This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi all - hoping someone can advise on the copyright status for this file, seems to be used and probably owned by the Liberal Party of Ontario as they use it on their website. I'm an intruder from Wikipedia so I'm not quite sure how this works over at Commons. Thanks, WildComet (talk) 03:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks WildComet, the file is attributed, in the metadata at the bottom of the file page, to "Thomas Skrlj" as the author and copyright holder. Because there is no evidence the copyright holder has given permission I've tagged it as requiring permission. Ww2censor (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I really don't know much about this bit I am very interested in it. I am not professional photographer but I love photography. Can I upload my captured photos?? And I am not from any agency so how can I get any permission??
Can I take part in this compition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Here sona0000 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Here sona0000: Many editors who upload their photos are non-professionals, so yes you can upload so long as your work is with the scope of the project (see Project scope). Most competitions have some rules so you need to read them before uploading to that competition. Please sign your posts by adding four tildes, like this ~~~~ to the end of your post, so editors know where to find you and who made the post in question. Ww2censor (talk) 15:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
New Page Creation
Hello! I'm not sure if this address is still monitored but I was wondering how I would go about creating a page for a company on Wikipedia? I have searched before but to no avail, and it is now about 4 years later and still no luck. :) Anyway, the company's name is Recursive Dynamics and it's current operating area is middle georgia, although we ship internationally. Is there any way to create this entry or any way to purchase one? Thank you!
@TheCoffeeGuy1: I'd suggest that you read en:Help:Your first article, which describes the requirements and procedures for creating an article on the English-language version of Wikipedia. I suspect that Recursive Dynamics isn't sufficiently notable to merit a Wikipedia article. If you have further questions, the people at the en:Wikipedia:Teahouse are probably in a better place to answer them. --bjh21 (talk) 13:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
TheCoffeeGuy1: However if appears you want to write about a company you work for. Ideally this is not the forum for such questions that should really be addressed to the wikipedia of your own language s mentioned above. I will cover some points quickly for you. Because Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia written by its readers, the subjects for our articles are generally chosen by the editing community. Please note that although Wikipedia has many articles on companies and products, our website is not a business or web directory. For more information about why this is so, please see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOTDIR>. You may also find it helpful to view our notability requirements at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability> (for the general guidelines) or <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CORP> (for organizations).
You should also be aware that the Wikipedia community strongly discourages articles written by individuals close to a subject because of the inherent problem of "conflict of interest"— this is the difficulty in writing objectively about your organization, your family, your work, or yourself. You can read more about the issues around conflict-of-interest editing here: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:COI>. Ww2censor (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Deanna Corso: Do you have an actual question? Please sign your posts by adding four tildes, like this ~~~~ to the end of your post, so editors know where to find you and who made the post in question. Ww2censor (talk) 15:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
And if there is some other language in which you can make yourself clearer than you can in English, please use it. - Jmabel ! talk15:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
UNHCR Connecting Worlds App
UNHCR's has build a first of a kind Connecting Worlds app, where refugees and donors, in a secure environment, can exchange messages and images to create a stronger connection and common understanding. UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is mandated to lead and coordinate international action for the worldwide protection of refugees and the resolution of refugee problems. The APP is in a pilot phase and has been tested in three regions with very positive reviews from both refugees and donors.
I am wanting to add a picture to the wikipedia article about the chief justice of the supreme court of Japan. In official website of the supreme court, there is an article about him that has a picture (https://www.courts.go.jp/english/about/justice/otani_n/index.html). I am not sure what licence this picture has and if i can use it.
Saya selalu upload photo dari seluler android , sedangkan dalam ikut serta kompetisi harus disertakan METADATA sedangkan berkas photo dari seluler android hanya ada tanggal bulan & tahun serta waktu yang menunjukan jam pengambilan photo / kamera.
Saya selalu mengabadikan alam dengan seluler adroid.
Terimakasih. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WarnaLautku (talk • contribs) 11:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Using Google translate: appears to be a complaint that our contests require metadata that is not easily captured on an Android Mobile. Not clear what help is being requested. - Jmabel ! talk14:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
I have tried "Perform batch task" and viewed "View source for Commons:Deletion requests/" (which is protected and so I can not use) to no avail. I tried to copy Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Tourist snapshots by user Matlin 5 also. If I nominate them one by one, people get angry. These are the files I wish to nominate for deletion because they are "tourist snaps" or personal pictures. They are currently not categorized in the May 1, 2021 section.
The "visual file" tool does not work for this as this editor has uploaded thousands of images in the last month. What is the way to do this? Thank you, Krok6kola (talk) 23:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Great! Thank you! I am trying to figure out what you did. COM:JWB is just a dummy file to put things in temporarily? I was trying to use COM:VFC with dates. That editor has probably uploaded 20,000 images or more in May alone. Krok6kola (talk) 01:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Wonderful idea. I should do something like that.(User:Krok6kola/temp!) There are so many completely junk images in May 2021 uncategorized files. I noticed with the above mentioned editor, many of his images have no category at all. One way of dealing with the situation, I guess. Thank you again. Krok6kola (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
@Krok6kola: You're welcome. However, that attempted ping did not work. Per mw:Extension:Echo#Usage, you must link to another user's page and sign in the same edit in order to effectively mention, notify, or ping them, and even then only if they have "Notify me when someone links to my user page" set (which is the default here). — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me02:37, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
I cannot complete the process of uploading a .webm of 2.9 GB using the standard Special:UploadWizard. The uploading part seems to work (it takes me about 2 hours to complete), but at the very end I get the error "The server did not respond within the expected time.". I tried with Firefox 88 and Chromium 91 on Ubuntu 20.04. What are my options? Is it worth it to try a command line tool (Commons:Command-line upload) or a desktop application (Commons:Upload_tools#Standalone_desktop_applications)? The file is in fact the product of the concatenation (via ffmpeg) of two .webm files (1.8 GB + 1.1 GB). Maybe I could upload these two files and some administrator could run ffmpeg -f concat -safe 0 -i list.txt -c copy output.webm on the serveur?
Note: the .webm file is a video tutorial on how to contribute to Wikimedia Commons (in French).
Hi ,
I'm wondering if i am ale to upload images from academic papers into an article if these papers are then appropriately refrenced and cited ? thank you. TechnicolourKaleidoscope (talk) 04:41, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't understand why all of my original photographs are being flagged as copyright as I try to publish an article for my organization. How can I give you copyright info when I am already abiding by your rules to only upload what I have taken with my own camera...
This seems very backwards and I would appreciate it if someone could authorize me to please upload my own photos. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.7.142.99 (talk) 11:42, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
If they are public domain, you'll need to use a template that indicates why. If they are copyrighted, you may not upload them here. - Jmabel ! talk02:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
How to show my gallery of art in Wikimedia commons
@Meshack gonga: Typically, we only want general artwork if the artist is of encyclopedic notability. I'm going to guess that you are not, but if you have any evidence that you are, then please provide that. - Jmabel ! talk02:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Appropriate name for a category including a company name
Hi,
I wondered if anyone can point me to the right place to discuss the appropriateness of category names (in this case, whether "Orange mobile phones" for mobile phones related to the "Orange" brand is in line with Commons' standards or conventions- assuming we have them- and if not, what it should be named.) Thanks. Ubcule (talk) 17:52, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ubcule: COM:CFD is probably a good place for this. You should be able to start a discussion by clicking "Nominate category for discussion" in the Tools bar on the left, while on the category page. – BMacZero (🗩) 20:37, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Is this within the threshold of originality policy?
Hello, I am new here at Commons but I edit pages at the English Wikipedia frequently, specifically this one as Wetrorave. The topic of that article has recently gone viral on TikTok, and a YouTuber published a video titled "The Darkest Album I Have Ever Heard", which is mentioned in the article text.
Now, a writer mentioned the video and its thumbnail (directly linked here) is mentioned by that writer as an example of the exaggeration of some Internet users in relation to the article's topic. I have cropped the image to show only the text "THIS ALBUM WILL BREAK YOU" but I am not sure if it thus falls under the public domain per the threshold of originality. Does it? I mean, the text does consist of "simple geometric shapes or text." What I am worried about is the background, which is not simple geometric shapes or text. The main thing of the image (the text) is simple, but the background is not. While I think this could be adequately described by prose, the font size of the text in the thumbnail does add up to the "exaggeration" factor mentioned--the purpose would be to show an instance where a user has overestimated the album's "scary" quality, and increased font size does help with this (probably at the subconscious level).
@Wetrorave: I'm sorry, there's a lot there that I'm not following. For what image exactly are you asking whether it exceeds the threshold of originality, and what country does it come from (since that standard is set differently under the laws of different countries)? - Jmabel ! talk02:52, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Ah yes, sorry for my confusing explanation. Basically, I want to use this image on an article of the English Wikipedia but cropped so that only the text appears, in order to meet the simple geometric shapes and text criterion of the threshold of originality policy. Would a cropped edit of the image showing only the text be unoriginal enough so that it is public domain? Wetrorave (talk) 03:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob ich Fotos aus Fandom-Wikis (Hier: Little Nightmares Fandom) benutzen darf. Unter "Licensing" (https://www.fandom.com/licensing) hieß es, dass der Text in den Artikeln unter Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License 3.0 lizensiert ist. Was die Bilder angeht, steht dort nichts, weshalb ich angenommen habe, dass für diese dasselbe gilt.
Hallo User:Popaaa, wenn keine Lizenz angegeben ist, müssen wir leider grundsätzlich davon ausgehen, das die Datei Urheberrechtlich geschützt ist und hier daher nicht verwendet werden kann. In diesem Fall liegt das Copyright wohl bei Bandai Namco Entertainment. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Change of display image by unknown persons
I am inquiring as to why a picture that I have uploaded was not accepted for submission. The article I have submitted for publishing has been accepted and published, however, the picture I have provided was not. From who was the current display picture and why wasn't I notified? Why is the picture I provided hadn't been used in the publishing of the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafiq Alam1987 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Display Image Changed by unknown party
@Rafiq Alam1987: Fitindia deleted File:2020 Profile Pic2.jpg because you didn't provide any evidence that it was released under a free licence. When you upload someone else's work to Wikimedia Commons, you need to provide some evidence that the author has actually agreed to allow anyone to use it for any purpose. See Commons:Licensing for all the details. File:Madam Rabab Fatima.jpg has a similar problem: the source Web page doesn't give any indication that it's available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence that you've claimed. --bjh21 (talk) 21:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Link from commons to wikidata
I created the page Ilya Borodin (swimmer) in en.WP ([2]). I tried to create a category here, but I don't know how to add a link to the page in en.WP. Using the "add links" button does not work, because I cannot insert anything under "page". Can anyone help? --Kallichore (talk) 23:44, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, I am unsure about whether pictures from this video can count. The caption states, "This video is available for editorial licensing, broadcast tv, all media and worldwide use" But ultimately I am unsure what category this comes under. Hope someone can help thanks. Maxwell King123321 (talk) 07:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Hello. I tried to use the Commons SVG Checker, and it said that my file was not an SVG, although it is, and I made it in Inkscape. What does this mean and how can I resolve it.
Thanks for the help,
--Amtoastintolerant (talk) 03:33, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Screen shots from Simpson Trial available for free on Youtube
Hello! I got a message on my talk page that screen shots I've posted to several wikipedia pages may be deleted if I don't source the information. I want to follow police but I was understood that screen shots are permissible. I took some screen shots of Youtube videos from the Simpson Trial and uploaded them to wikipedia. If that is not allowed then I will immediately delete them but if there is a way save them I'd prefer that but in either case I want to follow policy. I didn't realize I was doing any type of copyright violation because I was the one who made the screen shots so it should be considered mine property since I'm the one who made it and it is freely available on Youtube. Please help me out with this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsongebre (talk • contribs) 08:44, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
I have to ask you that how can i add my own business on wikipedia. I have an account on wikipedia and also i had a page on wikipedia. But it had been speedy deleted. I dont know why. And also kindly guide me how to establish my company on wikipedia. Its an important platform that we have to focus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SARZ Music Production (talk • contribs) 09:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi all, so, I just uploaded my first contribution [3] and a bot helpfully added info, that I wasn't sure I needed to add. Anyway, now my questions: when I google the name of the image the media file doesn't come up in the search. Not on the first page, nor the last. ;-) Have I missed something or is it because it is newly created that google doesn't show it? How can I increase it's "attractiveness"? And last one, for now: can I link in the source section to the web site containing the image? TIA Pisa911 (talk) 06:04, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello and welcome here! To the first question: google needs some time (a week or a little more days), to find new contributions in the www and to show them as a search result. Furthermore it can be helpful to delete your browser cache. Best regards --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:07, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR and I'll try to be patient! Would you be able to tell me if I can add a link to a web site for the source and how to make it a "hyperlink" instead of a "redirect footnote" thingy? Sorry about the lingo, not sure what the accurate terminology is. TIA Pisa911 (talk) 19:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Pisa911, think there is a problem: do you know, when (or: in which year) the painter created the self-portrait? (That could be helpfull, even if its long ago). This is his work, and you are the photographer of it and must have a permission to put your photo under a free license like you have done (and it's needed here). May be, Petra Alsbach-Stevens said or has written to you so? First, I can entry this in the file information, what I know now. It's right to follow the information "not your own work" in this and similiar upload cases.
