Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:14, 7 May 2006

Regarding Zawahiri

Zawahiri's image is a U.S. government public domain image. (http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/terrorists/teralzawahiri.htm) So it can stay. WhisperToMe 00:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Image

Hello Thuresson, someone in the spanish wikipedia asked me to check this Image:Ottoman small animation.gif to use it in an article there as it's public domain, but according to the summary it comes from a printed 1996 version of the Britannica, which I assume is copyrighted. Could you have a look and tell me if I'm right?. Thanks, AnnaP 02:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Indeed it's a complicated matter, thank you for your quick answer and a happy new year to you as well, time goes by so fast that I already forgot we've started a year. Regards. AnnaP 22:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Images

Hello. You told me to check Image:Anna_mala.jpg and Image:Anna_Eurovision_1980_and_1982.jpg. According to the summery I said I made them in Adobe Photoshop. The one from Eurovision, I stayted, I got from a video capture of a DVD i own, and put them together in Photoshop, and wrote on it. And the Mala picture I got from the CD pictures and scanded them together, and made the colloge in Photoshope. Greekboy 00:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Me again. Am I going to get a response? I do not want these images deleted. Greekboy 22:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I think the best is if you post the details of the permission you received from the copyright owner on the image talk page, eg. Image talk:Anna mala.jpg. I can't delete these images, somebody else will have to decide on what to do. Thuresson 23:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright I put the copyright info under discussion page. Can you now take off the banner on the picture page, saying it is a disputed image? Greekboy 01:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Can you take off the banner on the page that you put up?? 68.45.82.68 22:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

No, because I dispute that User:Greekboy is the creator. The user scanned the photos off a Anna Vissi CD, and I believe that the photos are owned or licensed by the record company. Thuresson 22:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

If you think that, then help me find a different copyright for it. Alought of people make collage's out of pictures and put them on Misplaced Pages. And can you ATLEAST take the banner off of the Sceen Shot one? Oh and also, the Mala collage picture I can explain to you. The top right pic. in it, is a CD cover scan. The background I made. The left and right pictures are from a PRESS REALEASE of Mala. And the center faded picture, is a promotional picture from a year later, I put into it to make it look nicer. Greekboy 17:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I changed the copyright on the Mala picture, and left the one on the Eurovision picture, because it fits fine with it, since it is a screen shot. Can you now take the banners off both of the pictures? Greekboy 01:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Whats happening with the photos? Are you going to take the template out?? Greekboy 01:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Umm.....Do you remeber me and the photos?? Are you gonna take down the templates? I changed the licensing, and evden someone else changed the licenses too. Please take down the templates.....I have fixed everything, and provided explanations on the photo pages.Greekboy 02:31, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Image

you deleted the image of the Oglethorpe University logo citing "fair use". How have other universities gotten their logos included? Thx. OUPetey 21:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

WikiCommons do not allow "fair use" images of any kind. Furthermore, Oglethorpe university do not allow unrestricted unlimited use of this logo by anybody (link). Thuresson 22:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Lech Wałęsa

If you do not accept my statement then just list this picture for deletion instead of constant ignoring of my explanations and tagging it as possible violation over and over again. Halibutt 14:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Is there a problem with the words in the template: "Please do not remove this notice while the question is being considered" Thuresson 14:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Eucratides

I'm fine with the Public Domain tag, although I changed to GDFL because I was told that it is not legally possible to put anything into the Public Domain (a copyright stays, although all rights can be released). As the tag has a provision ("in case not legally applicable..."), I guess it is fine anyway. Regards PHG 23:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Moro br 1.jpg

Hi Thuresson, I changed the tag into PD-ineligible and I left an additional note about why this image has no rights pending upon. It would be very fine of you if you could please check the whole to see whether my note is sufficiently clear, and if this tag is the one which better fits to this unusual situation. I also removed the "no source" tag, I hope this wasn't too much "bold"... However, please let me know if there is anything else that I should add or explain. Thank you :) --g 17:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ulrike Meinhof als junge Journalistin.jpg

Image needs a new tag.. PD? I have see the pic on her daughter's (Bettina?) website. If your not quick it will get deleted. Cheers -- max rspct leave a message 22:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Registration on the Swedish Misplaced Pages

Due to this ip being blocked by the Swedish Misplaced Pages, i couldn't ask this over there.

Now, i wanted to register an account there to discuss about the blocking of adresses used by schools, since i belive this would allow me to atleast talk in the discussion page or wikimail you, but for some reason, there isn't any registration form. Is this because the ip is blocked? If so, i'd like it if i could possibly ask you about this matter on this discussion page.--Akunaeru 10:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mauñel Azaña y Díaz.jpg

Regarding the image, it says on it's page in detail where it's from. It also has a tag.--Primetime 19:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm interested to know if you have a permission from the artist or copyright owner. Please provide more info so that others can check that it is released to the public domain. Thuresson 19:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I have replied on the Possibly Unfair Images page. May I also ask what you think you are accomplishing by pressing this issue so hard?--Primetime 16:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Somebody requested this image for deletion at WikiCommons so I'd like to have the question resolved so the photo can be kept. Thuresson 17:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

You left me a message regarding Image Tagging Image:Isaac Gruenwald.jpg. I have no idea how to source a Government post office in any country. Cynthia B. 20:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, thank you. Thuresson 20:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

No! Please don't delete my image!

