Please do not remove information from articles, as you did to Ottoman miniature. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. See my edit summary as well, take care.Uness232 (talk) 01:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Istanbul. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
Hi Mercresis respond to your suggestions for Tukey page
1) The image has indeed very low quality for the Armenian Genocide. but at least the image is rectangular (Not tall but large) and fits the page well. Usually images that are tall are more difficult to fit to the article. Like the one that you have suggested below:
I honestly think that there shouldnt be an image for the genocide there. I cannot find in any other countries wiki page. Exp: In the page of Germany, there is not a single image related to the Holocaust. But this is another topic and I dont want to be the one who decide on this maybe it should be discussed in the Talk page first. you can start the discussion there if you want and if the moderators approve it. I am willing to do this change. Instead of the image of the victions we can put another image of the Three Pashas and the coup who are the main responsibles of the genocide.
2) I totally agree that Canakkale Bridge is an engineering marvel but the image is not a very good one. I am still waiting for a decent image taken with high resolution and after the completion of the bridge. A better picture would fit there. Also that section has already 2 images and the 3rd one would be automatically removed by the moderators since they usually complain about the overloading the page with images.
3) I had the same thought with you about choosing the right image for the language section. I decided to choose the Turkic languages used areas. Which is larger than the 'Organization of Turkic States'. so I decided to go with how spread the language is instead of pointing to the organization. But Can you specify why you think the organization would fit there better. I am open do discuss it in more detail.
1) I think the 1915 Çanakkale Bridge image is good enough (when a better image comes we can replace it) because it will remain the world's longest suspension bridge for only a limited amount of time (and time is passing). Sooner or later it will be surpassed by a bridge in China or the Strait of Messina Bridge in Italy, etc..
2) You should at least move the Atatürk image to the right, because he was not connected with the Armenian issue in any way and his image immediately after the Armenian one doesn't look fair. A better placement would be at the right side, together with the women who obtained their civil rights thanks to Atatürk. Mercresis (talk) 13:44, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for November 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Istanbul, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grand Bazaar. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I really admire your work on Turkey page. but the page is overloaded with images. when this is the case moderators remove way more images than normal when they revise the page. So lets try to not overload each section with too many images. I try to do it in a proper way. I hope you understand my concern while trying to add more images. soon we can have last than what we had before. Metuboy (talk) 15:45, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! // Timothy :: talk16:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Turkey page is editted way too often without edit summaries
Hi Mercresis.
When you are doing edits. you dont have to publish small changes constantly but collect them in one and use edit summaries It is impossible to know what you are doing. you might get a ban on this page. since the page is protected and your edits can appear as vandalising. Metuboy (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's impossible. The User:Modern primat has declared a war against Kızılelma images being uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and he may be right about the "copyright" issue (I'm not sure whether the "press release images" by Baykar can be uploaded or not). I uploaded a nice photo of the Kızılelma's maiden flight, but it was deleted from Wikimedia Commons through the intervention of User:Modern primat. I'm guessing that the reason may be "political". Mercresis (talk) 09:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
oh yeah, probably im personally against your poltical idea and your political religion(islam). but i can do NOTHING about this in wikipedia. because if i push my ideology on wikipedia articles or commons images, this will be rule breaking. also, whatever reason that why i put your images in deletion, it is not important. and your images got deleted, thats the most important thing. ----modern_primatඞඞඞTALK09:59, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just made a "guess", trying to understand why someone would be so "passionate" about having dozens of Kızılelma images deleted from Wikimedia Commons (the time and effort for doing it). This was the only "logical explanation" I could think of. Mercresis (talk) 10:08, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
stop trying to understand. stop personal comments. user your "logical explanation" for uploading proper licensed images.