Please read the websites imprint chapter "Copyright":
"The content and works on these pages created by the site operators are subject to German copyright law. The reproduction, processing, distribution and any kind of exploitation outside the limits of copyright require the written consent of the respective author or creator. Downloads and copies of this site are for private, non-commercial use only. To the extent the content on this site was not created by the operator, the copyrights of third parties are considered. Third party content in particular is marked as such. If you should still be aware of a copyright infringement, we ask you to provide us appropriate information on the matter. Upon notification of appropriate violations, we will remove such content immediately."
Without a permission your photo has to be deleted here, or the painting must be older then 70 years of sure.
Thanks for that input Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR, I am Petra Alsbach-Stevens, the great-granddaughter of WKD. How would I prove that? So far, the images I have uploaded were taken by myself. But as my father, grandmother and greatgrandfather are dead, I cannot get permission from them. I have not been able to ascertain when my great-grandfather died, but judging from the lack of family photos after 1945 I assume it occurred around that time. He was born in 1876 and the self portrait bears strong similarity to a photo of him from the 1920's, would that be sufficient proof that it's an old painting? And how would I document that in the image file? I have lots of other paintings, I just got permission from my cousin-twice removed to use her photos, and they are actually dated 1936! How do I document her permission, she's not a user on wiki. On the website there are images from autcion sellers etc and I have used their images there with their permission, would that be enough or do I have to go back and get their permission for Commons as well? TIA Pisa911 (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
PS: on my user page I have mentioned that he is my ancestor. But I assume that doesn't count as proof. Pisa911 (talk) 21:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
@Pisa911: This is going to be a bit complicated, because there are several images, and several different sets of issues. We can probably sort out at least most of them, but there is going to be some back and forth.
I don't see above: was his work all in what, at the relevant times, were under German jurisdiction, or will Latvian (or other) law also enter the matter?
Could you please create a Category:Wilhelm Karl Dohmann and add that category to all of the images so that we have an easy way to see all of the relevant images in one place? (If you don't know how to do that: are the images in question precisely all of your uploads and nothing but your uploads?)
Thanks for your offer of help Jmabel. Yes, my uploads are all works by WKD, and if I can sort out the copyright and other issues I would like to upload all the ones that are owned by the family (~20) Background to my contribution: various auction houses and museums are using wrong biographical information when putting his works up, all going back to this entry [4]. The date of birth and death are from an ancestry.com profile of someone with the same name. The gallery has not responded to me about correcting it. I want to create a more openly available resource, making sure his work gets acknowledged correctly. Unfortunately he was not a relevant painter of his time, so writing a page for him on Wikipedia is out of the question. Regarding the permission for use of photos taken by my family, does everyone have to send an email to the OTRS or can I submit it in other ways? Regarding jurisdiction: he lived and worked in Latvia til 1912, Germany 1915-23, Argentina 23-30's, Germany 30's - 40's. During all those times he painted to support his family. TIA Pisa911 (talk) 01:13, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
PS: I just looked at how to create a category, but to be honest I feel utterly overwhelmed by all the other things to create and look out for, so I won't do anything on that front yet.Pisa911 (talk) 01:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
@Pisa911: Duration of copyright in Germany is life plus 70 years, so right now works of anyone who died in 1950 or earlier would be public domain there. If you know confidently that he did not live past 1950, then {{PD-old-70}} will do. If you can find out the date of death down to at least the year (if you are a relative, you probably can work out who would know) you would do better to use {{PD-old-auto}}.
date QS:P,+1950-00-00T00:00:00Z/7,P1319,+1945-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1326,+1950-00-00T00:00:00Z/9,P1480,Q5727902
. That seems unlikely: this does not appear to be a portrait of a man in his seventies. Could you please also look at what you have said for dates on other images? In particular, anything we can definitively place before 1926 will be public domain in the U.S., using {{PD-US-expired}}. For later ones, I'd personally guess that they will be either {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}} but that may take some research. Probably someone at Commons:Village pump/copyright can better help there.
You are clearly wrong in describing a 1944 photo as your "own work," please change that to accurately reflect who took the photo, and you will need permission from the photographer or, more likely, the heir to their intellectual property rights (unless they also died in 1950 or earlier, in which case the photo is presumably public domain, similarly to the paintings). Do you know who it was and their date of death? If not, I'm afraid we're be out of luck for another 50 years on a precautionary basis. - Jmabel ! talk14:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Jmabel for all the additional info: first up I am, together with my siblings, the current living heir of WKD. Would that make me/us the copyright heir to family photos? The photo was taken at their home by his wife. I have edited the info to that photo [5], is that the correct way? I am still trying to establish their precise death dates and places, unfortunately my grandmother and dad had not kept any documents or letters that enable me to do that easily. PS: I didn't think the photo would be kept after I deleted it from the talk page, I'm not particularly interested in posting family photos unless to prove identity, etc. Would I have to go through the deletion request process, or can I just delete it from my uploads? As for the date on the self-portrait, I understand now, that the date of creation is required, but as I don't know if he created the self-portrait when he was young or when he was old, I put down the latest possible one. He seems to have been painting to support his family right into old age. Out of the 40+ paintings I know of, only two have been dated or titled, which makes date placement really hard. Thanks for your time and thoughts Pisa911 (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Are you saying Auktionhaus Michael Zeller made up a date of death without evidence? If so, are you saying that the death date there is wrong, might be wrong, or what?
Pinging User:WolfD59 who uploaded that and presumably should be involved in this discussion. Also, WolfD59, you basically cited the front page of the auction house site as a source, which really isn't much of a source, no way to track down the original image and see what they said about it.
Where you are the heir to the painter or photographer, if your intent is to put the work in the public domain if it is not already Cc-zero-heirs, the simplest thing is to use {{Cc-zero-heirs}}. What that basically says is that if you hold any residual rights, you waive those and people may treat the work as if it is in the public domain.
How does that work with photos of the artwork that I did not take (from the auction sites for example)?Pisa911 (talk) 03:12, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
When you say "the photo" can you please link, we have several million here. You cannot delete photos, that's actually a right reserved to very few people, mainly admins. If it is your own recent upload (within the last week) and isn't used in any article, you can tag it with {{speedydelete|G7}}
If all you know about an image is a latest possible date, you can use something like {{before|1945}} (or, more likely, something like {{other date|between|1900|1945}}--you certainly know some earliest possible date. - Jmabel ! talk02:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Liebe Pisa911, ich habe die Diskussion jetzt nur überflogen, finde sie aber etwas wirr. Ich versuche daher einen Neustart in unserer beider Muttersprache. :) Soweit ich das sehe geht es hier ja v. a. um die Datei File:Wilhelm Karl Dohmann.jpg. Es gibt hier im Wesentlichen zwei Aspekte, die beachtet werden müssen:
1. Wer hat das Gemälde an sich gemacht? Laut Bildbeschreibung Wilhelm Karl Dohmann. Laut Bildbeschreibung ist das genaue Todesjahr unbekannt, aber wohl vor 1950. Damit wäre er also seit mehr als 70 Jahren tot und das Gemälde daher gemeinfrei. Kann zweifelsfrei ausgeschlossen werden, dass er nach 1950 noch lebte?
2. Wer hat die Fotografie von diesem Gemälde erstellt? Laut Bildbeschreibung du? Dann hast du selbst die Rechte an dieser Fotografie und kannst für diese auch frei eine Lizenz erteilen. (Laut einer ab morgen gültigen Änderung des deutschen Rechts ist diese Fotografie allerdings in Deutschland ohnehin nicht mehr schützbar - das spielt hier auf Commons nur teilweise eine Rolle, da hier auch US-Recht beachtet werden muss.)
Das sind jetzt erstmal die beiden wichtigen Punkte. Falls diese beiden Punkte doch schon geklärt sind und ich das oben überlesen habe tut es mir leid, dann brauchen wir uns natürlich nicht länger damit aufhalten. -- Chaddy (talk) 15:11, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Vielen lieben Dank -- Chaddy, ja, inzwischen habe ich einige Problematiken aussortieren koennen. Leider ist die Diskussion im Laufe der Tage explodiert (aufgrund meiner Unwissenheit) und unuebersichtlich geworden, leider aus dem Grund dass ich als Erbin einige der Gemaelde selber fotografiert, das problemloseste Szenario (wenn ich von einem Todesdatum vor 1950 ausgehe, habe aber ausser Abwesenheit von Familienfotos keinen definitiven Nachweis dafuer bisher). Aber ich habe auch Fotos von anderen Familienmitgliedern, die ich zwar benutzen kann, aber erst muss ich den OTRS Prozess navigieren. Und dann die Fotos von Gemaelden die ich im Internet gefunden habe. Da scheint es schwieriger zu sein, was in ein zwei Faellen schade ist, da sie wichtige Vergleichselemente enthalten, die die Zuordnungen logischer machen wuerden. Aber dass sind Probleme, die eher fuer einen Kunsthistoriker interessant sind. Pisa911 (talk) 20:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Pisa911 and Chaddy: Wenn es wäre einfacher, ich habe auch mehr als ein bißchen Deutsch.
Es macht nichts wer hat die Gemälde fotografiert. Durch die Aufnahme eines genauen Fotos eines zweidimensionalen Werkes werden keine geistigen Eigentumsrechte geschaffen. - Jmabel ! talk21:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks everyone, Jmabel-- ChaddyWilhelm Zimmerling PAR and all others in the other discussions for your patience and help. I have learned a LOT and for the time being will stick to copyright-easy images (mine and family, who I can get to send me emails with permissions for the OTRS) I'm wondering if this discussion, and the other two [7][8] should be archived to avoid others getting confused? I'd be more than happy with that. PS: I'm afraid my English is better than my German by now, as I have not lived in Germany for the past 2 decades, even though I use it daily. Now how do I add a wink emoticon?? Never mind, just kidding. Pisa911 (talk) 22:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Help with Talk/discussion page use please
Hi all, I want to upload images I took of my great-grandfather's paintings and signatures on those paintings (both his daughter and my father are deceased). Most of the paintings I cannot definitively date, because he rarely dated or titled them. Would the discussion page be the appropriate place to discuss that, or should that be part of the description of the painting? And how would I add the signature picture then without creating a separate entry for that? Or would that be an acceptable way of publishing that? Another hurdle, I have not yet been able to establish the exact date of my great-grandparents deaths, but their absence from family photos after 1950 suggests that date. So, on the discussion page I would mention that as well. I have created a sample, for the painting [9] and the discussion page [10]
Thoughts and guidelines appreciated Pisa911 (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Sorry to be such a pain, but I feel i need more clarification for my data entries: Date: date when MY photo was created or the art work? What's the difference between source and author? And lastly, the image [11] that got this all started has as source a hyperlink to a gallery's auction site and as author the artist. So far so good, but when I checked the gallery's web page they have NO copyright info on there. What does that mean in the context of loading images to Commons? As they have a huge gallery here as I can see in the hidden cat [12] Thanks for your patience Pisa911 (talk) 00:33, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I have just uploaded an image that is relevant, as it can provide one cornerstone comparison date.[13] But it had been published on an auction web site. So I followed/copied, I hope, the entry for this image [14]. I would appreciate it if you could check if I did it correctly. TIA Pisa911 (talk) 02:02, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Pisa911: For an accurate photo of a two-dimensional artwork with no frame or other three-dimensional aspect, the only relevant date is the date of the artwork. It does not matter when the photo was taken. - Jmabel ! talk02:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel: @Jeff G.: Urgh, I just realized I may have wasted a lot of time and energy uploading the images: I googled "Wilhelm Karl Dohmann" and my first entry appeared at the top of the search results. YAY! But then realized most people would only use "Wilhelm Dohmann" because of the signature and tried that, and nothing! Do I have to rename all the present files and can that be done in a batch (14 so far)? SORRY! Pisa911 (talk) 04:22, 6 June 2021 (UTC) PS: just read the renaming guidelines, not sure if my reasons would be a valid enough one to delete the "Karl" in the file names? Sorry, this is just all doing my head in. Pisa911 (talk) 04:38, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Pisa911: There is no need to rename any photo, as long as the name is reasonable. Just get them into the correct categories. - Jmabel ! talk21:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.,
Thank you very much for your response and concern!
This illustration is indeed distributed through this and other photostocks only by commercial RF-License. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksander AƑ (talk • contribs) 19:30, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi ! I don't know if we can use this photo in Wikipedia. I think it might be okay, but i'm not sure about it.
I found this photo in an old book (the photo might be taken in the beginnig of the last century ~1900).
I found it here : https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=loc.ark:/13960/t17m0tb96&view=1up&seq=10
The book was digitized by Internet Archive and the Library of Congress.
The book was published in 1920 after the death of the woman on the picture.
beste Wikipedianen, kan iemand kijken naar Category:Melle de Boer (kunstenaar)? Na het croppen van een foto, kwam de volgende tekst te tevoorschijn "Warning: Default sort key "de Boer, Melle" overrides earlier default sort key "De Boer, Melle". Weet iemand wat hier is fout gegaan? Groet --Agaath (talk) 21:28, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@Tarun ghritlahare4: Hi, and welcome. We probably don't want your documents, see COM:NOT. I see you have uploaded some images, where do you want them uploaded to next, and why can't you do that yourself? If you are having problems uploading to here, please be specific. See also COM:SIGN. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me04:35, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Обсуждение страницы о удалении
Здравствуйте,
Меня зовут Регина и я занимаюсь редактированием страницы, которая называется "Всероссийская газета Добрая Дорога Детства".
