File talk:Rebecca Wang BAFTA 2013 (8463766343) (cropped).jpg

 

call for discussion

I requested the individual who added {{NOINDEX}} and {{Personality Rights}} tags this image return here and offer explanations. Geo Swan (talk) 12:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Based on VRT ticket:2023061210005132 I've applied {{NOINDEX}} in order for the image not be indexed by search engines, as a courtesy action. If the community would like to undo/remove this, it should be discussed on a noticeboard. The reason is found within the ticket for those with access. {{Personality Rights}} should be applied to all images where a person is identifiable in order to warn re-users of non-copyright restrictions related to the image (same as {{Trademarked}} on all file pages with logos). --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

1. User:Josve05a, in the US justice system, when a prosecutor applies for, and is granted, permission to not share evidence with defense attorneys, because the evidence is classified, and the defense attorney does not have the security clearance to view that evidence, someone is obliged to offer an unclassified summary of the withheld classified evidence. Sometimes the judge makes the prosecutor draft that unclassified summary. Sometimes the judge drafts it him or herself.

   I don't have access to 2023061210005132. Could you please draft a summary of what that ticket says, that does not breach security?

   If the owner of the photo's IP rights, or Ms Wang, want the image deleted, as a courtesy, shouldn't we expect them to do what every other individual in that situation is expected to do - initiate a deletion discussion, where they say WHY they want the image deleted? Isn't a {{NOINDEX}} tag basically a kind of stealth deletion?

   As an administrator you would have the authority to delete the image if you thought 2023061210005132 could be interpreted as an instance of Commons:CSD#G3 - a credible claim of a personal attack. But, I don't see how you could do this here.

   Commons:CSD#G7, uploader requests deletion, has to be requested within the first week. That is not what we have, here, is it?

   Commons:CSD#G9, you are an administrator, but not part of the WMF cadre, correct? So, am I correct, you are not authorized to claim you are making an "office action"?

2. You assert {{Personality Rights}} should be applied to all images where a person is identifiable in order to warn re-users of non-copyright restrictions. Do you regard this as your personal opinion? Or do you think you are paraphrasing a policy, guideline, or firmly established convention?

   Policies, procedures, and long-standing conventions have grown extremely complicated on WMF projects. It is possible that the interpretation you have of how the {{Personality Rights}} tag should be used is clearly spelled out, somewhere. But, I have raised this concern before, and no one has ever pointed me at that policy, procedure, or long-standing convention. Please go ahead, and be the first, if this exists.

   The reason I ask is that I raised this tag a few years ago, and I found wild variance, among people who applied it, as to what it should be used for, and when it should be applied. Here is the discussion Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/04#Questioning when the personality rights tag is relevant...

   If the Commons community were to really decide this tag should be placed on every image of a living person, wouldn't that mean applying it to one half, or one third, or one quarter of our images? How many images is it applied to now? Isn't it only applied to a fraction of one percent of those images?

   I suggest that, if it were really important, it should be part of the general disclaimer, not a tag.

   But, a counter-argument to the idea it should be applied to every image of a living person is that doing so lapses from the idea that we should not represent ourselves as giving legal advice. I said the tag's exposition is cryptic. It seems to be addressed to me, the Commons' uploader. But it is not, right? It is actually addressed to users of the Commons, who are considering re-using images they found here. Your phrase, "...in order to warn re-users of non-copyright restrictions related to the image..." How is this not legal advice, legal advice we should not be giving? Geo Swan (talk) 00:34, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Josve05a, the last paragraph of Commons:Non-copyright restrictions#Non-copyright restrictions says "Although we do not consider these restrictions relevant to our policies we do OCCASIONALLY add disclaimers such as {{Trademarked}} and {{Personality rights}} as a general public service." Occasionally... I suggest that is at odds with the idea of adding the tag to every image of a living person. And, if it is only going to be added occasionally, in exceptional cases, doesn't that imply that the person choosing to add the tag, because they consider the image one of the exceptional cases, should be able to explain why this image is exceptional enough to merit the occasional use of the tag? Geo Swan (talk) 00:54, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

 Comment. For posterity's sake: This discussion was continued at the VRT noticeboard, for further community input. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:21, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

• The discussion was archived, at Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard/archive/2023#When should the {{NOINDEX}} tag be applied...

Another administrator removed the {{NOINDEX}} tag. There did not seem to be any support for its use on this image.

In that discussion I suggested there will be times when a VRT member's response should be something like:

Thank you for identifying yourself, so I know you have standing on the issue you voiced here. Thank you for sharing your story. It's moving. I cannot, however, fulfill your request to delete the image or article you requested be deleted. Our policies state it should only be deleted following a discussion within our whole community. I can initiate the deletion discussion for you. I can initiate that discussion for you, only giving those details you authorize me to share. If you want to respond to questions or comments project contributors made in the deletion fora, and you create an ID to do so, I will inform everyone that I have confirmed that your responses are really from you. If you want to respond to questions or comments project contributors made, indirectly, you can email your responses to me, and I will post them, on your behalf.

User:Josve05a, since vanity is the most common reason for requests for the courtesy deletion of images, I am going to assume vanity was the underlying reason here. If you ever find yourself considering a similar case I suggest you consider a reply like the one I suggested here.

Josve05a reassured everyone he was, in general, committed to openness and transparency. Geo Swan (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

• Commons:Village pump/Archive/2023/06#To which files should the Personality Rights tag be applied...

Four individuals responded. It seems to me two of those respondents voiced support for sticking to the explicit wording of Commons:Non-copyright_restrictions#Non-copyright_restrictions - that {{Personality rights}} tag should only be used occasionally. Both these respondents selled out specific reasons for when they thought it should be used.

The other two respondents, User:TheAafi and User:Red-tailed hawk seem to agree the tag should be applied very broadly. They did not however take a stand as to whether it should remain on this image. Geo Swan (talk) 07:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)