@Modern primat: Unfortunately I didn't check my notifications until several hours after you posted your request for my help, but I have seen it now. What exactly are you asking me to "handle"? Most of what has been written here relates to activity on commons, where I have no particular relevance. As far as I can see, the only thing on English Wikipedia that you can be referring to is the fact that Mercresis suggested you might be acting from political motives. If so, then perhaps it might have been better to have extended more assumption of good faith, but it really doesn't go as far as being an attack, and it could perhaps have been best handled by you posting a friendly message suggesting that there wasn't justification for thinking you were acting from political motives. JBW (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Modern primat: When I wrote my message above I had not seen your talk page and block log on Turkish Wikipedia. I have now seen them both, and with the help of Google translate I have a reasonable idea of some of the things that led to your being indefinitely blocked from editing there. You may like to think about some of the things you were told there, and consider whether any of them might be helpful to you in connection with English Wikipedia. In particular, you may like to reconsider your approach to other editors with whom you have disagreements on English Wikipedia. Possibly taking a less combative approach might be more effective in getting your points across. JBW (talk) 18:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
what?! im the criminal here right now?!
you first say: ""Most of what has been written here relates to activity on commons, where I have no particular relevance.""
then you say: ""your talk page and block log on Turkish Wikipedia""
tell me, are you interested in protecting users from personal attack? or choose "oh, im not active commons but you are problematic because turkish wikipedia!!". this is dissapointment. ----modern_primatඞඞඞTALK23:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:4nn1l2&oldid=676519682#personal i got warning just because of that in commons: """""did you remove turkish azan for your personel religous beliefs? im looking your user page, and i see you are iranian(which iran is islamic republic). just, it is a thought. if you do that, it is bad. and tomorrow, im gonna record and upload again with more PROPER ways."""""
@Modern primat: Please don't twist my words to make them say things that they didn't say. If you wish to make constructive and civil criticisims of what I have actually said then I shall be willing to think about those criticisms, consider what if any valid points you make, and respond to them accordingly. If, however, you are just going to apply the same battleground approach to my comments that you have done to other editors' comments, then you are going to get nowhere. If you really honestly can't understand that, then I really don't know what I can say that might be more helpful. As for "protecting users from personal attack", if you tell me what personal attack, and when and where it was made, so that I can look at it for myself, then I will be willing to consider whether there is anything to be done about it. JBW (talk) 21:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
... can create a distasteful text sandwich (depending on platform and window size).Wide images opposite one another...
Multiple images can be staggered right and left. However, avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other; or between an image and infobox, navigation template, or similar..
Hello Moxy, I checked it with a smartphone, the dimensions are good (349px in total, all three fit a smartphone screen horizontally). Mercresis (talk) 14:50, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Istanbul Naval Museum into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit to Turkey has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 14:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have undone the revision deletion, but I am not going to restore the text, because it's unsourced, and because the article Turkey is already pretty large. In the future, when you copy from one Wikipedia article to another, you need to provide attribution. This is done by saying in your edit summary that the material was copied, and where you got it. Please have a look at this edit summary for an example of how it is done. Please let me know if you have any questions, or have a look at WP:Copying within Wikipedia for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 15:45, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Ince Minaret Madrasa, without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ─ The Aafī(talk)15:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm echoing the notice above; please don't move articles without discussion. Also, this is the English Wikipedia, so the Turkish version of the name is not necessarily (and is often not) the most appropriate version to use. (See the specific guidelines at WP:USEENGLISH and WP:COMMONAME.) Please keep this in mind for the future. I've likewise reverted your move of Yakutiye Medrese for the same reasons. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 21:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It should be either "Yakutiye Medresesi" (in Turkish) or "Yakutiye Madrasa" (in English). There is no such building as "Yakutiye Medrese" in Turkey, which is grammatically wrong. Mercresis (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"İnce" means "Thin" in Turkish. "İnce Minaret Madrasa" is half Turkish, half English. Either rename it as "İnce Minareli Medrese" or as its English translation "Thin Minaret Madrasa" or "Slender Minaret Madrasa". I support the original Turkish name. Mercresis (talk) 21:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Hagia Sophia" means "Holy Wisdom" in Greek ("St. Sophia" is a commonly made wrong translation), but it's never translated to other languages. Similarly, I support the original name also for İnce Minareli Medrese (no need to translate it as "Slender Minaret Madrasa", as Hagia Sophia is never translated as "Holy Wisdom" in other languages). Mercresis (talk) 21:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Yakutiye Medrese. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
