User talk:Yodigo

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Yodigo!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文(台灣)‎ | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−


You've uploaded a derivative work We're sorry, but Image:Irish st Patricks battalion stamp.jpg has been marked as a copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Photographs of copyrighted works are also subject to the same copyright, and therefore this photo must unfortunately be considered non-free. For more information, please read Commons:Derivative works and Commons:Freedom of panorama.

The file you added will soon be deleted. If you believe this image is not a derivative work, please explain why on the image description page.


čeština  dansk  Deutsch  English  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  ไทย  日本語  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−

Eusebius (talk) 06:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hola

[edit]

Abstente de subir imágenes/fotografías/escaneos de obras que no estén en el dominio público: dado que no eres el titular de los derechos no puedes cederals bajo una licencia libre y el hecho que las escanees no las convierte en tu obra, ese es un malentendido. En otras palabras, aunque tú realices la fotografía o el escaneo, aunque tú crees el archivo, la obra no es tuya y no puedes cederla. En particular, los murales de Castro Pacheco y los escaneos de músicos no están en el dominio público todavía. -- Drini 06:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Archivo público no es sinónimo de dominio público. Dominio público implica una ausencia de restricciones en los derechos de autor.
No basta con tener el permiso del pintor/fotógrafo, etc. para que una imagen sea aceptada en Commons. Es necesario que el propietario de los derechos acepte cederlas bajo una licencia libre que implica
  • Un permiso perpetuo e irrevocable para
  • Que cualquier persona (no únicamente Wikipedia) pueda reproducir, copiar, modificar y transmitir
  • Con cualquier finalidad, incluso con fines comerciales
  • Sin necesidad de tramitar un nuevo permiso
  • Provisto que: el crédito de la obra original sea siempre mencionado
  • Las nuevas reproducciones y copias tengan la misma licencia.
Este permiso sólo lo puede otorgar el creador, en el caso del os murales, Castro Pacheco. Tiene que enviar él un correo a la dirección indicada en http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:OTRS indicando claramente que acepta la licencia que se propone (en este caso CC-BY-SA) y que entiende que dicha licencia otorga las libertades mencionadas arriba de forma irrevocable y perpetua. -- Drini 14:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Caso 1) Sí, las otrasi mágenes deben ser borradas.

Caso 2) Salvo que sean muy antiguas, en cuyo caso están en el dominio público, de lo contrario es una zona gris y sería mejor consultaro el el café de commons.

Caso 3) No basta una autorización o un permiso, es necesario que el propietario de los derechos (no sé si sea el autor o el museo) libere las imágenes bajo la licencia libe de forma explícita, dejando en claro que se están otorgando los permisos mencionados arriba a cualquier persona, no sólo a la wiki. -- Drini 01:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Recuerda que en la carta tiene que dejar claro que entiende las consecuencias de la licencia 1) la irrevocabilidad 2) que el permiso se otorga a cualquier tercero (no sólo a wikipedia) 3) que las imágenes podrán ser copiadas, modificadas y reutilzadas para cualquier fin, incluso comercialmente (por ejemplo, editando un álbum fotográfico) -- Drini 21:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Respecto a dichas fotos, la de Chalín, dices que es de 1975, por lo que difícilmente se puede argumentar que están ya en el dominio público. Admito que me he equivocado con la de Guty, así que procedo a restaurarla. -- Drini 21:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Te quiero señalar también que la palabra "borrado" en lenguaje wiki es un equívoco. En realidad las imágenes siguen ahí, simplemente están ocultas a la vista del público y peuden ser "restituidas" en cualquier momento dado que no expiran y no desaparecen.

Yo sé que dichas imágenes son valiosas, pero recuerda también que estos proeyctos no buscan únicamente recopilar contenido educativo sino que además es fundamental que dicho contenido sea libre para su redistribución y reutilización (lo cual, excluye mucho material, y por esa misma razón no podemos aceptar material "cedido para uso en la wiki" porque no están dando un permiso para cualquier otra persona del planeta, sólo a la wiki). -- Drini 21:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aclaro, sin embargo, que una foto de un artista en un evento público sí tiene derechos de autor, siendo el fotógrafo quien posee los mismos. En User:Drini/Mexican_copyright_law tengo un rsumen (en inglés) de los puntos relevantes para commons de la ley federal de derechos de autor. -- Drini 04:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it, ask its master (Filnik) or go to the Commons:Help desk. --Filnik 05:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi Yodigo, I've taken the liberty to make a regular DR, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Guty Cárdenas.jpg, out of your speedy-categorizing of this file. --Túrelio (talk) 07:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:San_Estevan_Map.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!

Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pay attention to licensing
Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose.

File:La niña del mar y el sol.JPG seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file.

If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.

العربية  Deutsch  English  español  français  日本語  മലയാളം  polski  português  slovenščina  svenska  Tiếng Việt  简体中文  繁體中文  +/−

Elisfkc (talk) 18:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ruano Llopis.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!

Discasto talk 20:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hugo O'Conor.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!

Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tekanto San Agustin.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!

--Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carlos III, rey de GB y Maestro Fernando Lozano, director y concertador mexicano, 1980, en Londres.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) 07:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]