Commons:License review/requests

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcut: COM:LRR


Archive (latest archive)
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

Before requesting, please read Commons:License review and relevant pages such as Commons:Flickr files and Commons:Picasa Web Albums files.

To become a reviewer, one needs to be familiar with the general licensing policy of Commons and the common practices of reviewing. A reviewer is required to know which Creative Commons licenses are allowed and disallowed on Wikimedia Commons. They should also be dedicated in license reviewing every so often and offer their help in the backlogs. Post your request below, so that the community can voice their opinions. The community may ask a few questions to verify the user's knowledge. After a few days, a reviewer or administrator determines whether there are no severe objections to the candidate. If there are not, the user will close the request and add the candidate to the list of reviewers. If permissions are granted, you can add {{User reviewer}} (or one of its variants) to your user page and begin reviewing images.

Please submit your request at the bottom of this section. Copy the code below and only replace "Reason" with the reason you are requesting this user right.

{{subst:LRR|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|Reason ~~~~}}

Smuconlaw[edit]

Comments
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is this account used by only one person or by multiple? Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question - you know you can use Flickr2commons for uploading flickr files? If yes, are you willing to review licenses in the category CAT:LR and it subcategories and do you know the LR policies? JurgenNL (talk) 01:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Yes, I'm aware that Flickr2commons can be used but it's slower than UploadWizard as only one file at a time can be uploaded unless one wants to upload an entire Flickr album of files, which is not always desirable. Yes, I'm aware of the licence review policies, and have been careful about ensuring that my uploads of files from sources like Flickr have the correct licences and do not have "laundered licences". 鈥 SMUconlaw (talk) 06:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Can you give a quick overview of freedom of panorama, especially as it applies to images and videos of Singapore? Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 08:37, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
    • FoP in Singapore mostly applies to three-dimensional objects that are permanently installed in a public place. I say "mostly" because, like UK law, it also applies to items which constitute "artistic craftsmanship", though there is currently no case law on the exact meaning of the term. It does not, however, apply to two-dimensional works such as drawings, engravings, paintings and the like, unless they amount to a work of "artistic craftsmanship" (perhaps something like a mosaic or carving). 鈥 SMUconlaw (talk) 11:51, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Extended for 24h. waiting for comments. Alan (talk) 21:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Given these answers, I believe this user understands the rights and responsibilities of the right. Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 04:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)