What I support is irrelevant, follow the Wikipedia guidelines on moving articles as was clearly requested above. See Wikipedia:Requested moves for how to propose a move in the appropriate manner. The notices on your talk page above show that you have been editing on Wikipedia long enough and received previous warnings, so that you have no excuse for edit-warring or ignoring other guidelines. Any further edits like this will be reported to WP:ANI. R Prazeres (talk) 21:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Yakutiye Medrese" is grammatically wrong in Turkish. The correct Turkish form in this case is "Yakutiye Medresesi" and the correct form in English is "Yakutiye Madrasa". It would be more logical to choose one of these two names. The difference between "Medrese" and "Medresesi" (e.g., "Gök Medrese" and "Yakutiye Medresesi") is grammatically similar to the difference between "Cami" and "Camii" (e.g., "Ulu Cami" and "Nuruosmaniye Camii"). But don't worry: many Turks don't know how and when to use "Cami" and "Camii" correctly. Mercresis (talk) 22:05, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. As you note above, the correct English is "Yakutiye Madrasa" - so why did you not move the title to the English? I can't understand why on English Wikipedia you are preferring Turkish names over what even you yourself term the correct form in English - please use these forms instead! If all of your recent moves had been to titles ending in 'madrasa' then they would be much less of an issue, but moves to Medrese or Medresesi are not helpful. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@R Prazeres: It looks like a lot of trouble would be saved here if we could just all agree to go with the more common anglicized English forms of the Turkish names, i.e. madrasa here, rather than using the less common albeit slightly more bilingual transliteration of 'medrese' to avoid the confusion over whether this is less common English or grammatically incorrect Turkish. It would be better to meet on the common ground. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:56, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't mind either one, but please see my comment at the Yakutiye article's talk page. I think the context there is needed. R Prazeres (talk) 09:04, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessary: If you insist on having it wrong, have it wrong. I wrote the right version, and I explained it to you with examples above. After this point, I really don't care. It will be Wikipedia's loss if you'll revert it back to the grammatically wrong version, not mine. I have more important concerns and priorities in life. Mercresis (talk) 22:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the grammar rule in Turkish: Adjective + Medrese (e.g., Gök Medrese), or Name + Medresesi (e.g., Yakutiye Medresesi). Similarly, Adjective + Cami (e.g., Ulu Cami), or Name + Camii (e.g., Nuruosmaniye Camii). Mercresis (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
March 2023
Your edit to TAI TF-X has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. BilCat (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll be waiting for the verdict regarding the permission to use a Turkish government released image on Wikimedia Commons. The user who claimed copyright violation at Wikimedia Commons didn't provide any source to support this allegation (there is no such statement in the sourced link). It was just a guess, I suppose. Thank you for the notification. Mercresis (talk) 12:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no stake in this, or even interest, and never heard of it until today. (It turned up on my Watch List, and I got curious.) I don't know what the images are, and have no feelings one way or the other about whether they should be there. HOWEVER, while I could very well be mistaken, your last remark suggests a misunderstanding. It is true that, under US Copyright Law, publications of the US Government are in the public domain. But that's not necessarily true for other countries' governments. In my job, I've seen a lot of publications of the British Government, and they are generally marked Crown Copyright. I couldn't tell you about publications of the Turkish Government. But Wikipedia has to be careful. No information that a thing is under Copyright is not good enough; there has to be clear evidence that a thing ISN'T under Copyright. Uporządnicki (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, the laws and permissions are different in each country, and the Turkish government has generally stricter rules about content sharing (even though, in this case, the images have been shared with the global media, and their dissemination is to the benefit of the ruling party's propaganda efforts for this year's presidential and parliamentary elections). Mercresis (talk) 00:49, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Edit warring and politics
Regarding this edit, I'd recommend that you take a look at the actual quality of the image. It's an objectively low-quality image that does a very poor job of showing what a galley looks like. It's only interesting as an illustration of that particular vessel (until someone takes a better photo).
