Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:21, 9 August 2011

Archives

Note: If you leave a message here I will most often respond here

About Philippine Governemnt Seals

Hello Future Perfect at Sunrise,

I was wondering if I could get your advice. See I was browsing city and town articles when I spotted some of their official seal's summary in the source description said's Own Work and also the author claimed by a user. I want to seek your advice. Is this really possible? ---- BrianZhukov 14:53, 3 July 2011 (UTC+8)

Image licensing

Dear Future Perfect, Anthony Nguyen is my name and that is my photo, however Moo-Hyun Kim is the director of the hospital in question and I am an employee of his. The image for the first file is his property, and he has asked me to upload it. Unfortunately he is not very computer literate, and I'm pretty sure he would be unable to do it. I'm unsure of how to license it appropriately. The other two flagged images are also hospital property, but we are unsure of how to get permission to use them. Please advise if possible.

- Anthony

Qu (maybe apostrophe) ran

Are you still watching this? Do you think the poll should close? (Myself, I preferred to give an opinion than make any decision.) All the best, – Quadell 13:10, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I said I'd be watching this but totally forgot about it. And now I won't be available for another week or so. If anybody wants to close it, they are of course welcome to do so. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I don't think I should because I participated in the debate. I suspect no one else wants to close it because they don't want to step on your toes... – Quadell 11:49, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Ping... It's been about a week, so I thought I'd see if you're available. Thanks! – Quadell 12:19, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Uffff. Done. Thanks for the reminder, and sorry for the delay. That was one hell of a long-drawn-out process. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Action required against vandalism

The article Mahindra Racing is being vandalized repeatedly by a certain user by pasting contents from the team's website, not even bothering to reformat it.

I have reverted back the article quite a few times and also specified the reason in detail of rv on the article talk page.

I have observed you doing one rv on the article once, hence I am writing to you to take some action to stop this. Or just suggest me what to do in such scenario.

This is the second time I am writing with the same request, it remained unanswered and went into archive.

PratyushG. 15:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC) Talk

Edit: Sorry for being restless, but i have also written to Materialscientist. I noticed he is recent changes patroller, thought vandalism is something of his domain.

Talkback

AgadaUrbanit (talk) 20:12, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI

If you're interested: WP:ANI#Intimidating/Disruptive Behavior from User:Alecmconroy. Best, FASTILY 05:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Have a brownie

SwisterTwister has given you a brownie! Brownies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a brownie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

I hope you enjoy this brownie as a friendly greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 05:59, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete my wiki page?

Kmacdoan (talk) 07:17, 2 August 2011 (UTC)I am new to talking to users, I am sorry if this is wrong. Why did you delete my page? I just finished talking with wiki permissions, had the go and than you delete my wiki page. On top of that I didn't have the new informaiton saved on a word. I have to re due everything, which is why I am re posting the text onto my user page. I am REALLY not happy about this. I am going away on a business trip and this assinment is due thursday. I DO NOT HAVE TIME to go back and forth with wiki again. I just did for ONE WHOLE WEEK. So please, tell me what to fix so you wont delete my wiki page. I have followed ALL your guidelines. I am sick of this bs with wiki. Lets fix this problem NOW.Kmacdoan (talk) 07:17, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Upload

Sorry for uploading File:GreenLeavesfront.jpg... I won't do anything like that again.I checked it over, and I didn't see any copyright stuff. But I realized that it was too small, and wanted it deleted. But the main reason that I uploaded that file was to improve the article Green Leaves, that has incorrect dates, and a lot of untrue stuff.Atterion Talk•Contribs 08:02, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. I guess the most important lesson to take away from this is that just because you "don't see any copyright stuff" on a page doesn't mean it's safe to take it. Every image is assumed to be copyrighted by default, even without a copyright notice, and it needs an explicit licensing statement to release it for free use, not the other way round. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:05, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Good luck with the fun!!

I have removed your latest personal attack against Fastily here . At this point, you need to take two or three steps back from this whole situation, because you come across as being on a WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT rampage, and you're not looking good. You may well think that it would have been inappropriate for Fastily to block you, but he had every right of warning you that a block would be likely if you continued, and I'm repeating this warning now (and I, in fact, will have no compunction carrying out such a block too if necessary). Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

He's made several very serious lies against me. I have asked him to retract them, he has refused. If you want to, I'd welcome an arbcom review into which of the two of us has abused their position more. I called him a liar for saying he'd block me, that he was intimidated, and that i fabricated licensing information. These are all false, these are all one the record, and two out of the three are demonstrably false.

That said, I've had enough of dealing with your copyright crusade tonight. Perhaps you can draw up a petition of the admins and I'll leave permanently, if that's for the best. Everybody burns out, and when I spent four hours finding a picture to have it deleted without discussion, knowing a LOT about copyright law and how legal the use was, perhaps I went from "mature" to "burnt out".

