The condition you've added is not really enforcable under the CC-BY 4.0 license:

"free to use under only condition, to inform me where you have used it"

You may ask people to inform you, but it must be clear it is not a requirement. Otherwise, it counts as adding additonal restrictions, which is foribben by the license.

Similarly, the requirement on your other submissions that people credit you "if this is used commercially" is not enforceable because they are all under the CC0 license. If you want attribution, CC-BY 4.0 requires it, but CC0 does not.

Let me know if you have any questions. Until then, this and all other submissions with licensing conflicts have been download disabled to prevent people from using your assets in ways you may not approve of.

EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)

So here are my (hopefully more useful) notes. You don't need to do anything regarding these. Your submission is perfectly cromulent right now. This is just for your edification:

• The desire behind restrictions like "no reselling" and "no redistribution" are totally understandable. It is fairly obvious people mean do not resell these assets by themselves, but selling them within a game is fine. However, the practical and legal results of such restrictions do not align with those desires.
• The license (CC-BY) explicitly forbids adding extra restrictions like that. Once you add restrictions on top of the license, it stops being that license and risks weakening the protections the license provides.
• By foribdding resale and/or redistribution, it creates an unintended legal pitfall that makes the asset effectively illegal to use at all, even in free games. If someone shares their game on steam or itch, that counts as redistributing the asset within it. It also counts as "reselling" because, although the game may be free, the game is still used to attract customers to the platform, which earns revenue in other ways.
• Fortunately, the CC-BY license requires people to credit you and (especially when you explicity request it) link back to this page. Although reselling is technically permitted by the license (to allow for the games to be shared at all) this attribution requirement makes it very difficult for someone else to successfully sell your asset on its own. For example, someone takes this free asset, puts it up on itch or some other asset selling site and charges money for it. They still have to credit you and link back to this page. Any potential customer clicks the link, sees it is free here, and doesn't bother paying the other person for it.
• If the 3rd party seller does NOT attribute you or provide a link to this page on their sale page, they are in violation of the license and expose themselves to copyright infringement, etc.
• It is fine (and even encouraged) for you to share a small sample asset (as you have done here) while linking to a "premium" version of the asset elsewhere to entice people to visit your paid content. You can even license the exact same content differently on different platforms. Clarice can be CC-BY 3.0 here, and be a proprietary commercial license on itch, even if there is zero difference in content. But only YOU can decide to do that as the owner of the copyright. No one else gets to relicense your content without your permission.
• Found the issue with the links and fixed them.
• EDIT: Some tags you used are redundant and will probably be auto-deleted soon since they won't help people find what they're looking for:
  • 2danimation (a compound tag that no one will search for. Animation? sure. 2d? redundant; this asset is already in the '2D art' category)
  • freedownload2d (everything on this website is a free download)
  • freeasset (everything here is a free asset)
  • 2dart (redundant; '2D art' category)
  • 2dcharacter (character? sure. 2d? redundant, and making a compound tag like this makes it less likely to be found because far less people would search for '2dcharacter' than just 'character')

Let me know if you have any questions about this, and thanks again for sharing.

You may not apply legal terms that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)

Not really. In fact, posting it here- on a publicly visible page- helps prevent that. The formal copyright process involves a search for existing works. Even if the copyright office never found this CC0 asset during that search and somehow granted the 3rd party a copyright on it, it would be very easy to prove this asset existed before their copyright application, which would both nullify their claim and subject them to fraud charges.