "perfectly logical" like WMF, do you remember?. If you support blocking Russavia like your comment exposes, you should bear that sometime things happen in this project and because of the impossibility of knowing why, due to security reasons as WMF, atheists users will be forced to believe in God to find an explanation for such actions. You decide to take the path of supporting WMF, do it!, however, Please do not ask me to accept this type of actions that give you a kick in the ass to the community. --The_Photographer (talk) 15:09, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

For your information

Hi The Photographer,

I have removed this grossly insulting and bullying comment of yours. I find it is an unacceptable comment to make towards a user who is merely acting in good faith in accordance with community policies.

Thank you, -- Slaunger (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@Jkadavoor: did you read the comment the same way as Slaunger has? I found it a bit incomprehensible, so I'm unsure if it was a bit of an in-joke of some sort. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 18:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I read it in the same way as Slaunger did, and I don't know what happened to our good fellow Wilfredor...--Jebulon (talk) 21:58, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

No comments. Thanks Slaunger and Jebulon. Jee 02:20, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

"Sorry"

Hi The_Photographer,

sorry for the trouble. here and here. I only liked to show you the nonsense properties of the CC-0 license. Everybody can do it similar in all over the world. Of course, I respect your authorship and i wanted to correct it a bit later. I think you know me a bit to know that I'd like to help more than "be a troll". Best regards, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Muito obrigado pela medalha!

Oi Wilfredo. Muito obrigado pela medalha. Você faz um papel importante no Commons: o de fotógrafo. Por isso, por que ainda não fez um perfil no Commons:Meet our photographers? Você tem muito mais de 10 FPs, então você pode fazer um perfil. Tudo de melhor para você! Saudações, 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:25, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

A simple question

Hi The Photographer

I have a question about this series of edits made from your account yesterday that I hope you can give a clear yes/no answer to:

1. Maybe you want tell us why you ran the CU on me on 27 April 2013.
2. ...And please bitch dont come back with nonsense about CU being private for a reason...
3. bitch
4. Maybe you want tell us why you ran the CU on russavia on 27 April 2013. (with the edit sumary Je suis Russavia)

Did Russavia ask you to write these statements more or less as they appear here concurrently with the edits being done? Thank you, -- Slaunger (talk) 20:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

In the light of recent events, this is inappropriate on a public wiki. It is a direct assertion of meatpuppetry rather than "a simple question". I find it sad that Commons has allowed itself to become a set of public records with accusations for WMF lawyers to rifle for material to use. I recommend that this is ignored unless a proper SPI is filed.

For goodness sake, we are not paid to be here, this is a hobby we do out of love and respect for open knowledge. It is a pity that this no longer seems to be the mission for the organizations we created to support us and our work. --Fæ (talk) 21:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Fæ The reason I ask is because the edits have a language very much unlike the users usual language. But instead of speculating about meatpuppeptry and start a case, I simply ask the user. If the user says 'no', no problem. I will of course believe in what the user says. I of course expect The Photographer to just confirm it is not something he has been asked to write by anyone. I do not see anything inappropriate in the question. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Stand back from what you are doing. A project that leaves its unpaid volunteers in a climate of "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" is not one that I wish to participate in. --Fæ (talk) 22:09, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@Fæ: , stop digging your grave. I think that Slaunger's questions are legitimate. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:01, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

What an offensive thing to say. I may be unwell, but I have no intention of dropping dead just yet, thanks.

Rather than grandstanding and intimidating other editors on this talk page, I suggest either you or Slaunger create a proper SPI case if you are serious about having any evidence. --Fæ (talk) 19:04, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm trying to remain uninvolved, but I had to say something here. Fæ, it seems perfectly clear that you're willingly misrepresenting the phrase 'digging your grave' as literal when it's obviously meant to be metaphoric. You know that, everyone knows that, but your choice to frame it as Yann's offensive desire for you to die is pretty unhelpful and unnecessary too. If you want to take the high moral ground and make suggestions to others about how to handle an inflamed situation, toning down your own rhetoric and mock indignation would be a good start. Diliff (talk) 15:56, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice and viewpoint. --Fæ (talk) 16:13, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

These same questions have been carried me continuously for several administrators and managers OTRS using PM irc. It's kind of funny because they generally do a checkuser and then ask. :) --The_Photographer (talk) 16:16, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

You have chosen not to provide a clear answer to a simple question after more than ten days. Feel free to archive the discussion. I have seen enough. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:02, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Go with your intentions, manipulative and hidden elsewhere. I rebuke you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. --The_Photographer (talk) 20:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)