{{editprotected}} The fingers in this picture are cut off by the outline. This needs fixing, but I am unable to replace this image myself. Althepal 17:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain this in more detail? I don't see what you mean. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I suggest uploading your idea of a replacement under a different name temporarily, and we can compare - until then, I can't see much of a problem with the image as is.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihiltres (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure if I understand the problem, either; I'll remove the editprotected template, for now, until you have some more time to reply (or, as was suggested, uploaded a sample for comparison). Apologies if it's something really obvious I'm missing, here. – Luna Santin (talk) 09:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} This is currently categorized with Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 images, but if I'm not mistaken, the whole Nuvola icon set was released under the LGPL (not Creative Commons). So can someone with admin privileges please update the categorization to reflect this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soapergem (talk • contribs)

As I understand it, the Nuvola icons were released as PNGs and the subsequent derivatives (the SVGs) are licensed differently. Cheers. --MZMcBride 20:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't seem to actually be from the nuvola set anyway. It's just done in the same style. Algebraist 13:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Please unprotect this image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Upload Way (talk • contribs) 22:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Why? Algebraist 22:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Not done: requests for changes to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 22:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Note: If you can describe the edit you'd like done (i.e. Change X to Y), then feel free to do so and use the {{editprotected}} template again. --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 22:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Please disregard. User blocked indef as sock. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 23:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} The image description page currently links to Image:Stop.png in two locations; this should be Image:Stop2.png. Stannered (talk) 09:00, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea why is this page needs to be protected. Just like the other protection of file talk pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.56.25.105 (talk) 23:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

As you can see—by virtue of the fact that you were able to edit it—this page is not protected. The file page is. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 23:59, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the file should be protected, because there is no reason for an IP user to vandalize it. pluma (talk) 19:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Neither do I. Quoted from the above comment:

... there is no reason for an IP user to vandalize .

— Pluma

75.6.243.251 (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Its wikimedia version has been vandalised a few time, but I don't see why this version is protected. It was protected before anyone made any edits to it other than the maker. pluma Ø 02:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I think it's because this image is on a bunch of user warning templates. bibliomaniac15 02:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes. It's transcluded on thousands of user pages. In cases like that, it's not necessary to wait for someone to vandalize it. There's no need for anyone to edit that image page, so there's no point arguing about it. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 02:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, just dropped by because I saw this on a user page and wondered what it was for (the stop sign image) and then I of course I had to read the talk page, because I am nosy, and got a chuckle out of it. I have become interested in what this conversation is all about and am a bit confused. There is most definitely a red lock in the upper right hand corner of the user page and I thought that meant the page is protected from edits and then I see that someone says that it is editable. I did not try to edit it of course to find out because I don't see why anyone would want to edit it in the first place. So the red lock does mean protected right? Just curious because that is what I saw posted else where. Ț♥ttØØdẄ♥itre§ 04:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, I answered my own question by viewing the history of this page and it has recently been protected. Jumped the gun on that last comment. Darn it forgot to sign so came back Ț♥ttØØdẄ♥itre§ 04:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add {{Keep local high-risk|reason=it should be protected on the English Wikipedia}} per uploader's comment. TL22 (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

 Added — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

@Nihiltres and Luna Santin: what the user meant years ago was that instead of the tip of the fingers boing round, they have strange slopes. Moreover, the index and middle fingers have strange irregularities on the side. See my image highlighting those problems here. Veverve (talk) 08:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove the redundant text as marked below. It was added when the file was uploaded, and it is obsolete due to the creation of {{Keep local high-risk}}.

Thanks, Thriftycat ^{Talk • Contribs} 23:56, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:20, 13 December 2023 (UTC)