User talk:Chinakpradhan/Archive 7

Self image guidance

I still don't have any idea what you're wanting to do, and I don't know who that other individual is. Are you wanting to be credited in a different way? Change the Author field, then. What does "Scene type" have to do with anything? — Huntster (t @ c) 14:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster mate, I just said simply is anything needed for me add to prove this image is taken by me or just {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} is enough in self image case. Like I saw many added camera coordinates like File:ICF_Medha_Rake_Mr_418_During_the_Inauguration_Day_of_Line_3_at_Joka_Metro_Station.jpg. Actually I don't know self image rules on Wikimedia so need your help. Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:28, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

That guy is space shuttle almanac and I have discussed with you previously about him now being inactive here and you said in the past that he need to prove copyrights so I thought I needed same Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hand me one page on wiki to learn of self taken image rules Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:33, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that there is such a page. Some parts of Commons:First steps/License selection and Commons:Licensing might be of interest. Regarding that other person, if we've discussed him it must have been some time ago, and I've got a thousand things occupying my mind.

Normally, uploading your own photos isn't a big deal, but I suspect the images in the below sections were deleted because they were published elsewhere on the Internet and there was no way to connect them to you. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok all issues resolved Chinakpradhan (talk) 19:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hurrah!! @Huntster remember I do talked about Eventbrite patch licensing many a times. Recently I got hold of a good or probably new Eventbrite nasa admin who is reluctant to answer emails and he confirmed that patches are product of nasa so I am free to follow nasa pd license and upload it to commons without any problem. You can also do this on your own by signing up at Eventbrite and collecting patches just post launch. I have forwarded that email to your mail for confirmation. Chinakpradhan (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster it's a strenuous work for me to upload all the images myself please upload them all download links sent in email. Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Ahhhah, alternatively @Don-vip, can your @OptimusPrimeBot upload them if I send you in mail or paste links here Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi! My bot only deals with automating scrapping of space agencies websites, I don't do manual imports with it. vip (talk) 18:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

(Offtopic) Ah ya then OK. Btw @Don-vip I just remembered can it upload images from nisar website?? You said in your talk page once that you will do it. (Just a request) Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I'll do it but cannot say when. I have years of backlog ahead of me for this project. vip (talk) 18:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok lets see i will try myself if i am free then i will do myself or jan 2024 when launch nears. Bye. Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

hello @Huntster waiting for your reply to proceed forward with Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't know why you are asking me to do your work for you. I'm incredibly busy with my real life work. — Huntster (t @ c) 16:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok i will do it myself on being free. Just a help please, i got confirmation in email how to prove it to other admins (-other than you), that its nasa pd lisenced Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster will something like this work of lisence proving for this case too File:DART-impact-SAAO-Lesedi-Mookodi.gif Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I would open a ticket with Commons:VRT and forward the emails so they are properly logged and can be referred back to if any questions arose later. The issue with the file you just linked is that they don't seem to specify a license anywhere. I don't think that "permission" would hold up to any scrutiny. — Huntster (t @ c) 22:15, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ya i went over for license type ask but no response since then Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I have applied another email in a try to tell their lisence of images once it arrives i will forward it to you. Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

They replied use of lamest 4.0 lisencse use that i have forwarded to you@Huntster Chinakpradhan (talk) 12:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Their unwillingness to commit to a license suggests to me that either this is some kind of "form letter", or they don't comprehend what a license is, or they don't actually have permission to release things under a specific license. Regardless, in the future never assume a license unless the copyright holder specifically releases it as such. I would suggest nominating all three SAAO files for deletion together so that others might weigh in. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

i didn't understood they said in the past they used (CC BY) 4.0, currently nothing as such and they gave me right to publish under same lisence. Currently, its a valuable image as no other free version is available that captured it live, other non-free free space telescope images and LICIACube ones but not live one. Anything is wrong, it will be SAAO's fault. No other way to reach SAAO. Unless you are its member. Leave this issue for future, if someone contacted them clearly and find this copyvio then we can remove. There are plenty examples like soyuz patches that we discovered in 2020 and 15 years old uploaded patches were also deleted. @Huntster thanks you said to recheck so that I got corrected from 2.5 to 4.0 this time. Chinakpradhan (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Anyways if you still want further precise knowledge of this image's lisence apply for VRT lisence being added (as you said you will forward emails to VRT) along with my 45 Eventbrite images i just uploaded maybe others volunteers there can help us (like by futher contacting). Or raise this at Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard. I am sufficed by what they said. Chinakpradhan (talk) 14:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Where did they specifically state the files are released under CC-BY-4.0? And I never said I would forward emails to VRT, as I do not have the original emails. Regarding "Anything is wrong, it will be SAAO's fault.", that is absolutely not true. You are claiming they are releasing the images under a particular license, but there's no evidence that I've seen of that being true. You have a habit of assuming licenses. — Huntster (t @ c) 14:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The specifically stated or in other words, answered in response to my email which i fowarded to you. I am claiming the lisence in current case what they said to me in email. I dont have any other proof in hand. If you like to get in touch with them, call +27 21 447 0025 provided on their site at https://www.saao.ac.za/.