I got it from the Chinese Misplaced Pages here.

It used this template:

{{fairuse}}

I just put it on the image. I imagine that the fairuse image would also apply to all the Wikipedias in other languages.

--Fox Mccloud 20:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Morris.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Morris.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Apparently the image I uploaded has been overwritten twice, so no, I have no interest in the current image with that name. Thanks for the notification. —wwoods 07:15, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:KWolf.png

Hi, well the link to the image appears to be broken. There is no way now for me to document the copyright status of that image. What to do?--Fahrenheit451 23:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to explain why "panorama rights" are relevant for the copyright status. AFAIK panorama rights allows a photographer to take a photo of a building, a square, a work of art or a statue from a public place and then decide what to do with the photo without asking for permission from the architect/painter/creator. Thuresson 23:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

European Union

Hello Thuresson I had a discussion about images from the european union Template:EU image and on commons !!! ] and need some advice about the EN wikipedia policy: 1.: http://www.europarl.eu.int/guide/publisher/default_en.htm is an old disclaimer from 2000 and not updated.

• /www.europarl.eu.int/ ] publisher . use granted,, with mention of the source.© Europese Gemeenschappen, 2000 (older version).
• /www.europarl.eu.int/ ] the parlement . use granted,, with mention of the source. © European Communities, 1995-2005
• /europa.eu.int/ ] the portal . use granted,, with mention of the source.

Conclusion: 2005 version is the latest version, separate permission has to be stated on the page where the image is used which is not the case.

so. in the dutch version it is stated like this :nl:Sjabloon:EU-site -

Well it seems that by german law using the pictures is not granted, which is ok for the DE Misplaced Pages. Discussion about this can be found on ].

Next to the implication of law in different countrys there is also a problem in translated pages. The EN and DE version are not the same.

Copyright notice

© European Communities, 1995-2005 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. Where prior permission must be obtained for the reproduction or use of textual and multimedia information (sound, images, software, etc.), such permission shall cancel the above-mentioned general permission and shall clearly indicate any restrictions on use.

Copyright-Vermerk

© Europäische Gemeinschaften, 1995-2005 Die Wiedergabe mit Quellenangabe ist vorbehaltlich anderslautender Bestimmungen gestattet. Ist für die Wiedergabe bestimmter Text- und Multimedia-Daten (Ton, Bilder, Programme usw.) eine vorherige Genehmigung einzuholen, so hebt diese die obenstehende allgemeine Genehmigung auf; auf etwaige Nutzungseinschränkungen wird deutlich hingewiesen.

Well. the germans have deciced to remove al images from their wikipedia and now the actual question: They are implicating german law on the english wikipedia by making all images of european parlement members illegal for use.

So, is use of these images granted on the EN wikipedia or not ? Best regards . Mion 13:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

To tackle the first part: Malfunction of the copyright section.

Dear sir/misses. On your website there is still a page (http://www.europarl.eu.int/guide/publisher/default_en.htm) which is not updated since 2000 and is in conflict with the updated versions : http://www.europarl.eu.int/tools/disclaimer/default_en.htm (1995-up) and http://europa.eu.int/geninfo/legal_notices_en.htm#copyright (1995-up) Could you please update or remove the mentioned page ? Thanks in advance.

Sent today to the webmaster of the EU site. Mion 14:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

the second problem, commons !!! ] is granted by nation (depenedable on law) same as we see the creation of Common licenses by country, maybe the creation of 30 Eu templates by nation is requered. Mion 14:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

The 3th problem stated by RTC was, dat the 2 latest copyright sections, did not mention anything about reproduction. According to RTC/German Law, you have to read this as . that part that is not granted/mentioned is forbidden. In dutch law it is everything that is not forbidden is granted, -- Reg .Mion 14:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Example : on the page of this picture of Camiel EURLINGS the page has a link to Legal notice on the left side which links to the modified version , dropping any relevancy with the old one

Maybe this should move to: ] because commons is also involved. ?

Your answer please on : Template_talk:EU_image .REg. Mion 15:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Or better on Commons :

Read my tags!