Эту статью хотели удалить в 2018 году из-за того, что было указано недостаточно значимости. Я отредактировала эту страницу. Газета "Добрая Дорога Детства" выпускается при поддержке Госавтоинспекции и Министерства Просвещения России, а подписка на неё оформляется в каждой школе в регионах и имеет большую аудиторию уже почти 20 лет.
How to know the user who nominated my file(s) for deletion
Hello Help Desk,
My file was deleted and I'm requesting undeletion.
But how can I know the user who nominated my file for deletion?
The deletion notification bot just says "I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 09:10, 6 June 2021 (UTC)".
If I don't need to ask the user who nominated my file for deletion as the Bot says, I don't need to know who it is. But I would like to ask undeletion to him as well as requesting via undeletion process.
Please advise.
Thank you.
@橋場巌夫: The line immediately above that comment says
User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Netora.
Generally if we see something that looks like pre-existing copyrighted material with no obvious connection between the uploader and the source, it is usually assumed to be a copyright violation (i.e. no permission) unless there is evidence of permission. So this is most likely why it was deleted.
At your talk page you also make a comment I will copy here for the benefit of the discussion:-
ABCozy(Japanese Novelist) official website "abcozy.com" announce that quote/upload from abcozy.com by the Wikipedia user "橋場巌夫" or "ABCozyOfficial" is officially done by ABCozy.com and doesn't violate copyright of ABCozy Official Website, which is indicated in the link "wikipedia情報の更新について"（About information in Wikipedia）at the bottom of https://abcozy.com/author .
@Andy Dingley and 橋場巌夫: - I wasn't aware what the image was at the time I posted the response (I couldn't see it as it had been deleted). What I said related solely to the original question and copyright issue.
I'm not Japanese, and I wasn't really in a position to discuss notability of the author and/or usefulness of the image (both of which determine whether it belongs here). However, I do see that the Twitter account has 11 followers. Ubcule (talk) 13:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ubcule: @Andy Dingley:
Thank you for your advice. My name was changed from 橋場巌夫 into ABCozyOfficial
Do you mean that the logo should be deleted from Wikimedia Commons even if it is proved to be approved to upload into Wikimedia Commons by the official website?
The ABCozy official website added English statement like below in the link "About information in Wikipedia" at the bottom of https://abcozy.com/author .
And, the logo which was deleted is the one located on upper left in the website.(Yes, gemstone one)
---
2021/June/5 Created Wikipedia page of 阿部考二
The Wikipedia page created on 2021 June 5th Sat 00:11 by the user "ABCozyOfficial" is the official creation by abcozy.com.
Until now and from now on, the reprint/upload by the Wikipedia user "ABCozyOfficial" into Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons is the official one by ABCozy Official Website abcozy.com.
The reprint/upload by the Wikipedia user "ABCozyOfficial" into Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons is the one which has been done under the official right and does never violate the copyright of abcozy.com.
The other users than "ABCozyOfficial" doesn't have the right to reprint/upload the contents of abcozy.com without approval by abcozy.com, but, of course, as far as it is already reprinted/uploaded into Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons by "ABCozyOfficial", the reprint/upload/modify of the specific contents in Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons in accordance with the rule of Wikipedia/WIkimedia Commons does not violate copyright of abcozy.com.
And, of course, it doesn't violate copyright of abcozy.com, too, to not reprint contents in abcozy.com but to describe facts which can be read from the information in abcozy.com, wherever described inside or outside of Wikipedia, even if the contents is different from the part which the user "ABCozyOfficial" reprinted into Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons.
Please report to abcozy.com when you find reprint/upload by the other user than "ABCozyOfficial" which is suspected to be illegal and violate copyright of abcozy.com. Thank you.
Copyright and permission. (Whether you own the copyright or have permission to upload the images under a free license.)
Whether the image belongs here. Commons is a resource for useful images within the project scope. Even if we have permission, an image does not belong here if it is not useful for us. (This is what Andy Dingley was saying). Generally speaking, purely promotional content isn't accepted unless it is likely to be of interest or use.
Although your image was (perhaps wrongly) originally deleted for copyright-related reasons, I suspect that the logo doesn't belong here (unless the author is especially famous and notable). It's harder for me to judge that personally as I amn't Japanese.
Please note that I am not an administrator or employee of Commons. I am just a normal contributor that answered your question, and I can't keep track of all uploads personally.
Ubcule Thank you so much for your advice. I understand you are contributor, thanks. But if you are fine, please let me ask again.
>Even if we have permission, an image does not belong here if it is not useful for us. (This is what Andy Dingley was saying). Generally speaking, purely promotional content isn't accepted unless it is likely to be of interest or use.
Does the "useful" mean, in other words, worth to use for Wikimedia users?
The picture is the logo of the official site and also works as the avatar of the anonymous novelist 阿部考二.
And, yes, I am the administrator of the official website and we own the copyright.
The novelist 阿部考二 is not so famous at this moment. He is a fresh novelist who won a famous mystery contest in Japan.
Do you mean the idea of Wikimedia Commons is that, if he is famous person, the avatar can belongs here but if he is not famous yet, the avatar is not "useful" and then the avatar should be deleted?
I can upload the image again soon, but I'm not sure if it will be deleted again (because he is not famous) or discussion will restart after uploading again. In other words, I'm not sure if I can upload again or I should not even if I(our website) have the copyright.
@ABCozyOfficial: As I mentioned before, it is harder for me to judge whether the image belongs here or not because I am not Japanese.
If the author was very famous, it would probably belong. Otherwise, it probably does not.
(The person has 11 Twitter followers which suggests they are not especially famous at present. My instinct is that the logo image would probably not be considered useful for that reason).
@Realitylink: author is sometimes able to give permission, but not always; the cover may have a copyrighted artwork or photograph which could have a different author than the book. Also the author may have signed the rights to a publishing company. In any case a documented OTRS permission is needed.
hello i am trying to add photos for his wiki that show he performed with the artists listed on his page. I have his permission to use these photos, how do i upload the photos with credit to him — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drummergurlrjws (talk • contribs) 03:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
I wanna to upload photo of person in Getty Images and before upload it, I want to ask question. Does Getty Images contents are free license and what license must be used? The Supermind (talk) 10:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Lewis Hine's Power house mechanic – a classic example of this. See [1]
Broadly, no.
Getty don't offer anything under a free licence. That's not their business: everything they offer is for commercial sale.
There is a lot of Getty content (other libraries do this too) that is public domain. Often older US news photographs, or US Government work. It was public domain before Getty got hold of it, and Getty are charging people to use PD content that (ovbviously) the users could get without paying them. How you regard this as a business model is another question.
So:
Don't use Getty content here
Don't use Getty content here, even if it's public domain
Some Getty content is public domain and is also available from other sources, maybe the same ones that Getty found it from. If you source from these, it's good.
This image is taken from FDRE Mayor of Addis Ababa office and probably for use under GNU Free Documentation License. You may determine how governmental photo handle in Commons. The Supermind (talk) 12:19, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Howdy
I've uploaded some photos but I think I made a mistake on one and I'd like to review the suite of photos I've uploaded.
Is there a way I can see what has been uploaded from my account and edit if necessary?
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessica Meeuwig (talk • contribs) 14:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Using CropTool on an image which is pending review.
G'Day,
I had previously uploaded this image from Bollywood Hungama which is under CC-BY-3.0 license. The upload is pending review. I want to use crop tool to crop the image so that only the Woman in the Black Dress is visible and use that image on her Wikipedia page. However I am unable to do so as the Image has not been verified yet and crop tool wont let me proceed. I can crop the image on my computer but I don't know how to reupload it as a separate image derived from the original whilst still maintaining the CC-BY-3.0 & Verification needed tags.
please advise how I can achieve this?
STC1 (talk) 20:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@STC1: are you satisfied with the current crop? And could you please provide the real webpage from which you obtained the photo? Thx!--RZuo (talk) 22:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
No matter if the new file is able to stay here or not, he has to stay here with all the people shown. I reverted the crop and everey crop of a single person should be uploaded as a new file. --Mirer (talk) 00:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
I cropped the picture to a new oneFile:Gaelyn Mendonca (cropped).jpg. Then it had to be added to Wikidata (so it is now shown in the infobox of the cat here: Category:Gaelyn Mendonca. To be seen on the Wikipedia page in "en", it had to be added there too.[15]
If you want to perform crops like this in the future, you should (have to ...) upload them as new files and you shouldn't crop them in full body height. --Mirer (talk) 00:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@RZuo, Jeff G., and Mirer: Good Day, firstly I thank you for helping me out. Secondly, I apologize for the delay in reply and my general absence, as I was not aware of the progress taking place here, at least not until I recvd. a notification from User:Jeff G.. I also apologize for posting a link directly to the file rather than to the webpage (this was something I was unaware of), I have rectified my mistake and updated the URL here File:Gaelyn Mendonca.jpg; the source being [source]. Hoping can now remove Template:Bsr. The Cropped Image I see via Template:Extracted from, will work fine for the time being (till a better image can be found). So all I need to do is upload a cropped image with Template:Extracted from and all the original file's data will automatically get carried over? Or do i need to transfer all Data like source and CC manually? Thank you in advance... STC1 (talk) 01:48, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@SierraTangoCharlie1: basically my solution to your original problem was simply removing the LR template and then it could be cropped using croptool. new images cropped by croptool will have all the original wikitext on the description page carried over, but not the COM:SDC.
the webpage URL is important because the direct image URL provides no info about how the photo is used and attributed.
@Mirer: the uploader only wanted to show the woman in black. his/her intention was evident as the filename only mentioned that woman. that's why uploading as a new file was unnecessary and the old file was Commons:Overwriting_existing_files#Unedited_versions that should be overwritten. now you'd better rename the old file to accurately name both women.--RZuo (talk) 09:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@RZuo: Thank You. I understand now what I should do in future. Appreciate the advice.
Oh, I somewhat missed the point, that the uploader (SierraTangoCharlie1) is STC1 ... I thougt he just wanted to crop it. My fault - but if we can have a picture of both, we keep it, so I asked for renaming of the picture as I don't have the right to do it myself. Thanks for pointing me there @RZuo: . Mirer (talk) 12:57, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
There's many experienced editors here who don't have a camera, including myself. The last time I ever used a camera was in 2016. SHB2000 (talk) 06:10, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Image deletion
Hi! just uploaded an image that I had gotten the rights to uploads from the photographer and the subject depicted. What do I need to do in order to make it legal? Do they need to censent somehow or what? It is my first time uploading so I am a little confused what I have to do :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndersPeterHansen (talk • contribs) 19:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, you can send the permission to Commons:OTRS. Send the original mail or something where they can read the rights. Maybe it's better if you upload your own pictures, but if you have permission, you can send it. After you do that, you can change the name of the author into the right one, because now it says it's your own work. It's possible someone places a 'missing permission' logo on the page of the image, but when they check the image, they will remove it and replace it for an OTRS-ticket. If the information is not correct or they doubt it, the image will be deleted after a week (or something). (maybe better read the OTRS-page, what I say is only what I remember..) Good luck! - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
@AndersPeterHansen and Richardkiwi: To clarify: permission needs to come from the copyright holder, which is typically the photographer, and it needs to specify a particular license. Typically the OTRS team will not accept forwarded permissions, they want email from the rights holder. - Jmabel ! talk22:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Ok @Jmabel: , on the NL-Wikipedia I uploaded photographs from strongman and rock stars and the photographer sent a mail to me with CC by SA etc.. I forwarded that to OTRS-NL. A Commons-uploader sent the image to Commons. But if it must be directly, ok, it's good that I know that, maybe it's changed in the years, the last one was maybe five years ago from Adrian Vandenberg.. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 11:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
How to show my gallery of art in Wikimedia commons
My work schedule is very important to understand how we can give something back to the community and that we have many talents to expose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meshack gonga (talk • contribs) 10:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@Meshack gonga: I believe this is not the first time you have asked something like this. The answer has not changed: we are not generally interested in hosting artwork by people who are not already, in their own right, notable. - Jmabel ! talk15:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
I am a newbie who created a few wiki "Sandbox" articles. I uploaded a number of photographs to two articles in my "Sandbox," and added a photo to a current Wikipedia article. Because most of these photos were taken more than 70 years ago, their copyrights are expired. Some of the photographs uploaded were candid photos and the personal property of descendants of deceased people whom I've created "Sandbox" Wikipedia articles.
I am quite frightened that someone named "Gbawden," from South Africa, claims they were his photographs when they clearly are not. Not only did they span 50+ years of time, they also were taken all over the country. There is no possible way he owns any of them. How could this person see my "Sandbox," when this, I believe, is a private space? I am very disconcerted by these wrongful claims to just a "Sandbox" article, especially the ones that were taken by non-professionals in a candid manner.
