User talk:CyberXRef

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

Domanda[edit]

Ciao CyberXRef. Ho visto che è stata proposta per la cancellazione una foto che ho scattato a una scultura di Ercole Drei [1]. La scultura è esposta in un parco pubblico (l'EUR), ed è visibile a tutti, senza restrizioni di sorta. Tuttavia, mi pare di capire che sia ancora sotto copyright perché l'autore è morto da meno di settanta anni. Non sono pratica della legge in questione, anche se a lume di naso mi sembra incoerente che un oggetto sia esposto perennemente e all'aperto, in modo del tutto gratuito e a tempo indefinito, e poi non si possa fotografare. Ho scattato la foto per illustrare almeno con un'immagine la pagina dello scultore su Wikipedia, comunque non voglio crearte problemi, perciò lascio la decisione a chi è più competente di me. Grazie dell'attenzione. Un cordiale saluto. --Antonella (talk) 13:44, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

@Antonella Nigro: - Mi dispiace, non parlo italiano.
La legge italiana sul diritto d'autore non contiene alcuna eccezione per le fotografie scattate in luoghi pubblici.
Si prega di consultare it:Libertà di panorama#Italia & Commons:Freedom of panorama/table --CyberXRef 22:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Dear CyberXRef, I've seen that has been proposed for deletion a photo I took of a sculpture by Ercole Drei. The sculpture is located in a public park in Roma (E.U.R.), and is visible to everyone without restriction of any kind. However, as I understand, it is still under copyright because the author died less than seventy years ago. I am no practice of the question, even if it seems me incoherent that an object perpetually and free exposed outdoor, for indefinite time, could not be photographed. I took this picture to illustrate at least with an image the sculptor page on Wikipedia, however I do not want to create problems, so I leave the decision to you and those who are more competent than me. Thanks for your attention and I apologize for my English. Best regards --Antonella (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

These 3 images[edit]

Dear sir/madam,

Since you helped Dennis find a defense mil source for 1 images, can you give the original defense.mil source for these 2 images Or is the camera metadata sufficient:

Finally, this image has a problem because the uploader uploaded the low resolution version of the photo and did not give a direct online source for it:

I think the first 2 images can be kept in a regular DR but as for the third image, I have no idea. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:24, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

@Leoboudv:: All these Sochi photos were just recently posted on the DOD website news feed (I saw them on my RSS feed). One set of photos are on the defense.org site: http://www.defense.gov/photoessays/PhotoEssaySS.aspx?ID=4826 the other set is linked to army.mil Sochi slideshow here http://www.army.mil/article/118593/Sochi_2014_Olympics_Slideshow/ I bet these images are there. --CyberXRef 08:50, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
  • That's fine. Thanks for your help for the first 2 sources. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Morden to Sutton Map Mockup.png[edit]

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | Español | Bahasa Indonesia | 日本語 | മലയാളം | svenska | 中文 | +/−


Hello!

Thank you for uploading File:Morden to Sutton Map Mockup.png to the Wikimedia Commons. I noticed that when you uploaded from another Wikimedia project, you left out some important information, or copied it incorrectly. In the future, please consider using CommonsHelper, a tool which automates the process of moving files over. Thank you,

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:29, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

What did I leave out? The description was left identical, the date was copied over (note that you have truncated the date and removed the time), the author was properly cited and linked, and the licenses were exactly as the author specified (GPL 1.2+ with migration marked (as to allow attribution SA 3.0)). --CyberXRef 03:40, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
The disclaimers on the GFDL license. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
ah so I did! Thanks. Why exactly are there two identical templates with and without a disclaimer? --CyberXRef 03:45, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I just found WP:FIXGFDL. --CyberXRef 03:47, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
(Edit conflict){{GFDL}} => {{GFDL-with-disclaimers}} = {{GFDL-en}}
{{GFDL-user-en-no-disclaimers}} => {{GFDL-user-en-with-disclaimers}}
Those are just the GFDL en templates; there are plenty of other languages with local disclaimers. IMO it really is just easier to use CommonsHelper. You don't need a TUSC account to run it (although it's helpful), and there are alternatives if you don't like it. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:51, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. --CyberXRef 03:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:SRP entrance close.JPG[edit]

Please see my reply to your comment—I'm completely confused... —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 06:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

@ATinySliver: Sorry for the late reply; Over a third of the photo is covered by a sculpture. If you look here Commons:Freedom of panorama or more easily here Commons:Freedom of panorama/table; there is no freedom of panorama in the US for 3d artworks. Therefore the photo is copyrighted by the artist until 70 years after the artist has died. (With a few exceptions such as previous to 1932.) --CyberXRef 04:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I measured it out and its actually less than one-quarter of the image but, as I read over C:Dm and C:FOP#US, that may be irrelevant. I'm going to be back in the area in a week or two and I'll try making something similar but acceptable for Commons. Meantime, just in case this image should be speedy deleted, I've replaced it with File:SRP entrance wide.JPG at Santa Rosa Plaza. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 07:39, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


Category:Cupid Stadium[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Cupid Stadium has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | español | français | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | português | русский | +/−

Lupo 09:01, 19 May 2014 (UTC)