User talk:Geofferybard

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Geofferybard!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

-- 06:19, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Guerrillero

What is the story with USGS dot-gov photos? Are they public domain? Can we use them directly, if we have upload privileges on WMF proj, or do we have to post them to commons. And for that matter, is text on .gov USGS site which is silent on (c) by default a Public Record and thus Public Domain . (I think pretty much it automatically is Public Record, but I think one still has to attribute. My sister is a Intellectual Property paralegal for one of the largest software companies in the world, but she is so tightlipped about these matters. I take it these templates are reliable statements of WMF policy:

Sorry I have been very very busy. (I graduate on friday) Those tags are true representations of the copyright status of files that were created by a federal agency. cheers --Guerillero 04:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Licensing:

{{PD-USGov}} {{PD-NOAA}} Geofferybard (talk) 22:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp17 PubicDomaijn.png

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp17 PubicDomaijn.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp17 PubicDomaijn.png]]). 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!

Lymantria (talk) 05:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp16 PubicDomaijn.png

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp16 PubicDomaijn.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp16 PubicDomaijn.png]]). 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!

Lymantria (talk) 05:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp18 PubicDomaijn.png

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp18 PubicDomaijn.png, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:SenatorMarkeystaffreportp18 PubicDomaijn.png]]). 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!

Lymantria (talk) 05:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Geofferybard. You have new messages at Lymantria's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fed up with WP, now WC: Adminstrative vandalism?

Lymantria deleted several files from a Congressional staff report which in the United States are presumptively public domain. I don't think that you can sit in Holland and know what you are doing with regard to American law. Those files you deleted took some time to transfer to readable WMF format and were important to dissemination of public information regard nuclear energy licensing. This is English WP not Dutch WP and I consider it to be a reprehensible interference with the conduct of US nuclear policy to summarily delete those files.

Do you have a basis in American law suggesting that a report by Congressional staff is somehow presumptively copyrighted?

The point of the web is dissemination of information not smashing and destroying important files, particularly when as sensitive a topic as nuclear energy and its hazards are involved.

I think you have done a grave disservice to the WMF community because no one had any problem with those files least of all the staff of Congressman Markey. It is shameful that Wikilawyering has trumped common sense and made a shambles of Wikipedia. Intelligent and informed individuals are leaving WMF in droves because of incessant hassles such as your wrecking of these files, which were not complained about and never would have been.

I wash my hands of this. I have donated hours and hours of my time working up public information on nuclear energy safety issues and am not about to now gear up and wage a wheel war with people who have nothing better to do than trash the results of long hours of hard work. I am an American of Dutch ancestry and as far as I am concerned, Dutch interference with English language intellectual property is unwelcome. We need an American controlled Wikipedia, where we won't have these problems.

I am going semi-retired on WP and won't be wasting much time at WikiCommons. It has become its own unweildy, anti-friendliness bureacracy and is to this day being bypassed by fresh projects not so mired in legalism and technicalities for the sake of technicalities. Geofferybard (talk) 23:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

For the record: the files were deleted initially by me as having its source not properly indicated. I restored a version, to give more time to specify its source. Later Kamaraad Pjotr deleted the files as "out of project scope". I suppose that you have unsuccesfully asked for undeletion here? Lymantria (talk) 06:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

What gives that person the right to define "project scope?" This is an inane discussion over what should be a non-issue. I don't have time for this argument. What they are deleting pertains to the safety of nuclear power plants on an earthquake fault. To wikilawyer a rationale to delete is the heighth of counterproductive legalistics and I am out of here. Waay too much to do today for any more of this time wasting energy drain.Geofferybard (talk) 22:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Need your presence at Featured sound candidates

		We request the honor of your presence at Featured sound candidates
		Dear Geofferybard, Featured sound candidates needs your help and you can help by reviewing , nominating your sounds for the FS Tag. You can start reviewing/nominating sounds now. -- 17:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)