User talk:DanielTom

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, DanielTom!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 08:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Bertrand Russell with a pipe.jpg[edit]

Hi DanielTom, how do you come to the conclusion that the copyright of this photograph is expired? The source link ends up on a 404-page, no photographer is identified, and no date of its first publication is given. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 19:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The other uploads are similarly problematic. You cannot simply find a photo somewhere on the Internet and upload it to Commons. For every case a proof is necessary that the picture is in the public domain (or under a free license). If this proof is impossible, the photo must not be uploaded. Commons is in this regard far more restrictive than most other sites. And the date field of the {{information}} template should give the date of the photograph's creation and/or publication, not the date when it was uploaded. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi AFB. I essentially followed the justification in File:Bertrand Arthur William Russell.jpg (my thinking was: if that picture was fine, then the pictures I would want to upload of Bertrand Russell, where he is considerably younger, would be fine as well). But I do not actually know its copyright status, other than the fact that it was taken 50+ years ago. If that is not sufficient for its copyright to have expired (and apparently it isn't), then I see this can be problematic. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
At Commons, we honor US copyright as well as the copyright law of the country of origin (first publication, not necessarily where a photograph was taken). See, for example, this photo of Russell at Beacon School, which was obviously taken in England, probably in the 1920s. Let us assume that this photograph was published in the United Kingdom first. Then pma 70 holds per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom if this was published during the lifetime of a known photographer, i.e. it is copyrighted until 70 years have passed after the death of the photographer. This means that the photographer, if known, must have been died 1942 or earlier to have it in the public domain now. The problem is with this photograph (and most other uploads) that we do not know nearly anything. The photographers aren't named, the countries of origin are unknown, and the years of their first publication. If all this remains unknown, we cannot keep the images. If you want to save them, you need to research all this (which is difficult).
Here is an approach how photos can be found with the relevant information. Do not just browse the Internet but also organize books about Russell using local libraries and, where necessary, inter-library loans. Or go to a well-equipped university library. Many (but unfortunately not all) books provide source information for their photos. This can help. Perhaps some of these photos matches those you have already uploaded or you can scan images from such a book, if all relevant information is given.
Some of the photos were apparently taken in the United States. If you know where and when it was published first, you can check the chart at COM:CRT#United States. If, for example, it was published first before 1923 or before 1978 without copyright notice in the United States, it is in the public domain. See, for example, File:Honourable Bertrand Russell.jpg is in the public domain as it was published in 1916 in Chicago.
Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 20:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. I'll be at Porto University's Faculty of Letters library this weekend, so I will take a look there (and at Google Books as well). I doubt that I will be able to find the needed information (maybe it's possible to find out the year in which these pictures were taken, but information about the photographers is much rarer), but I'll let you know then. Alas, it seems that most of these older pictures will probably have to be deleted. ~ DanielTom (talk) 08:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

AFB, sorry for the delay. Many pictures of Russell were taken by Lady Ottoline, and are copyrighted. (Some don't even show up at Google Books.) McMaster University holds the copyright of most pictures I could find of Russell (others are hold by the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation). Maybe I could write to them asking for permission, but it would take time. I found out some details about the pictures, but mainly only about the date in which they were taken. Almost no info about the photographers. (For example, the Beacon picture was taken in 1927, so even its copyright has probably still not expired by now.) Maybe it would be wise to delete these pictures of which the copyright is uncertain (but maybe keep the ones where Russell is still young?). Again, your call, and my apologies for the inconvenience, DanielTom (talk) 14:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I have now nominated two of these images for deletion. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bertrand Arthur William Russell.jpg. De728631 (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification. As I said there, I do not object to their deletion. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:33, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

File tagging File:Pedro Cosme.jpg[edit]

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Español | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Հայերեն | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | Українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Pedro Cosme.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 send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS ( This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Pedro Cosme.jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

January (talk) 07:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The person in the picture (a professor at my university) knows not only that I uploaded his picture to Commons, but also that it is used in his Wikipedia article, and he is perfectly fine with it (and expressed thanks). Do I really need to bother him with the rather bureaucratic paper signing just over this trivial pic? ~ DanielTom (talk) 10:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately we need more than permission to use the image just on Wikipedia, it needs to be released under a free licence (please see COM:Licensing for more information). We usually ask for written permission from the copyright holder because this allows virtually anyone else to use it, including for commercial purposes. January (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Bertrand Russell.jpg[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg File:Bertrand Russell.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 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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Gunnex (talk) 15:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I uploaded several Russell pictures, about a year ago, but although they were taken long ago (about 100 years) I'm also not entirely sure the copyright expired for the ones were Russell looks this old, and as I've said above I don't object to their deletion. ~ DanielTom (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)