On the issue of forwarding emails @Huntster could you tell if Wikimedia VRT is open for common editing masses like me or only for administrators so that i can take the initiative of forwarding the emails since i have the original copy of emails. Chinakpradhan (talk) 16:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You would forward the email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Read COM:VRT for more information. — Huntster (t @ c) 18:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster I did a mistake forwarding tye emails to VRT without using this format (I first forwarded before reading page you cited). I got an auto generated email with ticket no should I resend or its OK. Chinakpradhan (talk) 11:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

So long as your initial email contained all the necessary information that the formatted version calls for, then you should be okay. Otherwise, I believe you can reply to the auto-generated email with any further evidence or statements, though I'm not certain of that. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:26, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster they find email OK and will add vrt ticket to all 45 nasa+3 saao images Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Joka-Taratala purple metro line no.3 inauguration on 30th december 2022.jpg

File:Joka-Taratala purple metro line no.3 inauguration on 30th december 2022.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

@Josve05a@Huntster what the hell happened 0 file discussion. @Josve05a a file discussion was necessary. See my history. If a file was proved nonfree I myself speedy removed it. I uploaded 32 images and the news video shows me as eye witness proof. Any error can be rectified. Tell once. Disgusting!! Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@Josve05a or anyone you find any image summon me once before rudely deleting. I learn by mistakes. Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@Josve05a tell this image problem Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:05, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Joka-Taratala purple metro line no.3 inauguration on 30th december 2022 27.jpg

File:Joka-Taratala purple metro line no.3 inauguration on 30th december 2022 27.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: An email has been received in ticket 2023083010005907 from the copyright holder requesting the file's immediate removal. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 17:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

New update

@Huntster is Wikimedia updated I see the 2nd page in file upload that asks you to tell file lisence is more descriptive with examples!!!!! Any more updates?? Is there a page that tells Wikimedia Commons updates Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:17, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Village pump/Technical‎ has periodic "Tech News" releases, the latest of which mentions updates to the upload wizard. Other than that, I have no information. — Huntster (t @ c) 18:18, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster is this image not for us https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/53336551344/in/photostream/ was a good image so asked? Chinakpradhan (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

gmt for Moscow in exif is meaning Roscosmos image? Chinakpradhan (talk) 14:37, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I am unsure what "GMT" or "SHK" are abbreviations for in this situation. Neither are initials for astronauts on the station. Given we cannot determine who took the photograph, we cannot assume it is PD-NASA unfortunately. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Hunster actually i was not sure for gmt only. For SHK, i have assurance that it is useless for us. See the module is named as nauka experiments or science airlock module for us but in or for Russian, it is named as SHK. Science (or Experiment) Airlock ShK. In Anatoly zak's page for nauka, the first big intro pic has a coagulation of three images. In that picture, the first picture with airlock facing north of your screen, the airlock is labelled as "Science Airlock ShK".

Main problem is GMT. It it was GCTC then it was Roscosmos's gagarin cosmonaut training center, but............. (answer is incomplete because of the less available info). Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense, and the use of the Russian abbreviation makes it even more likely for the image to be from a Russian source. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster how to find the link of a YouTube video's comment. A popular metro YouTube channel had granted me access to his videos for Wikimedia Commons and I want to link that during File upload. Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

@Huntster https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-MwPM4AEMU0&pp=ygUJbXJiIG1ldHJv is the video but I am thinking if it is right to use this grant as a chance for exploitation. Like taking out cool pics from all other videos too. Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, it is not possible to link to YouTube comments. Also, their simply "grant" is not acceptable for Commons, they need to go into that video's settings and change the license to "Creative Commons - Attribution" for it to be usable here. And no, unless they change the license for all their videos, you cannot use a statement on one to enact "exploitation" on all their other videos. — Huntster (t @ c) 17:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

it is available that reply on comments and likes on YouTube comments are transferred to emails so,I have the way clear to cite via commons:VRT but could you say clearly once more if the video linked above to which he commented to me is also allowed for Commons based on that reply or it also needs him to change the video lisence to "Creative Commons - Attribution"?? @Huntster

exploitation plan fails as per what you said as it's hard to instruct a YouTube channel to change settings only for me, notably, that it's not my channel. Let's see will try my best in a calm manner of convincing to him. Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Please slow down and rephrase your question. I'm not sure what you are asking. — Huntster (t @ c) 20:14, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

I am saying all YouTube comments are automatically sent to email so I have ref in hand via commons:vrt but do just writing "permission granted" in YouTube comment allow that particular video to be accessible to Wikimedia Commons usage or that too also need what you said "they need to go into that video's settings and change the license to "Creative Commons - Attribution"". Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:56, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

(for the above linked video) Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

(in more simpler terms I mean is that comment video still not allowed in Wikimedia Commons, isn't it?) @Huntster Chinakpradhan (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Correct, "permission granted" is unacceptable because a license is not specified. That's why I suggested changing the video's license in settings would be the best option. — Huntster (t @ c) 16:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)