@BonesDCL: User:Gbawden did not claim that the photographs were his/hers; rather that you had claimed to have personally taken these photographs (Own work) which you most likely did not. While the copyrights may be expired you can't claim the photographs as your own. To restore the images please go to Commons:Undeletion requests and make request; include as much information about the images as possible, most the importantly the date (even if approximate) on when the photograph was taken and photographer if known.
Copyright often lasts 70 years from the death of the photographer; just because the image was taken 70 years ago does not automatically make it in public domain. Images from before 1926 qualify for {{PD-old}} however.
Your sandbox is publicly visible (and can't be hidden), and while it is indeed usually ignored by others the images you uploaded were saved as publicly available for all (and again this can't be avoided). It's not that Gbawden went after your sandbox; rather he noticed the images you were uploading. MKFI (talk) 06:46, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
@BonesDCL: Also, if you put not only "own work" but a date like 2011-07-13 on a photo, plus the license {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (as you did at File:Peter Oglietti Portrait 1939.jpg, then despite the title, you are saying, "I took this photo in 2011, I own the rights, and I am providing this particular free license," which is clearly not true.
Your photos appear all to be from the U.S. You will want to familiarize yourself with Commons:Hirtle chart, which will help you understand the copyright status of older U.S. photos. For anything that would still be in copyright, we need an explicit license granted by the photographer or (more likely for this period) the heir to their intellectual property. If you are that owner, this will mean something like Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs, not the simple Cc-by-sa-4.0. If it is someone other than you, the uploader, there are two possibilities:
On a page or site that the rights-holder clearly controls, they can indicate the license on that site (typically on a page that shows the image)
More likely in this case, they can go through the process described at COM:OTRS to inform us of such a license.
Sorry this is complicated. The copyright issues involved in legally publishing someone else's work are inherently complicated. - Jmabel ! talk14:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
@BonesDCL: Hi and thank you very much for the advice. I will talk with the heirs of the photographs and follow the instructions you all have listed above. Best, -Bones DCL — Preceding unsigned comment added by BonesDCL (talk • contribs) 02:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Dzień dobry,
Jakiś czas temu zmieniłem błędny herb powiatu dębickiego na poprawny, zmiana została zaakceptowana i jest już widoczna dla wszystkich użytkowników. Problem jest taki, że gdy ktoś wpisze w wyszukiwarkę google "herb powiatu dębickiego" to w grafice > link wyświetli mu się również ten błędny herb (pod linkiem wikipiedii) link. Czy jest jakaś możliwość by usunąć lub zablokować ten obraz, by się w wyszukiwaniu nie wyświetlał?
i am job mogire ogeto one of the most current student to have an account within this wikimedia community how i wish to inquire about the best approach when it comes to upload of works and principles governing the process alongside the rules bound the ativity — Preceding unsigned comment added by JOB MOGIRE (talk • contribs) 11:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
The copyright of all contents on this website, including text, pictures, audio, video, charts, etc. belongs to Chongqing Transportation Bureau or relevant right holders and is protected by "Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China" and other relevant laws and regulations.
Any media or Internet sites that reprint the content of this website must indicate the source of the information. No organization or individual may illegally copy, plagiarize, or use this website and its contents for any commercial purpose without permission. The owner of the website reserves the right to take legal action if it determines that the user's actions are illegal or detrimental to the interests of the website.
Any articles, pictures or other information that the author or the right holder of the content published on this website declares shall not be reproduced, shall not be reproduced by any unit or individual."
2. According to the Copyright Statement, its pic may follow the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
(1) laws, regulations, resolutions, decisions and orders of state organs; other documents of legislative, administrative or judicial nature; and their official translations;
(2) news on current affairs;
(3) calendars, numerical tables, forms of general use and formulas."
2. According to Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China, I think the Copyright Statement may be against this law and invalid. Is this pic in the public feild?
3. If I can upload it, which license should I choose?
Hello, a question, is it possible to upload one of these photographs from Google Arts (1)(2)(3), the dates of the images are 1917, 1916 and 1900- JSeb05 (talk) 16:31, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@AlleyCats2021: Hi, and welcome. I am sorry to inform you that you have triggered Special:AbuseFilter/153 by trying to cross-wiki upload a png image as a new user while leaving the summary intact. Such uploads of png images are not allowed at all. You indicated it's your own work. Usually when someone uploads a png image, it's a copyright violation taken from the web. Please upload the full-size original of it per COM:HR, including any metadata, but it may be judged too complex to be under TOO in the country of origin, so you may need to license it on your official website or social media or send permission via OTRS. Also, any png image will look fuzzy when scaled down (due to design decisions discussed in phab:T192744) or jaggy when scaled up, so you may want to upload an svg or jpg version, too. If you can't get a compliant license, the image may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. If you change the summary or use our Upload Wizard instead, you should be able to avoid that filter. See also COM:SIGN. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me03:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Jeff G. I'm sorry but i don't understand what you mean about my logo its my own logo it is part of my game and my website and all of my socials i own the image i created it my self. All i am trying to do is create a page for my game so i can update it and so people know how to play my game and what update has been done to my game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlleyCats2021 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@AlleyCats2021: just in case that last is unclear: "license it on your official website" means that the site of the organization for which it is a logo should state the license clearly, including any required attribution. - Jmabel ! talk15:07, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm creating an author page for a fairly well known author in my region. I'm very confused about uploading photos to wikipedia/wikmedia commons. I am in communication with the author in question, so getting his cooperation is no problem.
The author's website (which is a separate personal website including the author's name in the URL) has numerous photos taken of the author. There are no rights designations on that page, but there is attribution for the photographer for at least a few of them. Can these be uploaded to wikimedia commons without a statement from the photographer?
Suppose one of the photos on the author's site was taken by a family member who presumably would have no problems granting unlimited distribution rights. If I or the author himself were to upload these photos taken by a family member of the author, what would be needed to demonstrate that wikicommons has full rights to use this photo?
More than likely, photos of the author which appear on the author's website -- if taken by a professional photographer -- were works for hire. In many cases, it may be difficult or impossible to reach the original photographer. Is there a way for the author to make a statement declaring that this photograph was a work-for-hire arrangement, and the author himself now holds the copyright?
I could conceivably ask the author to create a separate webpage on his website containing author photos -- with full declaration of copyright. Would this by itself be sufficient proof for a wikipedia contributor to upload the images myself?
Is any method of clearing these images described above to be fastest or easiest?
Does wikimedia commons have different clearance rules (i.e., fair use) for low res images? For example, the author's website was built maybe a decade ago. The photographs of the author are certainly low res by today's standards. Would it be easier for wiki to accept low res photos of an author on the author's personal website simply because it is low-res (and therefore fair use).
There are some low-res author images on the author's Amazon.com page. Could these be submitted by a wiki contributor as fair use?
That is an awful lot of separate issues in one question. Let me see if I can answer at least some of them.
1) If there is no rights designation on a photo that was taken within living memory, then most likely that photo is copyrighted. There are a few countries where there are some exceptions to that. Since you don't mention the country or the date of the photos, you put me at quite a disadvantage. The only likely exception is U.S. photos before 28 February 1989, and even there, there are many that would still be copyrighted. I don't have a lot to work with here, but the odds are that unless these are free-licensed, we cannot use them.
2) "Unlimited distribution rights" are neither here nor there. We need a license that conforms to COM:Licensing. In particular, it must allow both commercial use and derivative works. It is alright to require attribution.
3) In most countries (there are exceptions, and you don't say what country) paying someone to take a photo does not mean you own the copyright, unless that is explicitly stipulated in a contract.
& Sorry that's all the time I have right now. - Jmabel ! talk`
1. No.
2. A statement of a free license from that family member.
3. Only if that statement is believable. A quote of an explicit clause from the written contract may satisfy that condition.
4. Are "author photos" still about photos of which your correspondent is the subject, taken by someone else? Then no. What is needed is a statement of free license by the owner of the copyright, normally the photographer. Someone else writing it on a website other than the photographer's own website is not necessarily convincing. A confirmation by email from the photographer will probably still be required. If it is about photos taken by your correspondent, then yes, a statement of a free license on your correspondent's website is sufficient.
5. In the situation where the photos were made by different people other than your correspondent, there is probably not a fast method. It sounds like a situation where an email from each photographer would be required. Please see Commons:OTRS.
From the original poster--Robert J Nagle (talk) 06:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Author and website is produced in the USA. Photos were presumably taken in the last 10 years. My questions relate more to the process for submitting these photos for approval on Wiki Commons. This author has told me that he will help me provide the necessary documentation for Wikipedia; we just can't figure out what the necessary documentation will be sufficient to convince Wikipedia to accept it. would it be enough to have the author's web page with the photos include the Creative Commmons SA/public domain designation? It's easier for me to upload/submit the image, but if necessary the author himself could upload it (that's a last resort though -- he's not tech savvy). I've uploaded author photos for 3 other authors in the past, and each time I've received a different kind of runaround from Wiki. I'm trying to avoid problems this time....
Basically, what is required is evidence of a statement, by the owner of the copyright, of a specified free license for the specified photo. It may be a mention on the photographer's own website. Or it may be in an email from the photographer to Wikimedia. If someone other that the photographer is claiming to be the owner of the copyright, then also evidence supporting that claim. A false declaration of license by someone who does not have the rights on the photos has no validity. -- Asclepias (talk) 12:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Robert J Nagle: We need a specific free license, not a vague permission. Generally, the most restrictive license that is acceptable is {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}, which allows derivative works and commercial use, but requires attribution and also means that any derivative works must be similarly licensed.
Licenses must, in each case come from the copyright holder (because you can't give away what isn't yours).
If the copyright holder is not the photographer, we have to have good reason to believe the claim of owning copyright. In some cases this may not need to be absolute proof, but absolute proof is good.
Typically, there are two ways to provide permission.
Often the simplest is for the rights-holder to specify a clear license on a site or page clearly under their control. E.g. if it's a professional photographer with a website, or if it's a selfie by an author with a website, they could place an otherwise unused page in their domain with the image and a specification of license (and we'd give that as the source) or if the photo is on their site anyway, they could indicate the license in a photo caption, alt text, comment at the bottom of the page, whatever. Alternatively, more or less the same can be done via a social media account clearly under the rights-holder's control (a public post on Facebook or Flickr, for example).
COM:OTRS for email correspondence. This is often best when someone either does not have a site or page clearly under their control, or when they need to show a contract that transferred copyright. OTRS correspondence is handled by a small number of trusted individuals, and the details of why they believe your claim can be kept confidential. Obviously, this is more cumbersome, but it handles all the edge cases.
Can I upload these museum logos (1)(2)(3), for example, considering that some simple logos can be uploaded here like this one, I wonder if they meet the same requirements to be on wikimedia commons?–JSeb05 (talk) 00:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
The second one, with a sort of variant on yin-yang, is too complicated if it is in copyright. Might it be an old enough image to have fallen out of copyright?
For the third one: I don't know the threshold of originality in Colombia, you'd want to research that; the sketch of the building on top is certainly way too complicated to be PD, but the lettering might be OK, depending on Colombian law.
@Jmabel: Well I uploaded the first logo, the image is too simple as it only includes the thai flag and a simple typography. I already put all the basic information in the page, is there anything else to do? -JSeb05 (talk) 15:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Siddartha897: please read COM:Licensing to learn about acceptable licensing terms. Obviously if the copyright-holder has reserved all rights, they are not granting any sort of free license.
Typical Flickr licenses that we can use are:
Attribution
Attribution-ShareAlike
Public Domain Dedication (CC-0)
Note that unlike "Public Domain Dedication (CC-0)" we cannot accept simple "public domain" unless we have a specific reason to believe the image is, indeed, in the public domain. Also, we heed to be reasonably confident that the Flickr user in question had the right to grant the license in question. See Commons:License laundering.
@Lynn s.sweatt: You don't seem to have any significant contributions to any Wikimedia projects, so unless unbeknonwnst to me you are notable at the level of there being an article about you (or close to that), it would not be appropriate for you to do that. We do not host personal pictures of people who are not actively involved in the project. If you make a few useful contributions, then a small number of pictures of yourself would be welcome on your user talk page, and you would upload them just like any other photos (e.g. with Special:UploadWizard. Do note, though: copyright belongs to the person who took the photo, not the subject of the photo, so that is who needs to provide a license. If they are selfies, then no problem. If someone else took them, then the simplest thing would be for that person to open an account and upload the photos as their own work. - Jmabel ! talk00:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
"specify the competition" => we have lots of competitions here, so Jeff & I have no way to know which one you are talking about. - Jmabel ! talk15:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Editing a page (not mine) and trying to add a picture to it
It is my picture. I keep getting "We could not determine whether this file is suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Please only upload photos that you took yourself with your camera, or see what else is acceptable.....". How do I solve this issue? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2405:201:8006:38:AC54:1060:9D5A:10F (talk) 08:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Usually that message arises for cross-wiki uploads of small images. If you have a higher-res version, please use that. Also, you are less likely to get that sort of message from Commons own upload tools such as Commons:UploadWizard. - Jmabel ! talk15:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Good time of day. I uploaded the picture which is single cover. I want to stand the license {{Шаблон:Несвободный файл/ОДИ}}, It’s using on the Russian Wikipedia. When I stand it, I get the attention «This file maybe meet the deletion...», and file was deleted. How can I stand this license correctly and save this file?
