This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:
How to use Commons
Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.
Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days. The latest archive is Commons:Help desk/Archive/2024/05.
Hi, I think this may be a rather unusual case but does anyone happen to know how copyrights work on movie props? I own quite a few screen-used props in my collection, such as Mr Tumnus's letter used in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, casino chips from Ocean's Eleven and Elvis, and photographs of Helen Mirren taken for a scene in The Clearing but not shown in the final cut. Some of them are recognisable, sure, but most are inconspicuous and generic enough that one can hardly tell which film they are from without knowledge of their provenances (for instance, the said letter from Narnia is littered with indecipherable gibberish). So, could I, for example, scan one of such prop documents and use the image to illustrate the film's article? Or should I consider them copyrighted just as much as the films themselves are? Fred Cherrygarden (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Stuff like letters or photographs almost certainly carry their own copyright. Casino chips, unless they have an illustration on them, probably do not. It depends on the item.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In most countries, nowadays, if something can be copyrighted, it is considered copyrighted at creation. So if it's something that would be eligible for copyright, then it almost certainly is copyrighted. - Jmabel ! talk21:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is any difference between things made for a film and things made for other reasons (I might be wrong, IANAL). I'd love to have them here, though, and Wikipedias allowing fair use may be interested. Some of the props may not have any copyright because of being utility objects or of a simple or generic enough design, but still interesting because of their history. Things made as copies of some well-known object may not have a copyright of their own, and the copyright of the original may have expired. –LPfi (talk) 11:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bart simpson costumed man.JPG
Does images like these belong under the category "cosplay"? It looks more like an entertainer in a children's amusement park Trade (talk) 17:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hard to say. Personally, I've never been happy about those "cosplay" categories, because they make an assumption about the motivation of the people depicted. I've seen them applied (for example) to costumed people in parades from before that term was even invented. (Sort of like the person who wouldn't believe that File:2000 Fremont Solstice Parade - blue women.jpg, possibly NSFW, had nothing to do with the film Avatar… which came out nine years later.) - Jmabel ! talk17:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the first week after upload, you can ask an admin for a courtesy deletion. You cannot delete uploaded fotos. The license you choose for your upload cannot be revoked. Even if it was possible to delete, someone else who made a copy can upload the copy as long as the attribution is correct. C.Suthorn (talk) 18:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There never seems to be any consequences for news sites taking pictures without attribution os it's kind of a moot point Trade (talk) 22:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can contact an admin at their talk page or via wikimail. You can ask at HelpDesk or VillagePump. But almost always you should go through a DR (left column of file description page) or in the case of a courtesy deletion just add the speedy template with the courtesy reasoning to the file description page. C.Suthorn (talk) 09:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Suthorn: no, if someone else were to re-upload a photo to Commons that had been speedied on this basis, we would almost certainly delete it as a courtesy to the original uploader (presuming that uploader was also the photographer; obviously we wouldn't do that if this was public domain work or someone else's licensed work in the first place). - Jmabel ! talk01:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As an illustrative hypothetical, if a friend of mine takes a picture with his camera, and then fully gifts that picture to me (with all its intellectual/creator rights), does Wikimedia Commons accept that albeit i was not the creator of the picture, I am nevertheless the owner of it and that I am free to be the one donate and upload the picture to Wikimedia Commons?
