Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests

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

Current requests[edit]

File:John Ausonius.jpg[edit]

I'd like a review of this deletion. Towpilot has been a long-term, communicative and established contributor. They're not particularly active anymore, apparently because of numerous deletion discussions from people doubting their authorship claims (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Desmond Llewelyn 01.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/Image:I Rossellini A Hopkins.jpg etc. and User talk:Towpilot). As stated on sv:Användare:Towpilot, Towpilot has worked as a professional photographer. While such claims are commonly false, I personally find Towpilot's claims credible.

In the deletion closure, Ellin Beltz stated that https://emajmagazine.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/racism-behind-attacks-on-immigrants-in-sweden/ predated the upload on Commons and was larger. However, the Commons upload was made in 2007, and the blog post was published in 2010 (hence the URL). Last time I checked, 2010 happened after 2007. The size of the file is also not much to go by, since https://emajmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/john_ausonius.jpg has obvious upscaling artefacts. The blog post somewhat vaguely attributes the photo to Nyheter24 – presumably it was grabbed from http://nyheter24.se/nyheter/inrikes/481380-lasermannen-blir-utan-besked, which claims that the photograph was created by Privat (which just means "private" – a lazy non-attribution typical of today's Swedish journalistic professionalism). LX (talk, contribs) 17:19, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think you are right, but for professional pictures which copies (even smaller) are available on the Internet, a permission would be best. I think a general ticket saying that he works(ed) as professional and that all images he uploads on Commons are his would fix any doubt, especially for old pictures scanned from argentic. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
That's already been suggested by User:LtPowers. Since that hasn't happened yet, I don't it will. Nor do I think it should be required for undeletion. An e-mail wouldn't really add anything in a situation like this. We're not dealing with an online source published before the Commons upload, and there is no online source attributing an author whose identity an e-mail could help confirm. LX (talk, contribs) 19:00, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentYup & oops, you're right 2010 is after 2007; my bad. I think I transposed that 07 for July month to year incorrectly. I did see the @nyheter24 and also the "foto:private", but if the uploader is the photographer, why is the copy here so small? 167 bytes is really small, but most of his other uploads are just slightly larger which may be one of the reasons he has such trouble convincing people that these are his images. If I was wrong to close this the way it was closed, please feel free to reverse the deletion. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:38, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
I can't reverse it myself, but yes, since your closing argument was that the file was a copyright violation from a site with a larger version published before our version when in fact it was an upscaled version published after our version, respectfully, I do think that this closure was in error and should be reversed. The anonymous nominator's suspicions are no more compelling in this case than in the deletion discussions for other files uploaded by the same user, which resulted in decisions to keep the files. I'm guessing the files are small because that's the largest size the uploader wished to share, as is often the case with professional photographers. As you mentioned, the other uploads are similar, so if you have any remaining concerns, any future deletion discussions should really take all of the user's uploads into account. LX (talk, contribs) 13:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)