File talk:Ken O'Keefe.jpg

Photo

(from talk:Kenneth O'Keefe but related to this picture so copied over) Off2riorob (talk) 12:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Please don't remove photo again. Evidence of permission has been provided. It is due to be deleted 26 January if evidence is not provided. Leave it until then. --Christiaan (talk) 18:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

So, take it easy with your bad faith allegations of bad faith .. the pic has been without permission for too long, the pic is in another article so won't be deleted anyway. Off2riorob (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I only found out today that evidence of permission is required. Thanks, by the way, for letting me know (was that policy even around when I uploaded the image?). Anyway, I didn't mean to accuse you of acting in bad faith. All I meant to say is that removing it from the article would be an act of bad faith based on the fact that I've explained that an email containing details of the permission has been sent in accordance with WP:OTRS. If there's a policy for removing files from articles that are under OTRS then fair enough. But is there one? --Christiaan (talk) 19:12, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The pics in another article anyway so would not be deleted, it is good practice to remove any pic that has not got permission as this pic has not got currently permission - the pic is available to re-upload even if it was deleted, its not like the wheels drop off is it. Are you the owner of the copyright to this picture then? I was looking at your uploads and this one seems a cut and copy from the web without any metadata at all like your other claims pictures have. Off2riorob (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I asked for and received permission from the author by email to "use the pic in anyway you like as long as I'm credited." Unless there's a strict policy I oppose removing it from the article. It's a photo of him. We're not improving Wikipedia by removing it. --Christiaan (talk) 19:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

It's obviously him and the picture has been in the article for quite a while. So unless someone complained I see no harm in leaving it there for another week until the copyright issue clears up. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 19:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

That is quite irrelevant, oh, no one has complained so it must be ok. The actual issue is that the image has been in our article for a lengthy period of time and we never had the correct permission for it. Off2riorob (talk) 19:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

• - To Christiaan - you need to ask the owner of the pic to contact the foundation themselves - contact through you is not sufficient at all. The owner of the copyright needs to contact the foundation and release the picture directly, not through a wikipedia user. Off2riorob (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

That's not what the deletion tag said. The deletion tag said "Unless a link to a webpage with an explicit permission is provided, or an email from the copyright owner is sent or forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, the image will be deleted after Wednesday, 26 January 2011" (my emphasis) --Christiaan (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

It's also not what the permissions page explains to do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Permission#When_permission_is_confirmed

Not sure what your saying but - The copyright owner has to contact the foundation directly and clearly state what commons comparable license they want to donate the picture under - you are not a viable authority for the owner to act as a conduit for the owner to operate and release pictures through, you should direct the copyright owner to the correct OTRS location and they will help him there. Off2riorob (talk) 20:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Would you mind linking to instructions that say this? --Christiaan (talk) 20:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

This has been my experience from picture uploading and similar issues. Off2riorob (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure but there must be instructions somewhere. The instructions I linked to above appear to suggest the opposite of what you're saying. --Christiaan (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

So does the link rob provided. It doesn't say or imply the original author needs to provide permission directly to wikipedia. In fact it seems like it's saying that whoever uploads the pic needs to get permission, and then send a copy of that. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I have not provided any links - Well, lets see, I have given my advice from my experiance of claims I have had rejected and other such - I have an email from the owner claims and when the email is received we can access the copyright release claim. Off2riorob (talk) 20:15, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I've cleared up thread to be clear who provided links.--Christiaan (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, well, I appreciate your advice Rob. I've emailed the author again asking him to to provide a direct email in case you're right. --Christiaan (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, there is a link somewhere that supplies a good note to send to copyright owners with the correct place and licenses to choose between but right now I can't find it, perhaps ask at media help. Off2riorob (talk) 20:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

You mean this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries I've sent it to him. --Christiaan (talk) 20:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that the one and it preferably should come from him direct to the foundation, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 20:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)