You can't take hours of someone's life and delete it. Oh, if they were in bad faith, fine. If it doesn't belong in the article, fine. If it was a highly requested image??? and work was put into it?? and you delete it for unpredictable, obscure reasons?

That just convinces me to not invest any serious time in the projects. Four years ago, seven years ago, this didn't happen. I knew the rules, the rules were followed. Now, it's just a testosterone filled mess where law and common sense have given way to shouting and mindless bureaucracy.

And I guess we've all done our part and making this place a little less welcoming and open today. Fewer image uploads, less trust, and worse articles. Good work all round. --Alecmconroy (talk) 09:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

British Isles stuff

Hi Future Perfect at Sunrise I left a note for Moonriddengirl yesterday evening about this (I want a second admin to review whether or not a user should be sanctioned per WP:GS/BI). Moonriddengirl appears to be busy - if you get a chance I'd very much appreciate some input, even if she gets back to me another POV wouldn't go amiss--Cailil 10:59, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Email

-FASTILY 16:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Retroradioman29 images

Dear Future Perfect at Sunrise, I noted that you have concerns over my images, I listed the "This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License."

I saw not further area to elaborate.

i can reload the files with me as the copyright holder if need be.Retroradioman29 (talk) 09:17, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for coming back to me about this. Yes please, if you are indeed the copyright holder, then please do add that information to the images. You don't need to re-upload them for that purpose; just go to the image page and edit it like any other page. You can add a statement like "My own photograph", preferably with a brief description of where, when and how you took the image. However, in a case like File:Ptsd-800x800.jpg, I have some doubts, as it looks like a news photograph taken from somewhere on the web. If you are not actually the photographer who took this, then there is no way we can keep the file, unless you can demonstrate it is somehow under a free license or in the public domain (which is unlikely though). In that case, at a minimum, you'd need to add a description and/or link to where you took the image from so we can verify who created it and/or owns it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Bye

I'm due to be vanished by day's end, so goodbye. For my part, I'm sorry if I was unnecessarily incivil or upsetting to you personally. EnWP used to be a very civil place full of discussion. Instead of discussions we have iron-clad rules, instead of civility have what what you see every time you delete a good-faith contribution.

Don't let yesterday become tomorrow. I'm leaving, if I'm the problem there is no problem. I've been here a long time. There's a problem. Yesterday was a great example of it.

Learn from it or the project dies. I can't stay here to learn from it for you anymore, and no one gives a shit what I think anyway. ---Alecmconroy (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I sincerely regret your decision and I'm sorry you feel the way you do. But I'm afraid you did misconstrue the whole situation about those images rather badly yesterday, and given the way you acted I don't really see how I could have responded differently. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Photos

Hi F.P. Can you guide me as to Wiki's copyright policy on uploading photos from museums. Is permission expressly required Slovenski Volk (talk) 14:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I guess I'll need a bit more concrete information for this one. Photos you took yourself in a museum? Or photos published by the museum? And of what kinds of objects? (Modern works of art that might themselves be copyrighted; ancient art; other artifacts?) Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:02, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

It is a photo I myself took of a reconstrcuted ancient Illyrian dwelling within the grounds of a museum, as well as photos taken by me of ancient pottery, in Ohrid Slovenski Volk (talk) 04:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

explanation

well, during christmas i was there at treasure island, a shopping mall in indore. I saw a shop where everyone was busy in the making of a sketch of themselves. I went there and payed for myself also. That was an amazing sketch painting. I immediately told to make a sketch of my favourite movie star Ajay Devgn, then one day i submitted that to desipaintings.com. Now i've lost the original one, so that i claimed this image again.

Shrikrishna 3 (talk) 04:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free use images

Despite the lack of notification, I have noted your objection to the non-free use images File:Stingrays kelly cup 2001.jpg and File:Stingrays kelly cup 2009.jpg. As I have found suitable free images to use in their place, I see no need to waste time disputing their use rationale. Please feel free to delete them at your leisure. Cheers,  Cjmclark  18:23, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Can you translate ths?