@FahnbullehV: As far as I can tell, your first edit on Commons was the automatic creation of your account when you asked this. What exactly were you trying to do, from what tool (please provide a URL). Did the tool give any indication of what it thought might be the problem? I doubt it just said, "You can't upload this." - Jmabel ! talk15:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Tagged files for deletion that are still up
Greetings,
so I'm not very active on Commons, so I apologize if this question sounds dumb: I've tagged twoimages for deletion in January, and the ensuing discussions have indicated that they should indeed be deleted. However, they are still up, so I am wondering what else I have to do to get them deleted? --LordPeterII (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
We could not determine whether this file is suitable for Wikimedia Commons. Please only upload photos that you took yourself with your camera, or see what else is acceptable. See the guide to make sure the file is acceptable and learn how to upload it on Wikimedia Commons.
The content must be freely licensed. Do not copy files illegally (in violation of copyright) from other websites.
If you believe that the file meets our licensing standards: Upload the file again or click "Retry failed uploads"/"Submit modified file description". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shyam Kobade (talk • contribs) 09:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@Shyam Kobade: Hi, and welcome. I am sorry to inform you that you have triggered Special:AbuseFilter/153 by trying to cross-wiki upload a smaller (<50,000 bytes or <2,000,000 pixels) jpg image as a new user while leaving the summary intact, and Special:AbuseFilter/156 by trying to upload a smaller (<50,000 bytes) jpg image as a new user. Each jpg image you tried to upload is smaller, and you indicated it's your own work. Usually when someone uploads a smaller image, it is a copyright violation taken from the web. If you made the images yourself, please upload the full-size originals of them per COM:HR, including EXIF metadata. If you did not make the images, please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept them, and have the copyright holder(s) license them on their official websites or social media or send the images and permissions via OTRS with carbon copies to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the images may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. If you change the summary or use our Upload Wizard instead, you should be able to avoid filter 153. See also COM:SIGN. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me11:46, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Socrateskilikyada: Merhaba ve hoş geldiniz. Yukarıda gönderdikten sonra başarıyla bir fotoğraf yüklediğinizi görüyorum. Bunu çözülmüş olarak kabul edebilir miyiz? Ayrıca bkz. COM:SIGN.
Trying to upload mug shots of Richard when he was arrested and charged with practicing law without license. These photos have been previously widely used by sources cited in my draft article including the NYTimes and Van Meter book about the Duncan case (case Richard was handling when arrested). Richard is dead, the photos now belong to me. My relationship to this project is clearly stated on my user page. Annesobol (talk) 16:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Annesobol
I don't understand the sense in which the photo "belongs to" you. Physical possession of a photo has nothing to do with owning intellectual property rights, which is what you would need to be able to provide a license. If you claim to own those rights:
Who was the photographer?
What is the chain of ownership by which that person's copyright comes to be owned by you?
For what it's worth, typically a photo in the New York Times would be copyrighted either by the Times itself or by a wire service. It is quite unusual for such a photo from the U.S. for any time after 1925 to be currently in the public domain. - Jmabel ! talk03:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I am writing about Draft:Richard B. Sobol, are you able to see my inquiry in my User talk for that uhr account?Annesobol (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Annesobol
I've tried to have a look around, but can not find a real answer. I'm curious why works licensed under CC-BY-ND-2.0 are not permitted on Commons, as long as the uploaded image in fact has not been remixed, transformed, or built upon? Ved havet (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ved havet: perhaps Jeff and I have not understood your question correctly. Are you perhaps asking why Commons has a policy that we accept only licenses that allow derivative works? Or perhaps you haven't understood the policy, because "uploading it to Commons isn’t derivative" is not the issue. The problem isn't that uploading to Commons would be a license violation, the problem is that it would be against policy for Commons to host a file that does not allow derivative works. - Jmabel ! talk15:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Exactly, I'm asking why it's not permitted – why there's a policy against it on Commons – considering that uploading it wouldn't be against the CC license itself :) Ved havet (talk) 15:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I don't want the new google images-like format where only the images are shown. I want the old classic search with each file laid out one after the other. Is there any way to switch back? Kingofthedead (talk) 07:28, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Dit klinkt misschien stom, maar mag ik het epos van Gilgamesj uploaden, ook al heb ik deze versie niet zelf geschreven? Alvast bedankt. Noot: als je moet kiezen, beantwoord me dan in het Nederlands. | This might sound stupid, but am I allowed to upload a version of the Epic of Gilgamesj, even though I did not write this version myself? Thanks in advance.
Is that a translated version? While the original Sumeric text is of course out of copyright, any modern translations are copyrighted to the translators and may not be uploaded depending on the age of the translation. De728631 (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Yes, it's translated, but in Dutch from ±1800, so it is out of copyright.
I just uploaded a photo that I took with my phone, and in reviewing the details, noticed that it includes the original GPS coordinates of where it was taken - my home? o_O Is there a way for someone to suppress/remove those details so they're not public? Please let me know. Thanks!
@UNSC Jon 117: I've uploaded a new version with the GPS data stripped, so at least they're not immediately visible on the page. However, the older version is still available for download, and an administrator (which I am not) will need to delete it. You can either edit the page and add {{SD|G7}} to the top to have the whole thing deleted or you can follow the instructions at COM:REVDEL to ask for just the old revision to be deleted. Given that the case is already public, you could also ask at COM:AN. I honestly don't know which approach will be quicker. --bjh21 (talk) 22:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Follow-up question: is there an easy way for me to strip the GPS data myself prior to upload? Currently running macOS Big Sur 11.4 and have Adobe Photoshop Elements 2021 if that helps. UNSC Jon 117 (talk) 16:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Suppose I have taken an image of an aircraft display model from web; edit out it's background; uploaded to commons- does it still considered as copyright violation?--E1Char (talk) 18:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@E1Char: Hi, and welcome. I concur with Magnus on this, per COM:TOYS and COM:UA. It would still be a copyright violation if you had taken the photo, unless the model was in the public domain or freely licensed. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me01:38, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
My bad! If I've read that in first place I would've never wasted my time on someone's picture (circulates widely in web; the problem is don't know who's work is that almost everyone uses it, hence I came to the conclusion that it must be under creative commons, if I know whom to ask I would've asked; my bad) and I got a new title added to my wall "License laundering"; anyway thanks for taking time to respond to my queries --E1Char (talk) 16:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation
Hey there, I'm not so experienced with Wikimedia Commons or with copyright in general, so I figured I'd ask this here since I don't really trust myself with this kind of stuff.
While searching around, I noticed this file – File:Scaled and Icy album cover.jpg – and figured it was odd since as a Wikipedia editor, I know that album covers normally aren't public domain and have to be uploaded locally (to Wikipedia). On the English Wikipedia page for the album, the image (which was uploaded locally there, so not this particular upload) is described as being used in fair use, as usual, and as most likely being copyrighted to the record label. So, I'm pretty sure this is a violation.
I went to check if the uploader had been recently active – here on Commons and other projects – and in doing so I noticed they also uploaded File:SAI era logo.jpg, which I'm not sure of the copyright status of (not sure if it meets the threshold of originality or not). When I saw they were only active on one day across all projects, I just decided to come here instead of inquire on their talk page. Juventiuscinna (talk) 05:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
SAI is probably right around the threshold of originality: a rune in an ellipse, slightly stylized.
For "Scaled and Icy", it would depend on the copyright status of that (probably Chinese) image. If it's old enough to be public domain, just cropping it and adding text would not create a new copyright. - Jmabel ! talk15:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Help desk/Archive/2021/06 Mimi Chakraborty
I want to change the image available for the actress but I am not able to do the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayita007 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Two updated images that I uploaded several hours ago at File:Milford on Sea High Street - geograph.org.uk - 356755.jpg and File:Groynes and a shingle beach - geograph.org.uk - 701611.jpg are still not displaying for me. I still see the old versions both here at Wikimedia Commons and at the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milford_on_Sea. This happened before, and clearing cached files in my browser (Edge) fixed the problem. Perhaps it would fix the problem again. However, why should I have to do this? Normally when I make updates to Wiki pages, or post content to any websites, I do not have to go through the tiresome process of deleting cached files just to see the results of my changes. Is this a known issue with this site? What can be done about it? Noting also that File:Pennington Marshes - geograph.org.uk - 145530.jpg did update correctly for me, almost straight away. I have no idea why there should be a difference. I think I followed exactly the same procedure with all these files. Can anyone shed any light on this issue? ITookSomePhotos (talk) 17:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@ITookSomePhotos: This is completely normal with images, on any website and any image. Your PC stores a cached version of that image, so that it doesn't need to "download" it every time you open the page. A quicker way to clear the cache is through pressing CTRL+F5. Nehme1499 (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Ctrl+F5 seems to have partially worked, but not in all places. Some places are still stubbornly showing the old version. However, it seems pretty crappy, almost unworkable, to have to do this. It seems to mean that, in order to be sure that they see latest versions of images, all users would have to hit Ctrl+F5 every time they go to any Wiki page that they have previously visited. Is this really how it is supposed to work? I wonder how other websites manage when they want to make a change to an image. I would expect there to be some kind of timestamp check, so that the server can first send a timestamp of an image, and the browser can check whether it matches the cached version, and download the new version if not. ITookSomePhotos (talk) 19:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, "purge" also does not force update of the stale images that are still showing incorrectly. With of course no blame levelled at any of the present company, the way this works is clearly highly unsatisfactory, indeed extremely crappy, with users potentially seeing out of date content indefinitely, with no indication that this is the case, and apparently no way of fixing it, short of pressing Ctrl+F5 and/or "purging" on every page they (re)visit, and even that does not work in all cases. ITookSomePhotos (talk) 17:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
If you mean report a bug that "purge" does not always work, TBH the fundamental "bug" is that "purge", or Ctrl+F5, or any action at all, should be necessary in order for users to see up-to-date content. The whole thing is a total nonsense, not that I am saying that Wiki is solely to blame. ITookSomePhotos (talk) 22:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Please assist regarding attached inquirey
Dear Editors,
IS THIS OKAY... too much or too little???
I copied the Michelangelo Pietà photo by Stanislav Traykov for use in an educational display about the Catholic Church and gift to a Priest. Underneath the photo, I wrote:
"Jesus willingly suffered death by crucifixion for the salvation of all mankind" Michelangelo's "Pieta" in St. Peter's Basilica, Vatican City.
On the reverse of the photo (which I framed), where my title "The Pietà" is located, I put the following credits/license and copyright info:
Edited version of (cloned object out of background) Image: Michelangelo’s Pieta 5450 cropncleaned.jpg.; Author/Photographer: Stanislav Traykov Copyright (c) Mark S. Kelly 2021 Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled:
"GNU Free Documentation License".
Version 1.2, November 2002
Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
@2600:8806:7F06:200:894:C862:5618:DBF7: It sounds to me like you have followed the GFDL requirements pretty well. You can see that some of the requirements of the GFDL are quite onerous (such as the requirement to include the entire text of the license). Next time you may want to use the image under a Creative Commons license, which you can see is another option allowed for this particular image. That would only require you to include a line of text similar to this: Pieta by Michelangelo, photo by Stanislav Traykov, CC BY-SA 3.0 <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/>. <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Michelangelo%27s_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned_edit.jpg>. Background removed. – BMacZero (🗩) 17:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Recommendations on svg file substitution
Hello, I've been vectorising some seals of Thailand's provinces from png to svg lately. (Namingly: file:Seal Nakhon Pathom.png to file:Seal Nakhon Pathom.svg, file:Seal Chiang Rai.png to file:Seal Chiang Rai.svg, and file:Seal Lamphun.png to file:Seal Lamphun.svg) I'm not sure if I've done it right by updating the existing png to a vectorised png and add a template saying an svg file is available. I'm still new in vectorising files and am not sure about how to publish tem correctly. So, I would like to seek recommendations if my publishing form and editing have been according to codes of conducts (if any). It would be extremely helpful should any would mind checking the aforementioned files if they are edited correctly. Also, do I have to put it anywhere so all the png files be turned to the substitution svg globally across all the Wikimedia projects? Thank you in advanced. --Chainwit. (talk) 12:34, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
@Chainwit.: looks good otherwise, but it is not really necessary to overwrite the old PNG files with rendered SVG version. In fact that might violate COM:Overwrite. If you wish to upload a PNG version as well (not really necessary), you might upload it as a new file instead of overwriting the old. MKFI (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
@Woble ItohG: } For anyone to help you, you are going to need to be a lot more specific than that. What tool were you using? What type of file were you trying to upload? What error message (or other behavior) did you get? You do seem to have successfully uploaded several PNGs, which do not, however appear to me to be in Commons' scope. - Jmabel ! talk05:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, i've tried in vain to search for media from a certain commons user with a certain date. It seems that one can use, e.g. "date=2016-11-30" to restrict the search result to media with that date in the Information template field "date". But if i add the user name as in the "author" field of the Information template, i get zero results, although there are images with that date/author combination stored in commons. For example, there are some files by user Isaruizescobar and date "2018-08-29" (e.g. [1] and [2]). Using date=2018-08-29 author="Isaruizescobar" as search string gives zero results. --Fl.schmitt (talk) 15:04, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Great - works exactly as needed, thanks a lot! I need such execute searches like this while trying to identify unidentified locations (and to categorize the media accordingly) - in such cases, it's very useful to find images by same author from the same date which might reveal the location. Your hint is very useful. --Fl.schmitt (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. Fl.schmitt (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
I uploaded an image without fully realizing that it was in violation of copyright. I would like to rectify this error and replace with another image sourced from Flickr and licensed via Creative Commons under ShareAlike, however I can't figure out how to proceed with this. Can anyone point me to some documentation on what to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ServetusSnape (talk • contribs) 21:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
JREF Using it in logo does not make it "The Preferred official head-shot from James Randi Educational Foundation" Where did they express such a preference? --Guy Macon (talk) 22:16, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
National Portrait Gallery picture from 1909?