And, if the answer is yes, in the upload process do I select the option "This is my own work"? Does "my own work" mean that I created the picture -which I would not be able to claim in the hypothetical above- and/or that I have ownership of the work (wether I created it or was gifted to me) Thank you. Al83tito (talk) 07:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Al83tito. In principle, the person taking the photo is considered to be the copyright holder of the photo and they can transfer their copyright to others if they want. In your example, your friend is the original copyright holder since they took the picture with their camera (in most cases it doesn't even seem to matter whose camera they use to take the photo), and they then can transfer their copyright ownership to you if they want. So, you could upload that photo to Commons since you are now the copyright holder of the photo even though you didn't take the photo yourself per Commons:But it's my own work!. However, you would also be expected to be able to back up your claim per COM:EVID, particularly if the photo has been published somewhere prior to it being uploaded to Commons. If after you upload the photo someone felt your claim of copyright ownership was a bit sketchy, more formal verification of your copyright ownership may be requested. Simply saying that your friend took the photo and then gave it too you as a gift might not be considered sufficient; you may be asked to provide something in writing like a en:copyright transfer agreement or have your friend send in a COM:CONSENT email for license verification purposes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@user:Marchjuly thank you for your comprehensive and helpful answer! Just one more clarifying question: in the circumstance above where I own gifted media, do I upload it under the option “This is my own work”? (Does “own” here mean both authorship and/or transferred ownership?) Thank you. Al83tito (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but I don't know the answer to that question. However, whatever you chose can always be changed after the file has been uploaded. So, I believe can choose "own work" for the purposes of uploading the file, but can then diredtly edit the file's page to amend that claim to something more accurate and appropriate. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Al83tito: I agree with Marchjuly. I assume from the question that you are using Special:UploadWizard; it's a bit clumsy for this case. Tell the wizard "Own work", but then promptly go in and credit the correct author. Explain the copyright situation in the "permissions" field of {{Information}}. And, of course, go through the VRT process. - Jmabel ! talk02:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How to add an image from Wikipedia English to Wikipedia french ? (That image is in Wikimedia Commons)
Hello all the team ! :-)
On Wikipedia English, there is an very good image, so i want to put it, on the same page, in Wikipedia French.
How to do that, in the appropriate way, with respect of the author, and rules of Wikimedia ?
1) I would download the file, from Wikipedia English, then upload it to that same page on Wikipedia french.
But i am not the author of the image. So, in the upload wizard, i would tick "Not my own work".
Then in the Source input, i would put the URL of the image, in Wikimedia.
Is there something else that i should do?
2) Is there a direct way ?
Since the image is already in Wikimedia, is it possible to simply put the URL of the Wikimedia's image,
directly in the code of the Wikipedia page, where i want it to appear ?
Usually, i would upload an image and add the code like this :
File:Image.png|thumb|The description of that image
With the URL, how should i do it? Is it like this ? File:Www.urlOfTheImageOnWikimedia|thumb|The description of that image
Hi Isabeau777. If you can provide the name of file, then it might be easier for someone to give you a more specific answer. Commons is a global project and images uploaded to it can, in principle, be used on any of the local Wikipedias like English Wikipedia, French Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, etc. as well as any other WMF project; however, each individual project may have its own policies and guidelines regarding image use that is separate from Commons policy. So, you will need to make sure the way you want to use the image complies with the image use policies and guidelines of French Wikipedia.If the image you want to use has already been uploaded to Commons, then it should be fairly simple to add the image to the page where you want to use it from a technical standpoint; you just need to add the image's file syntax to the page. There are some different ways this can be done depending on how and where the image is going to be used, but there should also be information about this somewhere on French Wikipedia.On the other hand, things get a bit more complicated if the file you want to use was uploaded locally to English Wikipedia because those files can only be used on English Wikipedia. In order to use the file on French Wikipedia, you will need to either (1) upload the file to Commons or (2) upload the file to French Wikipedia. You have to be very careful here because many files uploaded locally to English Wikipedia are licensed as non-free content and these files can't be uploaded to Commons per COM:FAIR. So, if the English Wikipedia file is non-free content, you will need to upload it locally to French Wikipedia. I'm not very familiar with French Wikipedia, but English Wikipedia's policy on non-free content is very restrictive. First, you're going to have to determine whether French Wikipedia allows non-free content to be uploaded and used. If it doesn't, then there's most likely no way you'll be able to use the image on French Wikipedia. If it does, you're going to have to figure what French Wikipedia's policy on non-free content use is and then assess whether the way you want to use the file will satisfy that policy. Any questions specifically related to non-free content use on French Wikipedia probably should be asked on French Wikipedia because that's were the file is going to be hosted and that's where it's ultimately going to be determined whether the file is OK to use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Isabeau777: Bonjour, Puisque, selon le titre de la question, l'image est déjà sur Commons, alors il suffit de l'utiliser directement, exactement de la même manière qu'une image qui serait déjà sur Wikipédia en français. Donc, selon l'exemple ci-dessus, Fichier:Nom du fichier|thumb|Description. On n'utilise pas l'URL. Il n'est pas utile de téléverser une copie supplémentaire de l'image sur Wikipédia en français. En fait, c'est notamment à ça que sert Commons : avoir une seule copie de l'image sur Commons et pouvoir l'utiliser directement sur tous les autres sites Wikimedia. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How can i upload audio files and videos (ogg, ogv, etc.)