I have nothing against including an image of an Ottoman galley in the lead, but it has to be a good general illustration of the article topic.
Oh, and please refrain from making up political arguments based on the fact that I'm Swedish.
Okay, I just wanted to express that Turks in general view Sweden positively and it's only a temporary situation (Sweden will sooner or later join NATO, in my opinion - probably within this year). But, perhaps it would be better for Sweden to maintain its neutrality, who knows... Maybe Erdoğan made you a favor that you can appreciate only in the long term. Finland has a long border with Russia so their situation is more dangerous, of course. Just my two cents. :) Mercresis (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. DeCausa (talk) 15:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please note, WP:EW says "The three-revert rule states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material, on a single page within a 24-hour period." I've added the underlining. It's more than 3 reverts of any part of the article: not just the same material. You're way over that today: this edit is at least your fourth. You should self-revert. Your edit summary also doesn't make senses. It doesn't have to be "officially" stated by the government - it's been reported by the state broadcaster. It seems like it's just because I reverted your turkey bird edits! DeCausa (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't say it was. It explicitly said that "TRT reported that...". that's quite normal. Are you going to self-revert as you have breached 3RR? DeCausa (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting the sentence was a completely new edit, not the repetition of a previous one. The journalist's personal opinion doesn't reflect the official declaration of the Turkish government. Mercresis (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not commenting on the topic above, Mercresis, but I would like to note that you seem to be getting into a lot of very pointless Turkey-related disputes. In galley (see thread above this one), you came on very aggressively with irrelevant antagonism and by invoking Turkish-Swedish foreign politics with zero relevance to the edited content.[1] Your edit had no bearing on the content itself and your edit comment was an ethnically motivated personal attack.
I've been editing Wikipedia for some time now, and I've been involved in some heated disputes myself over the years. I strongly advise you to develop some sort of strategy to soften your approach. Wikipedians are a pretty patient bunch, but if you keep engaging in personal attacks, pushing to the upper limits of 3RR, making obviously specious arguments, etc, that patience will run out.
To be honest, I'm more interested in aircraft carriers nowadays. I will leave you the topic of galleys. Keep up the good work. Mercresis (talk) 14:30, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for May 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kaan (name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kağan.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
I didn't add it, I originally deleted it. Then I felt sorry for the Azeri editor who added it (perhaps the pilot was his grandfather, family relative, etc.), so I decided to put it back (I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings). Don't worry, I won't put it back. Mercresis (talk) 14:03, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Turkey
The mass undiscussed changes you are making to the article Turkey are not supported by WP:CONSENSUS. Per WP:BRD gain consensus before making significant changes to the existing content. Changes such as this [2] require consensus to change. // Timothy :: talk02:56, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
What kind of a sham court is this? Accusing people with no proper evidence, just ridiculous "guess making"? Associating me with some random person who was banned two decades ago? Even the geolocation of the listed IP numbers of the banned person don't match! Mercresis (talk) 23:29, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
This is not a court. This is a private entity determining that you should not be permitted to use its editing services. It isn't a guess("Behavioural analysis + CU results leads me to believe Mercresis is indeed a sock"). 331dot (talk) 09:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I'll let the checkusers speak to your second assertion, although they probably cannot say anything publicly. But as for your first ... hey, this is the Internet; you could say you're a dog for all we could do to verify that. We have no way of independently checking your age, so that's a meaningless defense to the charge. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:25, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Orphaned non-free image File:CEV Champions League Volley 2023 Super Finals.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:CEV Champions League Volley 2023 Super Finals.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
_(cropped).jpg)
