User talk:Belbury

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an article, file or the talk page of an article or file. If you find this page on any site other than the Wikimedia Commons you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than the Wikimedia Commons itself. The original page is located at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Belbury.

This is the user talk page of Belbury, where you can send messages and comments to Belbury.

• Be polite.
• Be friendly.
• Assume good faith.
• No personal attacks.

• Please sign and date your entries by clicking on the appropriate button or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
• Put new text under old text.
• New to Wikimedia Commons? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers as soon as possible.
• Click here to start a new topic.

Archives 1, 2

File:Belinda2024.jpg

Your copyvio tag on this file wasn't appropriate. If uploaders don't lie and are honest in telling about the source, we should give them a benefit of doubt, by just adding {{No permission since}}. However, if they claim own work - it is outright copyright violation. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 11:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@Aafi: Hi, my reading of these kinds of social media uploads is that if the uploader provides the URL of a specific post, and that post when examined is not attempting to release the copyright in any way, and the user is not making any kind of statement about representing or being the pictured subject, I take the good faith interpretation that the user believes the post to be evidence of the image being public domain, but is mistaken about that.

The associated talk page template for CSD F1 says that the image has been "marked as a possible copyright violation" (not a definite one) and cautions that "unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here".

F1 has an exemption when there is "a reasonable possibility of discovering that the work is public domain through further research", but I wouldn't have said this applied to a typical celebrity Instagram photo. Belbury (talk) 12:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@Aafi: Would be good to hear your view on what I've said here, a lot of my Commons activity is flagging copyvios so I'd like to feel confident that I was doing it correctly. Belbury (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Belbury: Ideally, if a user claims a work as own which is otherwise found on internet; it is a clear ground for COM:CSD#F1 - simply because the uploader is lying. For the other case, where uploader doesn't claim own-work (but might or might not have permission) - our usual behavior is to tag the files with {{No permission since}}. Although this template is heavily worded, but elsewhere, as it says, "It (the file) is attributed to someone other than the uploader, or to an external site, and while a licensing tag has been applied, there is no proof that the author has agreed to release the file under the given license....." If permissions aren't cleared, the file is deleted in seven days. We do this in all cases where it could be said about permissions/licensing that there is ""a reasonable possibility of discovering that the work is public domain (other compatible licenses) through further research (or perhaps through VRT)." To clear up, where ever there is a honest attribution of author/source, permissions template is the right thing, and not a CSD copyright violation tag. Let me know if I make any sense here. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 18:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

About Human Brain-Genered by Freepik.jpg

Hello Belbury, I would like to report that the image is free and unlicensed, but unfortunately I couldn't find the correct option to select on Wikimedia Commons when uploading the image and because of that I ended up selecting the wrong option. I'm sorry about that, unfortunately I'm new to Wikimedia Commons and I'm still learning. I also won't be able to get the permissions information from the image's author. So you can delete the image without any problems, I appreciate your understanding and for letting me know. Kind regards, Neurestein!! : ) (Neurestein (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC))

ScreamingEagles GameDetail.jpg - forgot about this one

Hi, thanks for the deletion notice, I see it's already been deleted. It was a very early contribution of me 17 years ago, when I was pretty ignorant of copyright issues, a couple of years later I became an ArbCom member of nl.wiki so in hindsight I should have known better! And it was a very poor picture too. So good riddance to it :-) --10:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC) Brinkie (talk) 10:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

บักสัตว์ 125.25.182.191 10:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Michael Myers

Dear Belbury did you the know that thing on the Michael Myers (Halloween) article where it says "Michael Myers is regarded as one of the most recognizable and most iconic horror villains, alongside Jason Voorhees from Friday the 13th , Freddy Krueger from A Nightmare on Elm Street and Ghostface from Scream." was actually put there on the in popular culture section by a vandal a couple of years ago and nobody notice it do you think it's unnecessary? 2600:387:15:638:0:0:0:5 21:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

When it says in popular culture doesn't mean who are the best character alongside others it means what he's like in other media and merchandise and stuff you know pop culture. 2600:387:15:638:0:0:0:5 21:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Sure he could be one of most recognizable and most iconic horror villains but doesn't mean he has to have someone else alongside him there's countless horror icons. 2600:387:15:638:0:0:0:5 21:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)