I saw a photograph at the National Portrait Gallery(London)'s Web site that I would like to upload to Commons. The photo is dated 1909, so I assume it should be public domain by this criteria, but they have a by-nc-nd/3.0 license which means it should not be uploaded to the Commons. Can I or can I not upload it? --Benlittlewiki (talk) 22:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
For the UK works, identity of the artist is relevant. It could copied to Commons if the artist died 70 or more years ago as of 1 January this year. (An artist who did youthful works in 1909 and had a long life afterwards may not yet be dead 70 + years, so info on the artist is needed.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:23, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ilja F. Repin: Please note that Google books is not the author. The drawing looks signed. If you can read that name, that may be the name of the author of the drawing. Also please note that you cannot place a CC license on that file. The page is in the public domain. That is why you can use it. Please tag the file with public domain templates (the templates PD-US-expired and PD-old-100 would probably be correct). -- Asclepias (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@Basat37: We don't appear to have any Turkish speaking admins, and I'm not personally aware of any active Turkish speaking users to contact. Is there a second language you speak so that there may be someone else who can help? GMGtalk11:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
SVG images
As I learned in Help:SVG, SVG formats are created by software programs, such as Inkscape and Adobe. How can I get it them for mobile devices and after converting images, I want to know clear guideline from experts to use in Commons please. The Supermind (talk) 06:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel: I don't want to raise same repetitive questions but I wondered most users implement to Commons. But it seems to me complex steps because of being newcomer unless I getting sufficient information from experts. Thank you! The Supermind (talk) 16:41, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Uploading a colorized picture
I am having trouble with copyright stuff since the image is of princess of berar which I found on the Internet but the thing is that it was in black and white.
So I colorized it and want to upload it to her Wikipedia page.
But I'm not sure what kind of claim to use...
any help would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strike938 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey Strike938. If the image is very old, then it would likely be free and in the public domain. This often means that it was first published before 1926, though the rules vary by jurisdiction and circumstance, and we would need more information about the image and source to say for certain. GMGtalk11:09, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@Forbah Sandra: Hi, and welcome. the most restrictive license we allow for a file, {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}, does allow those uses, but requires attribution of you as the author, as well as sharing with a similar license. Please read that link, the underlying links, COM:L, and COM:SIGN carefully. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me12:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Фото для статьи в википедии сделано специально для меня
@Danis1703: Who was the photo made by? That is the person who owns the copyright, so that is the only person who can grant a license, and we need them to grant a specific license. See COM:OTRS/ru. - Jmabel ! talk14:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@The Supermind: No. Under the Berne Convention, all copyrightable work is, by default, copyrighted and all rights are reserved. For copyrighted work we always need an explicit, specific license. Without that, we cannot accept that photo on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk21:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Adding paid work
Hello! If I have paid for someone else to take pictures for me, am I allowed to upload those photos to Wikimedia Commons? As I understand it, I own the copyright for said photos even though I am not the one who has taken those pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2001:14BA:1EFC:C400:FD6E:C3AA:93FB:306F (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
It depends what the contract you concluded with the photographer says on that point exactly. If there is a specific clause telling who gets the copyright, then refer to that contractual clause. If the contract does not include a specific clause, then refer to the default provisions about copyright ownership in the copyright law of the legal jurisdiction in which the contract was concluded. In most jurisdictions, the law probably says that the copyright is owned by the photographer unless the contract says otherwise. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Can I upload a photo of a statue that's less than 150 years old?
The flow chart in the upload manager says that you can upload photos of statues over 150 years old. Can I upload a photo of statue (it's more of a monument?) that's less than 150 years old? I took the photo myself and the monument's in a public place, if that matters. Clovermoss (talk) 22:50, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: It depends on in what country the statue is installed and either when it was installed or when the sculptor died. Do you have that info? – BMacZero (🗩) 00:06, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: If my quick searching is correct, the sculptor was Alfred Howell, who died in 1978. That would ordinarily mean you could not upload the image, as the statue would be in copyright for 50 years after that (until 2028). However, Canada has a "freedom of panorama" law, which permits anyone to take and use pictures of 3D art as long as it's displayed in a public place. So I believe you can upload your photo as your own work, using a license of your choice to cover your photo, and then additionally add {{FoP-Canada}} to cover the statue itself. See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Canada. – BMacZero (🗩) 00:23, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Sexist, Vulgar, Misogynistic content in Image MetaData.
Good Day,
I came across many files which were uploaded from now Defunct website Filmytadka.in, Many of these Files have vulgar Sexist content in their Metadata (Image title Section), example: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 and many more. What Steps can be taken to remove such misogynistic content from files?
Thank you in Advance
--STC1 (talk) 11:50, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@SierraTangoCharlie1: Normally I'd just say that you could upload a new version of the file with the offending text removed. To me that would qualify as a "minor improvement" in accordance with Commons:Overwriting files. There's a problem here, though, which is that the files (at least the four that you mention) are licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0, which says: "If You Distribute ... the Work ..., You must ... provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing: ... (ii) the title of the Work if supplied;". So if this crudely promotional paragraph is really the title of each picture then the licence requires us to somehow provide it. I think there's a reasonable argument that that paragraph, despite being in the "Image title" field, isn't really intended to be the title of the image, but I'd want to hear at least some other people's opinions before acting on that. --bjh21 (talk) 14:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
I think it is pretty clear that is not a title. They were just using a convenient field for a screed.
I think someone should feel free to download, remove that from the EXIF substituting the current filename as a title, and re-upload. - Jmabel ! talk14:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Thanks. I've removed the offending fields from File:Mrinal Dev-Kulkarni.jpg using ExifTool and it seems to have worked OK. I haven't inserted any replacement title because I don't want it to be mistaken for a licence-required title, and anyway ExifTool thinks the relevant fields are descriptions rather than titles. There may be rather too many affected files to do by hand, but I'll make a start and maybe write a bot if I get bored. --bjh21 (talk) 15:32, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel and Bjh21: so it's ok right? to go ahead, download the image, remove the offending part from metadata and re upload? I can start on that in my free time. It just felt offensive to have such degrading vocabulary freely floating around on commons. --STC1 (talk) 18:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm concerned about tampering with filehistory. Is the intention here to overwrite the file, so the EXIF data is not visible to the average reader or user, but not suppress filehistory? The record itself is useful if investigating this source website, further it can usefully inform a deletion discussion about whether anything from this website can be considered properly released per COM:PRP. Any source that releases photographs of women with comments like "FilmiTadka, the Big Daddy to tame all the bitches and pompous assess has arrived" has a copyright credibility issue, which is a better discussion to have rather than censorship of published misogynist commentary, but to do that we need to be able to see and make an assessment of this garbage.
@Fæ: My plan (so far executed up to "P") is only to overwrite the files. The paragraph in question isn't a plausible description of any of the pictures, so removing it from the metadata is (in my opinion) a minor improvement allowed under COM:OVERWRITE. I don't think it comes anywhere near meriting revision-deletion. --bjh21 (talk) 13:02, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@Dharmadhyaksha: please note I yielded to your request and reopened the DR. I am now in the process of undeleting these files, a rather long task as you said yourself . — Racconish💬10:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Racconish: I am sorry for that request. In fact, you can undelete just some images as of now as sample and then maybe allow users to review/comment. That way we can save your efforts of undeleting. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:18, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
When uploaded, on 25 March 2015 "license was verified as "cc-by-2.0" by the UploadWizard Extension at the time it was transferred to Commons." As you can see now, however, it appears that no license has been specified and that all rights are reserved.
FYI: Two wayback machine captures. First on 28 Jan 2019 and second one is one I just did on 21 June 2021:
Die Wahrscheinlichkeit das wenn ich ein File uploade die falsche Lizenz auswähle ist enorm.
Ich schaffe ja nicht einmal ein von mir selbst gemachtes Foto bei dem ich alle Rechte haben, das richtig zu platzieren.
Ich werde/wurde dabei mit Urheberrechtsverletzung und sperre meines Accounts bedroht.
Wenn ich 2 Personen dazu Frage erhalte ich wenn ich pech habe 3 Antworten.
d.h.
Ich Suche eine Person/ Institution welcher ich das File gebe, ich dieser die Quelle beschreibe, und diese Person sich darum kümmert, die richtigen Hakeln setzt und das übernimmt und etwaige Beanstandungen und Beschwerden beantwortet.
Womöglich hat diese Person/ Institution auch die dafür nötige Ausbildung und Zertifizierung.
Ähnlich wie ich bei Rechts- oder Finanzamt Angelegenheiten ich das Thema einen Rechtsanwalt oder Buchhalter sprich einen Profi mit Zertifizierung übergebe
und der das für mich abwickelt.
Gibt es so eine Person/ Institution? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtw (talk • contribs) 11:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Mtw: [Via Google translate] Können Sie ein Beispiel nennen, bei dem das Foto vollständig Ihnen gehörte, kein Foto des urheberrechtlich geschützten Werks einer anderen Person war, wo Sie eine Ihrer Meinung nach akzeptable Lizenz hinterlegt haben und das Foto gelöscht wurde oder Sie zurechtgewiesen wurden? Es mag einen solchen Fachmann geben oder auch nicht, aber es sollte nicht nötig sein. - Jmabel ! talk15:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
I plan to provide a Wikipedia posting. Wikimedia describes itself as a repository of freely available media content -- audio, video and photos. Not listed is text content. Why do you make that distinction? I just opened a User Page. Do I upload texts to a different location than, say, photos?
With kind regards,
Robert Wielaard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwielaard (talk • contribs) 15:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Rwielaard: In general, texts are not something we want here on Wikimedia Commons. There are some exceptions, mainly for scans of historic documents. What exactly do you want to upload? - Jmabel ! talk15:39, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
How to edit an uploaded file to crop?
Hey Wiki Commons, I recently uploaded my own work file name "Cameron Scott on the set of the Kissing Booth 3.jpg" and am requesting that the content be modified for a crop ratio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KingdomKome (talk • contribs) 16:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello I recently uploaded a picture of a youtuber Moist Cr1tikal, it was File:Moist_Cr1tical.jpg and I was wondering what permission do I need to upload a photo of him ,I'm pretty new to Wikimedia and have only editing in the past,(Charles White Jr.), or if its ok to be used under the fair use laws, or somehow I could get in contact with him and get an email or what form of verification he can give me, thank you for hearing me out and let me know
@Drcrow049: Normally, a photo is copyrighted by the photographer, and that is the only person who can grant a license.
Commons does not allow pictures to be uploaded on a fair use basis. en-wiki makes some allowances for non-free use, but not normally for pictures of living people. - Jmabel ! talk02:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Commons image
I am trying to upload an image for a school assignment but it's not letting me or I'm doing it wrong. I would appreciate any help you can give me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlbaker29 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
I have permission from Mark Greenberg to publish the photo, but how do I establish the copyright so I can add it to his (still draft) Wikipedia page? He is not tech savvy so I'm looking for an easy solution.
@Purplepixels: Hi, and welcome. Sorry, we can't accept that photo as-is. Please have the photographer post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the image and permission (or copyright transfer paperwork) via OTRS with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me22:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Broken link indicated at photo challenge after file renaming
Hi, I had a picture file originally named "Five herring gulls.jpg" uploaded and entered at the actual monthly challenge "Five". This file got renamed to "Five Common Gulls.jpg" by administrator MPF. So far ok. But after I changed the file name in the entry of the challenge, as there the former name still was present, the picture itself did not show up, just the file name and description. And somewhere the message "file with broken link".
How can I put the actual renamed file (Five Common Gulls.jpg) into the entry of the challenge, as a first step the disfunctional one out, as I may have only four entries together with three other ones there. Hoping for help, best regards, Hartmut Schmidt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foeniz (talk • contribs) 16:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. bjh21 (talk) 08:19, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
CSD edit
Hi, I've CSDed an image for deletion diff, did I do this the right way and is the image considered clear copyvio, or should I use a different deletion method instead? --Justiyaya (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC) (please ping on reply)
Also is there a policy where you have to notify the creator of the image that their image is being CSDed here? --Justiyaya (talk) 20:11, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
The creator of the image, no, but the uploader of the file, yes. Please look at the copyvio template on the page where you inserted it and click where it says "click here to show further instructions". In this case, a bot corrected the omission after some time [17]. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:11, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. bjh21 (talk) 08:20, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Add metadata during Upload - has "fishermen" preloaded and apparently not removable or other depicts addable?