This screenshot from C-SPAN is tagged as "work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties", but from what I understand of [1], it seems this kind of image is not Commons-acceptable. Am I missing something? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gråbergs Gråa Sång. A screenshot from C-Span isn't automatically {{PD-USGov}} because it's from C-Span, but in this case this might be OK because it appears to be a screenshot from a en:Senate Judiciary Committee hearing per the source, which would seem to be covered as a "Congressional commitee hearing" per the C-Span license page you linked to above. However, there is a possible rub and that has to do with the location of the hearing. The hearing took place at the en:Dirksen Senate Office Building and not the actual en:United States Senate chamber. That in an of itself could be all that's needed as a reason the file can't be kept as licensed. It might seem like a trivial distinction to make perhaps, but it might be enough. If it does turn out that this file is OK for Commons, then there might be a more specific license like {{PD-USGov-Congress}} or even {{PD-CSPAN}} that should be used instead of "PD-USGov". -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I don't know enough about this type of thing to say whether the file 100% OK for Commons. Others may be more confident in making that assessment. I do, however, think that this wouldn't be something suitable for speedy deletion; so, COM:DR would be the way to go if you feel the file shouldn't be kept. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: You might want to take a look at COM:VPC#PD-CSPAN question since the location of the hearing does matter because the cameras used to film hearings with the US House and US Senate chambers are apparently owned by the US federal government and operated by US government federal employees. C-Span just broadcasts the feed it has access to from the cameras and it adds it logo to that feed. Video broadcasts of other hearings at other venues are done by C-Span employees using C-Span equipment. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:50, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Base template for indicating simultaneous publication
Do we have a template that can show a file remains in copyright in one country while we have retained the file due to simultaneous publication in the US? If not, could you suggest any similar templates I could use as a base to create a new one?
Due to the lack of an explanatory note on the file pages, an editor in good faith marked all the images as copyright violations.[2] As there are 119 files from the book, I'd like to insert a consistent message using a suitable template. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to add an image of a town parish map (Sea Lake) which I understand to be in the public domain. But I did not draw it. May I? AndiJoan (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jeff, the map was drawn by a government surveyor over a century ago, and so I understand is out of copyright. (A National Library of Australia entry says, "Maps published in or before 1954 are free of copyright".) The map in question is freely available for download, and so I have entered a link in the entry I made. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Lake#cite_note-8 ) But the map itself is not on display, so I cannot make a link to the image itself. Many thanks for advice & guidance - Andrea AndiJoan (talk) 23:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I’ve recently uploaded some files to this category. Even though I’m quite sure the content is in the public domain as it’s a 1800 book, I noted that I’ve used the {{PD-old-100-expired}} template instead of the {{PD-scan|PD-old-100-expired}}. Since I wanted to be more precise, but considering the fact that editing manually 150+ pages is impracticable, is there any way to automate this process? RodRabelo7 (talk) 15:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've recently found a video on here called "The Devil Bat". I've recently gotten into adding subtitles to it, but the media player that opens the video isn't very precise, it doesn't measure the milliseconds, different from the SubScript text thing it offers to use to add subtitles.
