Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kylu (talk | contribs) at 03:43, 18 March 2011 (→commons:File:Frank Buckles at 106.jpg: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:Neutralhomer/TopDeely2 User:Neutralhomer/TopDeely User:Neutralhomer/TopMenu User talk:Neutralhomer/TalkHeader

You're not an admin

I keep seeing you, and I keep thinking you are. Why is this? demize (t · c) 15:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Because I am everywhere. I am working on a couple articles, working with other editors, working on the Online Ambassador Program. I also help out on ANI and AN as needed, when admins aren't around (like late night hours). I also have about 5 tabs open at once, so it seems like I am making a ton of edits in seconds, but it is just a bunch of tabs. Plus, I am a quick typer. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		Misplaced Pages Ambassador Barnstar
		For your vigilance in keeping up with Jobar's huge class, I award Neutralhomer the Misplaced Pages Ambassador Barnstar. Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Congrats!

Well done and quite timely on the GA!--Wehwalt (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! :) User:Carcharoth is working on getting it on ITN as well, so that will be awesome. Just wish I could get it on DYK. Even with all the work, the DYK Checker still isn't saying it is expanded by 5x. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 22:18, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

commons:File:Frank Buckles at 106.jpg

I noticed your section at m:Wikimedia Forum#Who's Manning the Ship at Commons? and it had me wondering as well, so I did a little digging. I thought at first, as did you, that the work would obviously be a copy of a photo used for military ID or similar purpose.

Visiting the deleted file on commons, it gives the reason as: Copyright violation: There is no evidence that this is a federal work. "In fact, veterans participating in the Veterans History Project retained their copyright interests in the materials they submitted."[http://www.loc.gov/vets/researchinfo.ht

Visiting the linked site (actually http://www.loc.gov/vets/researchinfo.html ... his URL was cut off) provides the terms and conditions of the website, licensing information, etc... as well as:

It's actually quite common to find material copyrighted by private individuals, companies, or foreign interests on federal websites, unfortunately: It has the side effect of ruining an otherwise reasonable assumption that the site, being a federal work, would be public domain in nature. While it's possible that it'd be a PD image, the folks over at Commons are fairly strict about ensuring that the image actually is such, and would prefer to err on the side of safety.

I think the issue that was that while works created by U.S. federal employees while on the job is automatically public domain, there's no proof that the image of Frank Buckles was on duty at the time the picture was taken, so it can't be assumed that the image is safe to mark as such. (Similarly, if I wrote a book on my off hours while working as a federal employee, the U.S. government doesn't assume that the work is public domain. Were I performing the writing as part of my duties as such, though, they would.)

You may want to double-check with the folks on Commons to see if my understanding of Túrelio's action is correct, however. On the other hand, I may well be wrong in all this and a Commons admin will be by momentarily to explain how blindingly stupid I am and give you The Truth. Who knows? I just hope this is of some use to you. If not, feel free to ignore this entire rambling section, of course.

Best of luck. Kylu (talk) 03:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)