Emailed you but I guess it got lost. Can you read  ? It's used in Greek pyramids#Dating but by someone whose edit is unclear. I'd like to reword it to reflect what Sampson actually said. Thanks Dougweller (talk) 18:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, right, sorry, yes I remember it was in my inbox but I was away on vacations. Unfortunately I don't read Serbian. Could you ask some of our contributors from a little bit further up in the Balkans? Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here's more. I've now managed to locate the original publication by Sampson (1996). It was a bit misleading, because the titles of both the article and the journal are in fact in Greek, not in English as cited in the Serbian paper. So, it's N. Sampson (1995), Οι πυραμίδες της Αργολίδας και η πραγματική σημασία τους . Archaiología kai Téchnes 57 online paper. It's freely accessible online and there's an English summary at the end of the paper. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. I was confused and thought it was all in Greek. Hope you had a good time when you were away. Dougweller (talk) 04:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for advice about phrasing questions

Hi, Future Perfect. Thanks for your comment at Misplaced Pages talk:Image use policy#"All user-created images must be licensed under a free license"—it has helped to clarify things to me. I am a little concerned, though, about your comment that my question involved "an exaggerated legalistic sense of logic". It was not my intention to come off as a wikilawyer, so that comment surprised me. Since I'd like to avoid making this kind of an impression in the future, could you explain to me which part of my question struck you as overly legalistic? Thanks! —Bkell (talk) 02:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

why did you delete the picture i uploaded?

it said NOTHING about copyrights. therefore it is a free to use picture. don't delete useful and high ev pics please-- Someone35 (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

That is a misunderstanding. In almost all jurisdictions today, any published work is assumed to be copyrighted by default, no matter whether it comes with an explicit copyright notice or not. This picture was from what appears to be a commercial news source, and attributed to a named photographer, so unless you are that photographer it's off limits to us. You also failed to add a description of its copyright status to the file. If you believed the file was in the public domain, it was your responsibility as the uploader to explain why this was the case, on the file description page. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

how do i check what's the copyright license on a picture?

If it's under a free license such as Creative Commons, it usually says so explicitly somewhere on the same page, typically at the bottom where the copyright statements are, or on some websites it says so in a central place such as the site's "About..." or "Terms of use" page. If there's no statement at all, or only a standard "(C)" or "all rights reserved" note, you must assume it's non-free. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

ok, i'll look for it next time-- Someone35 (talk) 12:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how to licence; please advise?

I apologize for the incorrect licencing on my DTE Energy Headquarters photographs. I have licensed them under Public Domain. I did not want to get in trouble with DTE for posting a building with their logo on it; I took the photographs, but I obviously do not own the rights to the building(s). If this is incorrect, please advise. Thank you.

Ah, thanks for clarifying this. I was wondering why you would have bothered with a non-free declaration first, but this explains it of course. As far as I understand, you needn't worry though, because there is "freedom of panorama" in the US, so making photographs of buildings isn't considered as infringing on the architect's rights (and the logo is not the central object of the photograph). In that case, I'd say we leave it at your public domain release. Thanks, – Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:23, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Re:File permission problem with File:NaDa.png

Hey, Thanks for the notification, but it may not be what it seems. I'm the Assistant Manager of SK Gaming, which is the organization that has contracted the subject of the article and the service used to upload the picture. From an additional standpoint, I'm friends with the author of the image, so if there's any additional permissions, I'll speedily address it with her. Am I able to have the warning removed if I post our email conversation to your profile, or do I have to email Wikimedia, because I don't want to over-complicate something that should be so simple. DarthBotto _talk•cont 02:09, 08 August 2011 (UTC)

The easiest and safest way will be if you e-mail the information to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia.org". I also notice something else: in some of your pictures, you have stated both that the picture is "free" ("public domain") and that it is "fair use". These two things are mutually exclusive, and a "fair use" declaration wouldn't work in these cases. If you can clarify the fully free license instead, could you please also remove the "fair use rationale" templates from the files? You could replace them with the {{Information}} template as I just did at File:NaDa.png, or move the description into a plain text paragraph without a template. Sorry for the trouble, but this is important to get the files categorized correctly. Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Sun-free photovoltaics.jpg

I see that you have deleted File:Sun-free photovoltaics.jpg. I have clearly mentioned the appropriate licensing. Please enlighten me on what is wrong with this image, whose terms of use was provided here (please note point I.B.). Thanks. Suraj T 11:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Quoting from the website "sites wishing to use accompanying multimedia content (photos, video) may do so, provided the creator is cited in the MIT News caption. If no creator is cited, the multimedia content is not available for use." And as can be seen here, the creator was cited in the caption. Please clarify. Suraj T 11:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

This is to inform you that I have requested assistance at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Speedy deletion of Sun-free photovoltaics.jpg. Thanks. Suraj T 12:01, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The licensing page you cited contains a general license only for electronic media, but restricts re-use in some other media, such as print news media ("Images may not be reproduced without prior approval from MIT News"). That unfortunately makes it "not free enough" for us, as we insist on free re-use in any medium and for any purpose. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

And it is clearly stated that "Images may not be reproduced without prior approval from MIT News" under the II. Print media section for B. News organizations. Not allowed here? Suraj T 12:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

You are right that the license would allow us on Misplaced Pages to use them here. However, according to our own principles of being a free content encyclopedia, we accept material only if it is free not just for us but for everybody else also. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Should have known. Silly me. Thanks for responding. Suraj T 12:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)