Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
The image is obviously a cut-out and slightly enlarged part of ]. According to ], such an action does not give authorship. The columns "Source", "Author" and "Date", as well as the license, must be re-issued in accordance with the original photo. <small>Which must be deleted, but here is not Commons.</small> — Ирука<sup>]</sup> 00:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
The image is obviously a cut-out and slightly enlarged part of ]. According to ], such an action does not give authorship. The columns "Source", "Author" and "Date", as well as the license, must be re-issued in accordance with the original photo. <small>Which must be deleted, but here is not Commons.</small> — Ирука<sup>]</sup> 00:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
:Thanks for the headsup, ]. I made the closeup photograph that is ] diplayed to the left and followed what was understood in its description when creating the WP file. I do not know why you presume an image from which it is cropped. It seems that the disposition of a specific file is why you are calling for the action you have noted regarding the file I uploaded that was '''accepted''' during review — years ago.
:Thanks for the headsup, ]. I made the closeup photograph that is ] diplayed to the left and followed what was understood in its description when creating the WP file. I do not know why you presume an image from which it is cropped. It seems that the disposition of a specific file is why you are calling for the action you have noted regarding the file I uploaded that was '''accepted''' during review — years ago.
:Loss of the closeup image seems detrimental to WP where it is applied to the discussion of the minute detail at the article on the Narmer_Palette, please do not delete it. I also plan to use it for an edit of another article.
:Loss of the closeup image seems detrimental to WP where it is applied to the discussion of the minute detail at the article on the Narmer_Palette, please do not delete it. I also plan to use it for an edit of another article.
:The subject is an Ancient Egyptian artifact of unknown artistic origin, a cosmetic tray. No claim regarding creation of the artifact is asserted, only of creation of the closeup photograph. Noting the detail about ] on top of columns depicted below the belt of a king figure depictred on the tray — has a distinct purpose that calls for the closeup.
:The subject is an Ancient Egyptian artifact of unknown artistic origin, a cosmetic tray. No claim regarding creation of the artifact is asserted, only of creation of the closeup photograph. Noting the detail about ] on top of columns depicted below the belt of a king figure depictred on the tray — has a distinct purpose that calls for the closeup.
:'''Please clarify exactly how you would prefer the description to read and I will edit the file following your instructions'''.
:'''Please clarify exactly how you would prefer the description to read and I will edit the file following your instructions'''.
:Also, my understanding is, that an editor is free to exercise the option offered to stipulate local retention — please advise whether that has been changed — as I continue to want to exercise that option. I do not understand your last sentence, please clarify that as well. _ _ _ _ ] (]) 02:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
:Also, my understanding is, that an editor is free to exercise the option offered to stipulate local retention — please advise whether that has been changed — as I continue to want to exercise that option. I do not understand your last sentence, please clarify that as well. _ _ _ _ ] (]) 02:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
::I decided this because I saw several similar images in your contribution - unlike this one, the source of those images is only other images, although the file description says that you are their author. And also because of the lack of metadata. And, of course, when comparing the images as such.
:: Please provide a link to the discussion in which the image was accepted.
:: This is not necessary, but I would like to see the full image with metadata. — Ирука<sup>]</sup> 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
====]====
====]====
Line 35:
Line 38:
The album cover is a for an alternative version of the album, released months after the original. It is not substantially different and has not been subject to critical commentary therefore it fails ], the omission of the cover does not harm the topic. The cover is also of too high quality for a non-free image. <span style="color:#01260d">>></span> ] <span style="color:#01260d">'''('''</span>]<span style="color:#01260d">''')'''</span> — 21:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
The album cover is a for an alternative version of the album, released months after the original. It is not substantially different and has not been subject to critical commentary therefore it fails ], the omission of the cover does not harm the topic. The cover is also of too high quality for a non-free image. <span style="color:#01260d">>></span> ] <span style="color:#01260d">'''('''</span>]<span style="color:#01260d">''')'''</span> — 21:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Fails ] and ]. —] <sup>] ]</sup> 23:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Fails ] and ]. —] <sup>] ]</sup> 23:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Question''' if facing the vortex at a different angle and having KP emerge from it along with showing a new butterfly doesn't qualify as "substantially different" to the standard edition's cover, then what would? I was sure that counted for something. Image resolution could potentially be reduced. ] (] / ]) 03:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
The image is obviously a cut-out and slightly enlarged part of this image. According to c:COM:Own work, such an action does not give authorship. The columns "Source", "Author" and "Date", as well as the license, must be re-issued in accordance with the original photo. Which must be deleted, but here is not Commons. — Ирука 00:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the headsup, User:Iruka13. I made the closeup photograph that is diplayed to the left and followed what was understood in its description when creating the WP file. I do not know why you presume an image from which it is cropped. It seems that the disposition of a specific file is why you are calling for the action you have noted regarding the file I uploaded that was accepted during review — years ago.
Loss of the closeup image seems detrimental to WP where it is applied to the discussion of the minute detail at the article on the Narmer_Palette, please do not delete it. I also plan to use it for an edit of another article.
The subject is an Ancient Egyptian artifact of unknown artistic origin, a cosmetic tray. No claim regarding creation of the artifact is asserted, only of creation of the closeup photograph. Noting the detail about Hathor on top of columns depicted below the belt of a king figure depictred on the tray — has a distinct purpose that calls for the closeup.
Please clarify exactly how you would prefer the description to read and I will edit the file following your instructions.
Also, my understanding is, that an editor is free to exercise the option offered to stipulate local retention — please advise whether that has been changed — as I continue to want to exercise that option. I do not understand your last sentence, please clarify that as well. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 02:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
I decided this because I saw several similar images in your contribution - unlike this one, the source of those images is only other images, although the file description says that you are their author. And also because of the lack of metadata. And, of course, when comparing the images as such.
Please provide a link to the discussion in which the image was accepted.
The album cover is a for an alternative version of the album, released months after the original. It is not substantially different and has not been subject to critical commentary therefore it fails WP:NFCC, the omission of the cover does not harm the topic. The cover is also of too high quality for a non-free image. >> Lil-unique1(talk) — 21:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Question if facing the vortex at a different angle and having KP emerge from it along with showing a new butterfly doesn't qualify as "substantially different" to the standard edition's cover, then what would? I was sure that counted for something. Image resolution could potentially be reduced. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