The images from BSTU are free to use under german copyright law as they are released for public information as official documents. I find your putting those tags on the image pages to be very annoying and want you to knock it off. --Fahrenheit451 03:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I think Template:PUIdisputed is quite clear: "Please do not remove this notice while the question is being considered." Thuresson 10:12, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:SpringfieldMass.JPG

Hi, I'm writing to ask you if you know why your user name is mentioned in the copyright license of this photo? Thuresson 20:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

My guess is the guy who posted it wasn't sure how to mark an image and copied the mark on one of mine. I was unaware of the image until you mentioned it. - User:RFC1394A : Paul Robinson 18:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

HLHimmler.jpeg

Were you the one who posted that the copyright was in question? The copyright belonged to the German Schutzstaffel publishing house, which has been completely liquidated, and the image can now be found in multiple National archives. It is public domain. Nagelfar 02:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. When you write that it's available in multiple "National archives", which ones? It's not available at NARA or USHMM. Why do you think that the copyright previsusly belonged to the SS? Thuresson 16:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It's also in the book 'Heinrich Himmler; A Photographic Chronicle of Hitler's Reichsfuehrer-SS' by Martin Månsson, ISBN: 0764312022, It was an SS photo distributed to the SS offices for use on the walls on buildings and headquarters of the SS; the SS held all publishing rights for propaganda services until it was dissolved. Nagelfar 18:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

And it seems user Husnock does say it is available at NARA, and has had it tagged as such since 2005. Nagelfar 18:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't find it at NARA, which is its ARC number? Which other national archives have copies? Thuresson 14:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I am an employee of NARA and can state for a fact that the photo in question is available on the microfilm service record of Heinrich Himmler maintained at College Park, Maryland. I've also seen the picture in a few other places around our agency's holdings. -Husnock 15:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Which is the ARC number? How can I verify that the photo is public domain. Thuresson 16:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Though I don't know the particular ARC #, on his user talk page reply to me Husnock said, in regard to the public domain status of the photograph; …as an employee of the National Archives, I can state for a fact that the photo in question is available from our agency. I have seen it many times in many publications and it is available on the mirofilm of Himmler's S.S. service record. If the user in question wants to press it further, he can contact Archives II in College Park and they will tell him the same thing. The address is: National Archives and Records Administration; 8601 Adelphi Road; College Park, MD 20740-6001 Being that it is contained in the mirofilm along with Himmler's SS service record, it should be easy to find the ARC number in relation to that. I know the burden of proof for risk of legal reasons should lie with the uploader, though I think that is quite proof enough, I assure you I'm 100% about this one or I would not have stated it was PD on the upload, I also am fairly certain this photo is contained in the book (possibly with copyright status mentioned); 'Heinrich Himmler; A Photographic Chronicle of Hitler's Reichsfuehrer-SS' by Martin Månsson, ISBN: 0764312022. I uploaded this photograph in response to the previous colour photo for which the rights could not be ascertained, knowing that this was the free-use SS issue photo of his person & rank for public & government reference during his contemporary time in office. All other photos would seem to be more troublesome in terms of copyright (esp. with those by period photographers hired by the Third Reich whose copyright goes back to their family). Nagelfar 18:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I think this thing has been beat to death enough. I am an employee of the National Archives and Records Administration and have stated now several times that in my professional experiance, which includes 12 years research into German records and 5+ years as a military records historian, that this image is public domain as it may be found on a public record of Heinrich Himmler's service record. Short of calling College Park and getting the exact roll and fiche number where this number can be found (which I don't intend on doing), I think that there is more than enough evidence that this not a copyright infringement. If you are still not satisifed, I can't really tell you what to do. -Husnock 03:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not understand why you and Nagelfar are leaving messages on my talk page, this is not the place to discuss the matter in the first place. I have certainly not involved you in the matter. If the SS previously held publishing rights, I assume it now lies with the German government until life+70 years. Thuresson 21:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Poland related images

Whenever there is a question about a Poland related image, please let us know at Misplaced Pages talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board. We are happy to find sources (ex. ) and clarify any problems, but we would prefer to do it BEFORE the image is deleted and such.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

There is already a forum for discussing deletion requests, Commons:Deletion requests. It is in my opinion not necessary with a second forum to discuss Wikicommons deletion requests. www.ww2.pl do not allow commercial use of the photos. Thuresson 23:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Autoradiograph image restored -- please insert appropriate tag

The autoradiograph image you deleted is in the public domain. I have restored it. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Autoradiograph200dpi.jpg

As I noted:

This work is in the public domain because it was published in a book that is not copyright: Iyengar, P.K. and M. Srinivasan, BARC Studies In Cold Fusion, BARC-1500. 1989, Government of India, Atomic Energy Commission: Bombay.

Many Indian AEC documents are public domain the same way many U.S. NASA and DoE documents are. Perhaps there is a "tag" that applies to foriegn government research of this nature. I am not not familliar with Misplaced Pages tags. If there is one that applies to this case, please add it.

--JedRothwell 21:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. You may be interested to read Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 January 26#Template:IndiaGov where it is claimed that works of the Indian government are copyrighted for 60 years. Also, Misplaced Pages talk:Notice board for India-related topics/archive4#Template:PD-IndiaGov may be interesting. Hence, the image will be deleted once again from WikiCommons. Thuresson 22:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Look, the Indian AEC gave me the book. There is no copyright it it. I have uploaded large sections of it with their assistance. See: http://www.lenr-canr.org/Collections/BARC.htm. This particular autoradiograph is my personal property (a Christmas present from a researcher). It is the same as the one on the book because they made hundreds of images from that cathode. It is like making multiple copies from one negative.

How can there be a problem? This makes no sense. Researchers hand out sample data like this all the time, in every laboratory. --JedRothwell 01:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)