And there appears to be no way to remove the "fishermen" (there being no fishermen or fishing-related content in the photo) nor add more appropriate "depicts". Lacking any alternative, I did "Skip this Step".
Hello. I m here new to wikipedia. Can someone guide how to upload a image with a fair usage policy. Tried understanding from various articles. But could not understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinothcj (talk • contribs) 09:57, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Okay i uploaded 2 images by mistake on my wiki common can i remove it now? Kindly help.
Licence help please
I've uploaded File:HMS Canada 05071811.JPG, but I'm having difficulty in sourcing the correct US PD licence. Situation is this:- Image is a reproduction of a drawing made on 5 July 1811 by a French prisoner of war. AIUI, that means it would have become PD in the US 95 years after completion as the date of death of the artist is unknown. It is not known whether the image was published elsewhere before it was published in a book in 1929. The British author of that book died in 1944, and his works became PD in the UK on 1 January 2015. {{PD-US-unpublished}} doesn't seem to fit, because it was published before 1 January 2003. {{PD-1996}} doesn't fit because the book was still in copyright in the UK in 1996. {{PD-US-expired}} doesn't seem to fit either. Mjroots (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2 ad021 (UTC)
Jeez. Hard to imagine that this is in copyright in the U.S., either, though. Do we know whether U.S. copyright was renewed on that 1929 book? In any case, we'll be good in 4 years. - 04:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@Rudresh Chiradoni: Not sure I understand what you are asking. No such thing as an "audio video" or a "common Wikipedia", but here on Wikimedia Commons you upload audio and video files pretty much exactly the same way as you upload photos. Just make sure either to use one of the supported file types. There are also some tools for conversions, but if you want help for a specific file format please be specific about the format, not just "audio videos". Similarly, if you were not asking about uploading to Wikimedia Commons, please be clearer about what you are asking. - Jmabel ! talk20:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Uploading a file that was previously deleted
HI there,
I'd like to upload a file that was previously deleted because the copyright owner did not upload it. I am the copyright holder and I want to upload it, but ran into technical trouble because the file had been deleted. Can you please guide me to making this happen? Thanks!
MSJ Shameran81 (talk) 19:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@SPStark: That depends. Are you talking about an image on Commons or somewhere else? If somewhere else, I don't really have any particular advice other than "do a Google (or other) search, try to track down the photographer. If it's here on Commons, then is the uploaded still active (look at their contributions)? If they are, it should be easy to contact them on their user talk page, or (if they have provided an email address associated with their account) the "Email this user" feature. If not, I'm afraid you are back to the "somewhere else" case.
Thank you for your quick response. The photo was published on Commons. Looks like the photographer was "Ahodges7". I don't have any more information for him or her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPStark (talk • contribs) 12:47, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
@SPStark: That person's (Ahodges7) last contribution on Commons was in 2017 and on Wikipedia in 2018. As suggested above, you can try the email feature if that user associated an email address to his account. If you can't contact him through Wikimedia, and if you think you have a serious and good reason and you really must contact him, there is, on old versions of his Wikipedia user page, some general information about him, which, with some research and effort, might make it possible for you to find a way to contact him. However, you know that you may use his photo for free for your business brochure without need to contact him, if you comply with the requirements of the license under which he offered the photo. (Look at the specific license. Usually, that would be to credit him and mention the license and its url. That takes some more space in a printed publication, but not that much.) You need to contact him and purchase special rights only if you don't want to comply with that license. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:04, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
This is obviously not my own work. Arnold Majewski was shot dead by a Soviet sniper before my parents were born. However, the page says that as the photographer has been dead for 70 years, the file is eligible to be uploaded into Commons with a PD-old-70 licence.
The problem here is that I don't know how to upload it to Commons with this licence. Could someone provide a step-by-step guide on how to do it? JIP (talk) 02:11, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@JIP: You don't say what tool you are using to upload, but if it doesn't allow that license, then just fill everything else out accurately, use an arbitrary license, and then modify it to {{PD-old-70}} by editing the file page after uploading. - Jmabel ! talk`
@JIP: Partly. You asserted that the photographer has been dead for 70 years, but you say on the file page that you are the "author" (photographer). Clearly you are not 70 years dead. Who was the photographer who has been dead for 70 years? - Jmabel ! talk04:19, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
I have removed myself as the author. However, the original image page doesn't say who the photographer was, and it looks like the original uploader didn't know either. They just stated the image was from the Arnold Majewski family website and that the image is eligible for the PD-old-70 licence. However, the original image page does say that the photograph was taken in 1918, 103 years ago. JIP (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
A Google search found this page: https://www.genealogia.fi/genos-old/70/70_38.htm where the image is apparently published. I edited the image page to show the URL of this page. There is apparently also a page of Arnold Majewski's father Alexander Majewski but as Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an article about him I didn't do anything about that. JIP (talk) 11:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Участь у конкурсі
Доброго ранку!
В мене не відправляються фото на учась у конкурсі «Вікі любить Землю»!
Що робити?
Looks like a question in Turkish about how to enter a nature picture in an (unspecified) contest, presumably Wiki Loves Earth. -- Jmabel ! talk23:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Uploading texts to Wikipedia.
I think I'm hopelessly lost.
I want to submit content -- an article about naval architecture -- to Wikipedia, not not Wikimedia Commons.
Can anyone steer me in the right direction?
Much appreciated.
There are thousands of files here, so please provide some reasoning and the url of the image in question. No, you cannot do it. If it is a properly freely licensed image, without some very good reason, it is unlikely to be deleted. However, you can nominate an image for deletion by clicking on the blue "Nominate for deletion" link on the left side of the image page and it will be discussed, but only an administrator can delete an image. Ww2censor (talk) 21:21, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Uploading photo for monthly contest
Hi, I have copied the image name at top of edit file for the contest Birds in Flight as instructed. But how do I actually upload the image?
Hi, I uploaded File:Standing skier at 2010 Winter Paralympics.jpg, but I am not able to find out who this skier or biathlete is. The image has time stmp 2010-03-13 13:54:42, and the Bib seems to be 14. According to the time tables] of the 2010 Paralympics, this should be in the men's or women's biathlon pursuit, but I can not find any participant that matches. Can anyone help me? Ssu (talk) 12:40, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to guess that you mean, "Is it possible to use images from Commons in a book?" (If you meant something else, please ask more clearly.) Yes, it is. However, you have to conform to the licensing requirements for the image. If it is in the public domain, then that is simple -- there are no such requirements, but if it is free-licensed then typically you at least have to indicate the license and (in many cases) attribute the photo. It would be easier to answer this question about a particular image than in general. - Jmabel ! talk15:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Getting redirected
I was attempting to use File:SVG_check.svg to check an svg, but got redirected to File:Brown_check.svg and I temporarily overwrote the file with a different one. I reverted after I realized something was wrong.
@Gallimimus wikipedista.: If you uploaded it recently (last seven days) then just put {{subst:My bad upload}} on the page in question.
If it's been longer, then the fact that you are the uploader is not relevant and you need to nominate it for deletion just like anyone else might.
Also, please see COM:SIGN and please use a section header (I've added one) when you are opening up a new topic on a page like this. - Jmabel ! talk15:49, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear Help Desk--I think I added images correctly to Wikimedia Commons. THey are permitted by the copyright holder to be placed in the public domain, which I have documented. However, I recently was diagnosed with ITP, with a subdural hematoma and assorted seizures. and spent about ten days in the ICU of the local hospital and don't trust my memory. I have trouble remembering things. I would like to know how to transfer the images to the Wikipedia page for WHote Trash Debutantes. Thank you. Carl Macki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlmacki (talk • contribs) 07:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
@Carlmacki: Hi, and welcome. Accordng to our logs, you have uploaded 6 files. Of those, 1 has survived, File:FB IMG 1614918631271 2.jpg. For that file, it appears to be a photo of Ginger Coyote and some other members of the White Trash Debutantes allegedly performing onstage 4 March 2021, 20:32:13, as photographed by Angel Cassidy Borst. AntiCompositeBot noticed that you did not provide a required valid copyright tag. Such tags can be found in Commons:Copyright tags. As versions of that photo had already appeared online as far back as Jul 23, 2014 at http://i571.photobucket.com/albums/ss159/Punkglobe/May/WhiteTrashDebutantesTheWarfieldThea.jpg , I have trouble believing you. Please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept that photo as-is and it will be deleted within a week, and have the photographer post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their official website or social media presence or send the photo and permission via OTRS with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. See also COM:FN, COM:SIGN, and the messages left for you on User talk:Carlmacki and en:User talk:Carlmacki. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me12:02, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
question
Hi, on a commons page they deleted some photos of me, then they wrote the reason on the discussion page, how can I delete these warnings?--Luisa Fabbri (talk) 17:27, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: so if I understand correctly the deleted photos can be archived and once archived they can no longer be viewed, then do I have to use the Talkarchive template?--Luisa Fabbri (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
@Luisa Fabbri: Although it is technically possible to delete an edit (with more or lesss complex methods depending on what level of "deletion"), in the present case it would be altering another user's talk page and there should be at least some reason to do it (e.g. privacy concerns, defamation, etc., see for example the acceptable reasons for "oversight"). I read the page you referred to and, unless I'm missing something, the warnings are the usual standard templates and all the reasons are very generic reasons such as missing license or screenshot of software. So, it's hard to imagine why you would want to delete any of it. You might have a valid reason but could you give a clue? If secrecy is necessary, you can ask confidentially for Commons:Oversight but that will require a serious reason. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:59, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Luisa Fabbri: If you just don't want them generally visible, you can ask the user in question to delete them. They'll still be in the history, but that is much more discreet (including more discreet than the present discussion). - Jmabel ! talk19:26, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Luisa, I don't see you mentioned on that page. The files have been deleted, so there's nothing to link the notices to you. As a non-admin, I can't view the files to see which ones you might be pictured in. Or am I not understanding the issue? Pelagic (talk) 18:46, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Commons Android app states that I currently have "43 images used." I believe this is a reference to the images being used on Wikipedia or other related sites, is there a way I can locate where images I have uploaded are being used? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurtkaiser (talk • contribs) 01:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
where can i find about how to use templates for various violations of rules
i recently found that it is better to use "personality rights template" for images of living persons to be on safe side. is there any specific page about how to use templates for various violations of rules? --Agyaanapan (talk) 05:39, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
I amended the image that I had uploaded recently (adding a source for some detail) but an automated process on my computer applied the filename to an irrelevant image. I didn't spot the mistake, nor when I hit the final upload button (I plead, while blushing deeply, either distraction or mental febrility -- actually both would be better).
I would be grateful if someone could:
delete the version as of 08:59, 27 June 2021 (suit of armour)
delete the two versions above that, which I created before I understood what the Revert button did.
@SCHolar44: There is no point in deleting these. They are just in the file history. This is the same as having a bad edit with a typo along the way in the history of a particular Wikipedia article. - Jmabel ! talk16:00, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
How can I find free photos?
Photos from World Wide Web are often subjected to copyright and most of them are copyright reserved. Now I ought to go out from WWW, if there is medium that free photo derived, can you tell me hint that is best for free and authorship indicator medium? The Supermind (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
But there is almost no medium that is not mostly copyrighted. The whole point of copyright is to protect author's rights. Unless you are working with materials that are from before 1900, most of what you encounter will be copyrighted. There are country-by-country exceptions, but you don't say what country, and it would be a "fishing expedition" for me to try to guess what would be relevant to you. I'll give a couple of examples, though: (1) works by employees of the U.S. federal government, created as part of their work, are all public domain; (2) in France, proprietary rights in pseudonymous, anonymous or collective works last 70 years from the date of publication. - Jmabel ! talk16:07, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I know that it talks about text and sculptural materials but my question is official portrait of Mayor of Addis Ababa is public domain or simply give me a link to copyright status of Ethiopia in Commons page to read it please. The Supermind (talk) 17:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
@The Supermind: unless you have a specific basis as to why an image would be in the public domain, you should presume it is not. By far the majority of images you encounter are not public domain. - Jmabel ! talk18:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jmabel: The link above leads me CC Search which explained as "free image browser" under Creative Commons license. However, it leads to Flickr and unfortunately shows this message "Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)" does not support the license. There is a misconception between the site and w:Wikipedia:Public domain image resources. The Supermind (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Is there an issue with the upload wizard at present? I have tried to upload several times (with 2 or 3 different images) since last Wednesday (June 9). None have been successful, have taken some considerable time before failing to upload and then the only message received is 'error' (in red) but with no indication what that error may be. Any information available? As far as I am aware I'm using the same routine to upload as I have always done. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 19:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Hello, I tried using the 'old form' with the same result and I have looked at the 'alternative upload' methods but not being particularly tech-savvy I did not feel confident to try downloading / configuring anything. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 21:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: The image I am trying to upload is only 3.27MB according to file information and also via 'properties'. Others would not likely be any more and they are in fact ones I have succesfully uploaded previously (used as a 'test'). FWIW using Chrome and Windows7 and all updated as of yesterday. If there have been no other reports, I wonder where the problem may lie. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 15:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
OK, it's been two weeks now and still unable to upload images; just keep getting 'error'. Has anybody got any ideas? Eagleash (talk) 12:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Three weeks; still unable to upload anything. Need someone to take a stab at what might be causing this after nearly a decade without issue? Eagleash (talk) 08:14, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Where does the error message come from? Is it a message from Wikimedia or from something on your system? A Wikimedia message would usually also include an indication about what type of error it is. If the error is unrelated to Wikimedia, you'll have to investigate your system. Your last successful upload was in May. Did you change anything to your system or its settings since then? The problem might be related to your use of Windows 7, which is not supported anymore by its maker (1). -- Asclepias (talk) 11:24, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I do not believe it to be a Win7 issue, though it might be. I know several people still using ‘7’ and at least one using ‘XP’ without problems.
