Template talk:Oa

OTRS always?

Just to stress, once more, that the OTRS is only one of the many ways a copyright holder has to express a licensing suitable for Commons — and the one way that is most vexing for said copyright holder, the one that’s lest transparent, and the one taxes most our volonteers’ efforts.

Constantly directing uploaders seeking an undeletion and other such claimants to OTRS, when other options would be simpler and faster, needlessly crowds OTRS itself and reduces its effectiveness for those cases when it is the only option.

Just like we trust a photographer when a suitable license is selected in, say, Flickr, we should accept, and enourage the use of, an hoc statements linking to, say, the CC website, per which an author licenses their work. (I’m thinking of social media sites such as Twitter or Instagram, but also personal websites.)

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:37, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: I am not a mind reader. The community has chosen not to reveal the freeform text in copyvio tags on user talk pages or in the deletion log, and I am not an Admin, so maddeningly I can't access that info for a deleted file at COM:UDR (with a DR, at least we have a public reason). Uploaders are given multiple opportunities to substantiate licensing claims, but many who post UDRs just ignore those opportunities. Such an ad hoc statement should have been referenced on the file description page in the first place, not presented five steps down the road in a second post at UDR. In my experience, the percentage of websites and twitter feeds with licenses so free as to be acceptable to Commons and that we do not already have special cases for is so minuscule as to be negligible from my POV. However, you are free to suggest text designed to reduce traffic to OTRS while better serving UDR posters. Sorry for the late reply, I only just noticed this page existed. Please ping me if I don't respond within a day or so.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Template abbreviation

The abbreviated name for this template may be a backronym for multiple things (but I mostly chose it because it was short and its name was available):

• Oppose, Admin was right, we need proof
• Oppose, Analysis reveals a lack of proof
• Oppose, OTRS Agent needed to verify third-party claim in ticket
• Oppose, Accumulated evidence points to a need for caution per COM:PRP

Please note that it starts with a bullet and  Oppose, and four tildes in a row beat "subst:" by a few hunts and pecks (all for my convenience).   — Jeff G. ツ 18:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Translations

@Yann, Jcb, and Zhuyifei1999: This template already has built-in switch-based translations in German, English, Spanish, Italian, and Russian. I would welcome your translations in French, Dutch, and Chinese, as well as conversion to autotranslation.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 11:02, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm a terrible translator :( I can understand and write both languages, but to translate from one to another without losing meaning... uh... --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 16:56, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

• Translation to portuguese:

•  Oppose Esta imagem apareceu - ou estas imagens apareceram - na internet sem licença livre antes de ser carregada aqui no Commons (ou foi baseada em uma de tamanho pequeno e sem meta-dados EXIF), sendo eliminada por um administrador. Tendo isto em vista, políticas internas requerem que o atual titular dos direitos - o qual é normalmente o fotógrafo ou criador da imagem - enviem uma licença livre via OTRS.

Obs: change language to "pt".

--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 23:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Oppose

@Jeff G.: Does the "oppose" really have to be there? UDR is not a poll and it feels kind of hostile towards actual copyright holders. I could also add a switch to disable it when I use it or copy the template, but in case you agree it's not really needed it could just be removed. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 18:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Yes, the "oppose" really does have to be there. COM:UDR has been a poll for 11 years. Usually, people post requests for undeletion of a file which was deleted by an Admin, individual ones are voted on or commented on, and Admins close them. Occasionally, requests don't qualify for consideration because they did not follow proper procedure (the filename is not currently deleted or no specific filename is mentioned), and those can be closed procedurally by anyone. Most requests can be addressed prima facie by this template with a sig after minimal research because the files appear to have been copyvios. Actual copyright holders who have followed the rules generally have no need to post there because their files generally don't get deleted. However, since you want to use the text without the "oppose", I have implemented a "vote" parameter; syntax to suppress the "oppose" !vote is {{ Oa | vote = no }}, or more succinctly "{{oa|vote=no}}", after text, colon, or bullet on the same line to avoid code styling.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 07:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Here is how it currently looks in practice (live transclusion): " This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata), and was (or were) thus deleted by an Administrator. Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS."   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 07:06, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: Thanks! I'll use it. What I meant is it's not really a poll because if 100 people vote "support" to undelete a copyvio, it still won't be undeleted. The votes are not tallied. When someone claims to be a copyright holder (who didn't follow the rules) or someone who was given off-wiki permission by the copyright holder, I prefer not to tell them I "oppose" undeletion. If they go to OTRS, I'm not opposing it after all. I find the "oppose" to be more suitable for the less reasonable ("undelete because I need it!!") requests.

Do you like the OTRS backlog line I added? If you do, we should probably ping Srittau and Incnis Mrsi to update the translations. By the way, is it generally better to send people to their localized OTRS? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:53, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: any UDR is just as much a poll as any DR is. If the requestor has not made any sound arguments at a particular UDR, I am going to oppose because the same Admin who deleted in the first place would likely redelete. I like the backlog line or I would have removed it. If we have a translated OTRS page in a particular language, I make sure it has a shortcut and then refer with the shortcut.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 14:50, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: I agree many UDR requests are not correct, I just don't want to potentially discourage copyright holders from contacting OTRS by saying "oppose" because it's more like "support, provided that.." for me personally.

@Incnis Mrsi and Srittau: can you update the translations? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:01, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done for German. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 16:05, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@Srittau: Danke.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 16:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I find that this template, when omitting the vote, is also suitable for user talk pages or any other place where users ask why their images were deleted. So thanks again for making the vote optional. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 15:05, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

vote=delete syntax

Here is a demonstration of the vote=delete syntax live as "{{oa|vote=delete}}":

•  Delete This image has (or these images have) appeared on the Internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here (or appear(s) to have based on the small size and lack of EXIF metadata). Policy requires that the actual copyright holder, which is almost always the photographer or image designer, must send a free license directly using VRTS.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 13:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC)