User talk:Sam Sailor/Archive 1

File:2014-06-21 portrait from poster yoo byung-eun.jpg

File:2014-06-21 portrait from poster yoo byung-eun.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

ChongDae (talk) 06:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

An unfree Flickr license was found on File:INDEX Awards 2011 (photo by Dawn Danby).jpg

---

A file that you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons from Flickr, File:INDEX Awards 2011 (photo by Dawn Danby).jpg, was found available on Flickr by an administrator or reviewer under the license Noncommercial (), No derivative works (), or All Rights Reserved (), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as (CC BY), (CC BY-SA), (CC0) and (PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.

Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that, Túrelio. Best, Sam Sailor (talk) 10:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:User Sam Sailor.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:User Sam Sailor.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Yours sincerely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:21, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Sam Sailor,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:42, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Question

Hello Sam, You say my file File:Arvind Kejriwal Taking Charges As Delhi's First AAP CM.jpg as a copyright this file was originally posted to Flickr. So, those file isn't a copyright. Shinzo17 (talk) 12:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Anyone can upload anything to Flickr. That does not make it free of copyrights. Please post at the bottom of the talk pages. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2014-06-21 poster yoo byung-eun.jpg

File:2014-06-21 poster yoo byung-eun.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Wcam (talk) 13:49, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecated

Hello Sam Sailor, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2017 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2017 Picture of the Year contest, but not yet in R2.

Dear Sam Sailor,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2017 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the twelfth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2017) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top 2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2017.

Round 2 will end on 22 July 2018, 23:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 11:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I Don"t Understand: "‪Secondary Waltz"‬ left a message on my talk page: File:JDD Still1 Bathtub.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and othe...

Dear Sam,

I believe that I thanked you for nominating the article "Joan Does Dynasty" for placement on the front page of Wikipedia. If I did not, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH...I made several other online friends from the debates around copyright issues in my video art. These were resolved after discussion as you may remember.

Then suddenly this month, someone known as "Secondary Waltz" decided that the still from that video should be deleted from the page. He claimed it was a screenshot (which is never was by me, anyway) and invoked several other categories of problem which make no sense to me at all, even after reading the links he provided.

It so happens that since this p3iece was made in 1986 hence before digital editing was widely used, this still was made on film by actually shooting its image off of a TV screen with an Analog 35mm still camera. It was then scanned onto my computer and those of my distributors and institutions, galleries and museums that showed the piece. There are a number of stills from this scene in my film, not just this one, called still #1. They have slight differences in the times into the piece when they were shot. As fate would have it, this still also exists as a large print in a series of prints I made of stills from my work called, "Moving Stills." I created these by printing the slides onto a very shiny cibachrome paper stock to refer the attention of the viewer to the look of the television image.

When the still was uploaded onto the Wikipedia page, its source was still the analog image shot directly off of a television upon which the video was being screened. Since the still is a direct copy of the original and I own both the original and some of the copies, there would seem to be no copyright issue here. I am President of our small private production company, NO MORE NICE GIRLS which has 3-4 additional Board Members. The Company did not exist at the time the piece or the still was made but does, as my company, do some distribution of my work. When I give it to screening venues, I insist that the stills always be attributed to me, the maker of the original images. SO WHY DID WIKEPEDIA TAKE THIS STILL, WHICH IS SO DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THE MOVING IMAGES OF THE FILM - OFF OF THE FILM PAGE???? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND AT ALL. PERHAPS YOU CAN EXPLAIN, AND IF NOT, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT THIS ISSUE UP FOR MEDIATION.

Similar conditions obtain when it comes to the poster that was created for my film, THE HERETICS. This poster is an original work of art made by me and an effects assistant named Jeff Striker, a talented young image maker. We worked on it simultaneously on a large screen we shared, using the program, Adobe Photoshop. Its actual final design came about because of an accidental movement one of us made. The beauty of the accident as partial author of the image made us laugh in glee at the time. It therefore seems particularly grotesque, since I was part of the actual creation of the Photoshop image that its copyright could be questioned.

The original image is obviously much scaled down from the printed image which whose measurements we stipulate when sending to a PRINT SHOP. THE ORIGIANL IMAGE LOVES ON THE DESKTOPS OF MY COMPUTERS. It is uploadable to most on-line platforms and no screenshot needs intervene between our original and the one that appears in its scaled down form on the page for my film, THE HERETICS. As with all my stills, attribution to the artist must accompany their publication and I have given these stills to reviewers and curators all over the globe to use in publicizing my work on their calendars, posters. et al.

I have several historical and current distribution companies which handle the care of the original files that I now give them (I used to give them master tapes on Betacam or One-inch Uhmatic tape;) They are currently: Women Make Movies, NYC; The Video Data Bank, Chicago, Luxe, London and GDR, the Public TV Station of Denmark in Europe. But these are distributors of the work of artists and must abide by the same rules of attribution as other entities.

They also have the right to distribute the films and videos, stills and posters for my work and attribute the creation of these works to me. My role in these productions combines that of what might be called. "Producer-Director" in the world of film and "video artist" in the art world. The two titles assign credit for the work in the same way, though the functions might be seen as different or seem to be held by two people. Walter Benjamin had a great deal to say about authorship and “originals” in the world of mass reproducible art. But that was in another country and besides, not really relevant to why my images were pulled off of Wikepedia.

Any light you can shed on why “Secondary Waltz” had so little work to do that he became obsessed with pulling my images would be enormously helpful to me. For example, there may be one of those small series of words on the “Choose-your-proper-copyright” page of Wikipedia that would make the whole go away and the images can be returned to the place they belong on a page about visual art.

Thank you for any guidance you can offer, Sam, and MY BEST WISHES FOR A HAPPY, HAPPY NEW YEAR, full of some of the changes in the world we so sorely need !!! Joan Braderman juanitavid@gmail.com {Joan Braderman |06:42, 20 December 2018|Juanitavid}}

Dear Joan. I am sorry to hear that. As I am not a sysop (admin), I can not see the now deleted files. My suggestion is that you post a short message on the talk page of the sysop who deleted two of the three images, User talk:Túrelio. Explain that you are indeed the copyright-holder as well as the owner of the production company, and ask Túrelio for the best way forward.

Happy holidays to you and yours - may the new year bring some good tidings from Mr. Mueller. Sam Sailor 12:29, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

File:In front of the Copenhagen Synagogue -cphshootings (15915641124).jpg

File:In front of the Copenhagen Synagogue -cphshootings (15915641124).jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified: This file is a duplicate of the following files: File:Flowers in front of the Copenhagen Syngagoue after 20015 Copenhagen attacks.jpg. If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log. If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

B dash (talk) 06:18, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

File:Sonja Ferlov Mancoba - Effort Commun (1964).JPG

File:Sonja Ferlov Mancoba - Effort Commun (1964).JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

A1Cafel (talk) 03:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)