I have tried some experimentation and discovered that images taken since May 2019 (which was the previous time I cleared the SD card in the camera) will not upload but those prior to that will. In May / June this year I cleared the memory card (full) and since then files in that ‘batch’ will not upload from my laptop or from ‘back-up’ images on a memory stick. What I find rather strange about this is that during that period I have had images from the last 2 years both on my computer and still stored in the memory card in the camera and have uploaded at least a dozen to Commons; now they will not upload, but older ones will. Also, more recent images will upload from laptop, even if deleted from the memory card. It seems therefore that something untoward happened to compromise that batch of files, presumably when clearing the SD card. So it not may not be a Wikimedia issue but something amiss with my system. However, images from that ‘rogue’ batch will upload to other sites. Looks like a third trip to obtain more photos to finish a Wikipedia article, maybe.
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 11:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Photo upload
I have a photo that I would like to upload to a Wikipedia page that I have been editing. It was taken by a former newspaper photographer. I have an email from the photographer who stated:
Hey Robert,
No worries. Yes, you have my permission for this image to be used.
Thanks,
Zach
I also reached out to the newspaper editor, who stated:
You just need to say photo courtesy of the Brattleboro Reformer
When I tried to upload the file previously, "Permissions" advised:
@Jeff G.: Regarding the statement "we finally made contact with him and asked for specific permission ... and he didn't reply yet" - I checked my emails and found that the photographer did reply:
Zachary Stephens <zachary.stephens@vcfa.edu>
Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 3:18 PM
to me, Permissions
As the copyright holder of the image, Wikimedia has my permission to use the image.
- Zachary P. Stephens
@RAOeser: despite clearly good intentions, this is definitely not sufficient. It does not grant any specific license, and says only that Wikimedia may use the image. It does not appear even on the surface to allow reuse or derivative works, both of which Commons requires (assuming your intention is to upload to Commons). - Jmabel ! talk23:53, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
I am confused by a recent copyright violation posted on a photo. This photo was approved over 1.5 years ago. The copyright owner emailed in affirmation that the image is hers, and is CC BY-SA 4.0, etc. over 1.5 years ago. Everything was ok but now there is a new "possible copyright violation" notice here (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Honda00) and I believe this is an error. I left a message on that page but have not seen any more activity. I am relatively new and find navigating this universe very difficult. Any help would be appreciated! Honda00 (talk) 13:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 11:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Transparent backgrounds
I recently uploaded a version of the Streamy Awards logo with a transparent background but the background still appears white instead of transparent. Is there some way I should upload this to fix this? Alduin2000 (talk) 21:30, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. 廣九直通車 (talk) 11:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there. I am not entirely sure how to proceed with getting permission. Should I email/contact the company (camp) that took the photo and just make sure it’s okay to use, and forward that email to you?
@Jonahb027: Hi, and welcome. Please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept that photo as-is, and have the photographer post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the photo and permission via OTRS with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me07:33, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
About the file My beautiful laundrette.webp. This is an image file downloaded from Apple Music store's website, uploaded by me, but not created, as I'm not the copywright holder, I can confirm via Discogs catalogue website, that image was designed by and credited in its entirety to Farrow along with Pet Shop Boys, so as this is true I'm still not totally sure if it's of public domain, due to its apparition on Apple Music catalogue, and in the case if it's of public domain, which tag should I use to license my file?--Sanarkroid (talk)
@Sanarkroid: Hi, and welcome. Please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept that photo as-is, and have the photographer post Commons:Licensing compliant permission for such work on their website or social media presence or send the photo and permission via OTRS with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me07:32, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Why am I getting this message: If you do not provide suitable license and source information, your upload will be deleted without further notice. Thank you for your understanding.
Hello,
I don't understand why I am getting the below message? I have a rich descriptor for the file.
Many thanks
If you do not provide suitable license and source information, your upload will be deleted without further notice. Thank you for your understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vhurth (talk • contribs) 10:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@Vhurth: I don't see any message like this on your talk page. Did you get this message as part of the upload process, or what?
This has nothing to do with whether you have a "rich descriptor" by the way, it has to do with whether you have been clear on source and license. - Jmabel ! talk15:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@Mukeshkumar2021: Absolutely no idea what this is about: there isn't even such a thing as "blocking a page" and you don't indicate what page you are talking about, please reword! - Jmabel ! talk15:31, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
There is a fundamental question to do with photo. Is paying of stock photo is permissible to free license if I contact the uploader via email for copyright holding? Is it recommended first that contacting uploader for the permission before buying a photo at all? The Supermind (talk)
@The Supermind: for a copyrighted photo, no commercial stock photo company will sell you a free license that would be acceptable to use the photo on Commons. They make their money precisely by selling limited, typically non-transferable licenses for these photos.
Supermind, you have asked a series of questions here that add up to show you know almost nothing about how copyrights and licensing work. Please, either read the basic project-page articles on the topic (which I believe people have already linked in response to your previous questions) or stick to uploading your own photographs rather than other people's. - Jmabel ! talk23:44, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Three image file names changed after I uploaded them: How do I go in and correct them to their actual and original names?
Hi!
Yesterday I uploaded the first three of a series of .SVG graphics files in advance of writing an article that will contain them all.
After uploading them, and checking all the data that I had added before uploading them, I observed that your system seems to have decided to rename the file names, incorrectly.
The correct original file names are:
indivisibility_banner_01_2021-06-01.svg
indivisibility_flag_01_2021-06-01.svg
indivisibility_square_01_2021-06-01.svg
Your system has renamed them incorrectly to:
Invisibility Banner.svg
Invisibility Flag.svg
Invisibility Square.svg
Is it possible to go in and correct these incorrect names and if so then how do I go about doing it?
Furthermore, as I continue to upload the rest of the indivisibility graphics and photographs for use in the Indivisibility Flag Wikipedia article, will your system continue to rename them to the incorrect name?
Or is there a way to preventing that process from happening?
The system would not make such major name changes. There are minor exceptions: the first letter of the file name is always a capital letter and underscores are treated as equivalent to spaces (they are displayed as underscores in the url of the page and as spaces in the page). A more detailed explanation about those technicalities can be found on Wikipedia (Lowercase first letter, Spaces and underscores). So, for example, "indivisibility_banner_01_2021-06-01.svg" would be "Indivisibility_banner_01_2021-06-01.svg" in the url and "Indivisibility banner 01 2021-06-01.svg" in the title displayed on the page. But nothing else would be changed in your titles. Maybe some software you were using made the changes? For your files already uploaded, you can request their renaming, per Commons:File renaming#How to rename a file. (However, the first letter will remain capitalized and underscores will remain spaces.) For future uploads, please investigate further to see if the source of the problem can be found. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:05, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
@Karingottschalk: You uploaded the files using the Upload Wizard. I suspect you may have been misled by some of the Wizard's sloppy wording. When it asks for "Image title" (currently "Image title" in English), that becomes the file name on Commons. It defaults to the name of the file that you uploaded, but you may have changed it not realising it would become the filename. If you leave the "Image title" alone, you should get a close approximation to your original filenames, with just the changes that Asclepias mentions above. --bjh21 (talk) 12:03, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
How do I upload Parish (County) flags and/or seals to the commons?
I was curious about how the copyright works in regards to uploading a county or city flag/seal to the commons. In regards to federal works, it's okay, State seals are okay as most of their copyrights have expired, but at the city and county level, it gets very foggy. I've seen several examples of people uploading under fair use or similar. How can I upload to the commons in a way that guarantees high-quality imagery and doesn't infringe on any copyrights? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartie988 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I am trying to create a fan page, with the verbal permission of the content owner. I was planned to add a note that all logos and content is own by content owner.
@Twilliams ca: I don't understand what you are asking. There are no fan pages on this site. Are you asking about reusing images that are on Commons for a fan page on some other site? If so, what images from Commons are you talking about. - Jmabel ! talk23:46, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
I mean I am a fan creating a page for someone of note.
Again, there are no fan pages on Commons, nor on Wikipedia. Are you writing an article on the English-language Wikpedia, or are you doing something else?
Logos are pretty much always owned (at least in trademark terms) by the entity they belong to. If you are saying that they own copyright, though, then unless they are willing to provide a free license, those images do not belong here on Commons. Upload them on en-wiki (not on Commons) and tag them with en:Template:Non-free logo. - Jmabel ! talk15:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Missing description? What's going on??
Found this file File:House sparrow feeding behaviour.jpg. In it, the description states English: a pair of hour sparrow where a male hours sparrow is feeding a female during spring mating season in kathmandu Nepal. It's actually a female feeding a juvenile, not a male feeding a female. So I click on edit to correct this (and the couple of typos, too). But in the edit box, the description line is empty??? So how can it be edited to correct the error? Something gone badly wrong here. - MPF (talk) 11:05, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! So if I copy the 'caption' text and paste it into the description with corrections, that should work - but if I understand it right, the original incorrect text remains hidden away somewhere where it can't be amended or removed? - MPF (talk) 12:42, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
That hidden text can be found by going to "Page information" in the left column on the page of the image. At the bottom (Wikidata entities used) is the text. The text is a link that results in "Bad Request Invalid ID: M107114299". So indeed what you say the original incorrect text remains hidden away somewhere where it can't be amended or removed. Wouter (talk) 13:42, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@Wouterhagens: Thanks; I don't see anything called "Page information", though? Just "File information" and "Structured data"; neither includes the relevant text - MPF (talk) 14:03, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@Wouterhagens: thanks! I see it now. Also, the 'caption' has now been edited to correct it, from the file history by User:Nightflyer; @Nightflyer: can you please say how these hidden 'captions' can be accessed and edited? And why are they not visible and editable by default? If they are not, they must be considered as CC-BY-ND (licence restricted to no derivatives) and therefore contrary to Commons policy. - MPF (talk) 14:45, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Leider nur in Deutsch: beim Bild File:I come in peace.jpg gibt es die Beschreibung English: the white dove flying in monsoon rain in the manohara river banks of bhaktapur Nepal. Dahinter ist das Symbol eine Stiftes. Klick drauf, und du kannst bearbeiten. Gruss --Nightflyer (talk) 14:55, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@Bjh21: - not touched that Preferences page in years; looking now, it appears 'Hide captions' had been auto-ticked or something? Or possible I'd ticked it earlier without realising what it did. Anyway, I de-ticked it to see what happened, and the captions have appeared, though take up a ridiculous amount of space (the actual caption, plus a long list of empty lines to add translations in various languages; that might explain why I could have ticked 'hide'). So instead, I've tried ticking 'Collapse captions', which looks like it works tolerably well in that the captions are hidden in a drop-down menu, but still accessible. What would be nice though is to have the caption permanently visible (and editable) but with all the empty lines for adding translations collapsed/hidden; and/or to have the captions below the Summary, rather than above it. - MPF (talk) 17:31, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Asked a the top of a three-weeks-old section, moved here
Hi, during testing in the notepad page I uploaded accidentally a photo which is not royalty-free this work owned by the 9/11 museum. I revoke the license and hope the photo can be removed urgently, please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank Dammers (talk • contribs) 12:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@Ckinyc: but, further: if this is a photo by your client, and she has not placed it anywhere online with the license indicated, she will need to do one of two things:
put the photo online on some site of page clearly under her control and indicate the intended license there. That can then be cited as the source.
go through the COM:OTRS process to indicate the intended license. This is typically the more cumbersome approach, but will clarify permission if the other approach isn't practical.
Done. I copied your list, added those files to Category:Jefftemp with COM:JWB by pasting the list into the "Enter list of pages:" box and replacing "[[Category:Uploads by Matlin]]" with "[[Category:Uploads by Matlin]]\n[[Category:Jefftemp]]", and mass nominated them for deletion with COM:VFC and a custom heading at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Jefftemp#Files in Category:Jefftemp ("tourist snaps" or personal pictures). I could have done it by picking and choosing in VFC if I had criteria in my head, but I didn't have them. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
. — Racconish 💬 10:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved
.webp){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Karl_Dohmann.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Dohmann_Blick_auf_Stadt_und_Feste_Kufstein.jpg){kind=link}
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WKD_Hornberg_1944.jpg){kind=link}
![[9]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Karl_Dohmann_Red_and_white_flowers_in_Vases.jpg){kind=link}
![[10]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Wilhelm_Karl_Dohmann_Red_and_white_flowers_in_Vases.jpg){kind=link}
![[13]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Karl_Dohmann_Overcast_forest_scene_-1912.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp){kind=link}
![[1]](/wiki/File:Vistas_ronda.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](/wiki/File:Villa_Apolo.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
