User talk:Brian Josephson

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Brian Josephson!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 09:52, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  català  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  Esperanto  español  português  English  hrvatski  français  Nederlands  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  norsk nynorsk  polski  galego  íslenska  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Ελληνικά  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−


There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the ? Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 10:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I trust it is OK now, but who knows? --Brian Josephson (talk) 20:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion_requests/2013/12/15[edit]

Professor Brian, would you able to clarify the copyright status of this image at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brian David Josephson.jpg. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:59, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there no limit to how far the cabal will go in regard to hostile action -- doubtless they'd like to delete the whole w'pedia page about me as well, if they could find some excuse!
But I digress. It was supplied to the Nobel foundation by the Cavendish lab -- I've located the set of 12 photos taken by the lab photographer from which I was asked to indicate my preference, and that must be taken as pretty definitive. I've amended the deletion request page accordingly.
I might add that I don't like the main photo on my w'pedia page very much and would prefer the one on my home page which I took myself. I can supply a higher resolution one if preferred. --Brian Josephson (talk) 15:55, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Charles Tart.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

And also:

Yours sincerely, KurodaSho (talk) 02:45, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll contact Tart to ask him to put his permission in writing. Re File:Josephson Cavendish.jpg, I'm sure this was dealt with to the satisfaction of all concerned at the time (look above and you'll see that 3 years ago I wrote 'I trust it is OK now, but who knows?', and there was no comeback) and it is unclear why this issue has resurfaced. Anyway, I've located a letter from the HoD of the time giving permission for its use so will forward that. --Brian Josephson (talk) 08:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Professor. I appreciate your contributions. BTW Three years ago you added licence tag and a licence problem was solved, in fact, on the other hand, there has been no permission until today. You said "I trust it is OK now...", but the user you was speaking to seems a bot (Nikbot) so you has got no reply IMHO. --KurodaSho (talk) 09:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:ESP questionnaire.pdf[edit]

bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:ESP questionnaire.pdf. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

JuTa 14:17, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_on_the_Internet for justification of this use on wikipedia. --Brian Josephson (talk) 14:23, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
File:ESP questionnaire.pdf has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brian Josephson.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this project page, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

180.191.111.83 06:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why this bit of business has surfaced at this time as it appears that the photo concerned was deleted (in accord with my expressed wish) last year (and the debate was closed as well). Can 180.191.111.83 please explain? --Brian Josephson (talk) 08:03, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this deletion request. We do not delete deletion requests, but we do delete deletion requests of deletion requests. Jcb (talk) 09:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I trust everyone is happy now! The recursiveness reminds me of a paper by JE Littlewood that was translated into French by one Prof. X. At the end was a footnote in French thanking Prof. X for translating the paper, followed by a footnote thanking Prof. X. for translating the 'above footnote' into French, and this was repeated with a footnote again thanking Prof. X for 'translating the above footnote'. When asked why there was not an infinite series of footnotes, Littlewood replied that since the second and third footnotes were identical he did not need a translator to translate the third footnote but could just copy the second so the sequence could stop there. --Brian Josephson (talk) 09:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Prof. Judith Driscoll, University of Cambridge.jpg[edit]

العربية  asturianu  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  italiano  日本語  한국어  македонски  മലയാളം  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk nynorsk  norsk  polski  português  português do Brasil  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  Tiếng Việt  简体中文‎  繁體中文‎  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Prof. Judith Driscoll, University of Cambridge.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

العربية  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  বাংলা  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)  Ελληνικά  English  español  euskara  فارسی  suomi  français  galego  עברית  hrvatski  magyar  հայերեն  italiano  日本語  ಕನ್ನಡ  한국어  lietuvių  latviešu  македонски  മലയാളം  मराठी  မြန်မာဘာသာ  norsk bokmål  Plattdüütsch  Nederlands  norsk  polski  português  română  русский  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  српски / srpski  svenska  ไทย  Türkçe  українська  اردو  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Prof. Judith Driscoll, University of Cambridge.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Yann (talk) 09:06, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your image, File:Prof. Judith Driscoll, University of Cambridge.jpg, was deleted yesterday in accordance with our process and policies. You have recreated this content today after it was deleted; please do not do this. If you would like to contest the deletion, please visit Commons:Undeletion requests and follow the instructions there to have the deletion reviewed. Recreating deleted content outside of process is not allowed, and doing so repeatedly may cause you to lose your editing privileges. Thank you for understanding. Yours, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 10:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is bizarre. Did you press the wrong button or something, causing some wikibot to send a message bearing no relation to reality? --Brian Josephson (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Prof. Judith Driscoll, University of Cambridge.jpg[edit]

Pay attention to copyright
File:Prof. Judith Driscoll, University of Cambridge.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.


Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans  asturianu  azərbaycanca  Bahasa Indonesia  Bahasa Melayu  català  čeština  dansk  Deutsch  Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎  English  español  euskara  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  Lëtzebuergesch  magyar  Malti  Nederlands  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  Ελληνικά  беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  български  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  тоҷикӣ  українська  հայերեն  मराठी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ไทย  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:17, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear professor. Thank you again for your teaching. As I've already written (but you fail to understand or read correctly), you've not filled correctly the file description (no source, no permission) and if a permission has been sent via OTRS, you have to wait. When and if the email is received, processed, and approved, then the file will be restored automatically . Note that OTRS, like Commons, is entirely staffed by volunteers, and, also like Commons, is shorthanded, so it may be close to 99 days before the email is processed and the file is restored. Yours, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:16, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I don't understand. The page concerned, File:Prof._Judith_Driscoll,_University_of_Cambridge.jpg, has:

|source=file provided by Trinity College, Cambridge
|author=Library staff of Trinity College
|permission=email from Librarian Nicolas Bell
That is the text in edit mode but they also appear in 'Summary' on the photo page itself. So source and permission are both there. Should they be somewhere else?--Brian Josephson (talk) 16:06, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I really think w'pedia should save everyone's time and effort by adopting the system used elsewhere (e.g. the physics preprint archive and our own university's repository). The idea is that people have to agree to an appropriate copyright declaration before they can upload anything. That way, if there turns out to be a copyright violation the person who signed the declaration is the one legally responsible (provided the page concerned is taken down on demand). There is absolutely no reason why the organisation concerned should have to do its own research the way w'pedia seems to think it does. --Brian Josephson (talk) 16:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
... and now sincere thanks to User:Alexis_Jazz for sorting this silly situation out!--Brian Josephson (talk) 20:48, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thankfully, the situation has now been dealt with competently by the above editor. I really think I deserve an apology from you for wasting my time. Under the assumption that you acted in good faith, the only thing I can think is that owing to some fault in using your browser you did not see the update I had made so wrote under the assumption that I had not dealt with the issue appropriately. --Brian Josephson (talk) 16:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]