File talk:KAST kast designed by Marcel Douwe Dekker in 1992.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This file was nominated for deletion on 30 January 2012 but was kept. If you are thinking about re-nominating it for deletion, please read that discussion first. |
 | This file was undeleted on 16 September 2022 after being previously deleted. If you are thinking about re-nominating it for deletion, please read that discussion first. |
Re-installation of the original file
[edit]
As requested by me in the undeletion request, see here, the original 2010 file is re-installated here, because I would like to have the history of this one image on this one place. This image was made in Delfshaven in Winter/Spring 1992, and has had quite some history. I was published online on my website in 2008, and as one of my first images on my Flickr photostream which I started in April 2008. The 2012 upload has been re-installed as KAST kast in Havenstraat, 2012, thank you. -- Mdd (talk) 17:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, the outcome of the request was explicitly to NOT recreate the original file in this space, but to leave the new picture here, and move the old picture to a new location. The way you have done it now, changes the pages where the new picture was used to the old picture without notification to page subscribers. Whaledad (talk) 18:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Whaledad we started the discussion about this UR on your talk page in Dutch, see here, which i will continue there in English for everybody to follow. I also posted an analysis of the the DR discussion ten years ago, see here. I will explain, but this might take a little, that you got it backwards with your "pic for hire" argumentation. Next I will explain there is a recurring pattern of fact framing, which after due consideration turn out to be false dillema's. Again this will take some more time to explain. One of the outcomes will be, that eventually here on Wikipedia this doesn't seem to matter taht much, because you can do the right thing for the wrong reasons and everybody seems happy.
- Regarding the request to undelete the image here, there is not just the use of the image elsewhere which can be further corrected. There is the history which should be kept in a place, but also the naming of the files... and more. I will continue later this evening. -- 19:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Mdd, Please stop your plans to accuse me of being wong and "fact framing" ("I will explain, but this might take a little, that you got it backwards with your "pic for hire" argumentation. Next I will explain there is a recurring pattern of fact framing, which after due consideration turn out to be false dillema's.") I have no appetite of getting back into combative discussions with you. I have given you hard facts re. photographers copyright, which you can validate online as many times as you would like. If you come to my Talk Page to dispute my solid factual knowledge or accuse me further of "fact framing", your contributions there will be removed without further comments. Obviously you can comment here as much as you want, but I won't see those comments, because I will unfollow this page. Whaledad (talk) 20:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- There is no accusation. I am grateful for your support, yet you got it backwards with the "work for hire" conditions, which also came up in this recent deletion request. I will save that other analysis for another day. Good night. -- Mdd (talk) 21:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
