Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) at 14:56, 9 August 2011 (Archiving 9 thread(s) (older than 7d) to User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Archive 23.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

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)