Is there a way to display the milliseconds on Wikimedia for videos? Insnesnakos (talk) 19:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: looks to be a particular female posture that, judging by the photos, is a "thing" in Japan. The linked ja-wiki article ja:パイレーツ (お笑いコンビ) is unreferenced, but via Google translate suggests it was some sort of running gag on a bad Japanese comedy show. - Jmabel ! talk02:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: that's the article about the show, but if you follow a bit further you will see that this isn't about the show as such, it's about that term that was used on the show. - Jmabel ! talk02:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the fact that it is written in katakana means it's almost certainly a neologism on the show, and probably built out of foreign loan words, rather than having a Japanese root, but the etymology is not quickly obvious. Pinging @Benzoyl, can you explain? You created the category. - Jmabel ! talk02:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mateus2019: when used as a noun in English, always capitalized (both words) as are "New Testament" and "Bible" (and for that matter the names of other sacred texts: "Torah", "Pentateuch", "Koran", "Bhagavad Gita"). - Jmabel ! talk16:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I'm an admin from SqWiki and my community is recently preparing to set up a photo-contest about food pictures in Commons, something we did last year too.
I'm having some problems while creating the needed technical infrastructure for such a project.
For example, I'm failing to see why the jury subpage in here (switch to English) doesn't exist even though it actually does. Its name was recently changed because of a typo (the page dot moved) and I fixed the link after but it still remembers the old link somehow. I thought it could be a caching problems but 2 days have gone by and it hasn't changed. I don't know what I'm missing.
Another problem is about the subpage where the images are supposed to be collected, a category page: Category:Traditional Albanian food photography competition - 2023. I'm not sure how to mark it for translation. I tried translating its header subpage but nothing changed.
Jmabel, exactly. The page was in the wrong namespace, being on the main one. User Jameslwoodward sent it in the Commons namespace (Link) as it should be and I changed the /Nënfaqet subpage to work with the new link (the same + Commons in front). But it still "remembers" the old one and it says that the page doesn't exist. Is it a bit more clear now? I have the exact same problem with the last year campaign for the exact same reasons. — Klein Muçi (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jmabel, but I'm kinda lost. I didn't do any such things with the other pages. I just put the translation tags and then hit the "Translate this page" button and that took care for creating the /language subpages... — Klein Muçi (talk) 18:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jmabel, I can't give you right or wrong as I'm unsure myself but normally the /en /sq etc. language subpages get created when you press the translation button by the software itself. I have never created them manually before. — Klein Muçi (talk) 10:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An administrator called Rosenzweig left a message (on Commons) about possibly deleting a drawing of railings (from a Victorian trade catalogue) that I uploaded in the article entitled Saracen Foundry. It was said that there would be a discussion about it on a Talk page. How do I find this page? Could someone find it for me? BFP1 (talk) 14:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This indicates that its usage is in the public domain. Could some who is more able than me add the web site appropriately to the reference if that is required — Preceding unsigned comment added by BFP1 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I received today an email from Wikimedia Commons titled Rosenzweig left you a message on Wikimedia Commons. It got me worried and that is why I posted a query. I am glad it seems to have been settled. Sorry to bother everybody. BFP1 (talk) 18:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MH17 photos?
I discovered that we are missing the images used in the investigation of flight mh17. The authors are incognito persons in occupied war zones or under court witness protection, but the images are in public use. Is it allowed to upload such images? We are talking about the pictures taken by the witnesses of the transportation of the missile system and the pictures taken at the scene of the disaster. Aleksei Malogin (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricky81682: agreed, but those are not photos by "incognito persons in occupied war zones or under court witness protection", which are the ones for which I said licensing would be difficult to arrange. - Jmabel ! talk18:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
May be. I found now with browser Safari a normal behavior. With Firefox there is still the problem even after closing the browser, purging the files and doing null edits. Wouter (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Uploads by Miansari66
I found this Category with two files and another inappropriately named Category with just over 400 files. All of them are good quality contributions related to food. Apparently there are many more at random checks. Request someone to bring all together through bot/automated action. Thanks. Jazze7 (talk) 10:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Checking a few of the images in the category, they look well categorized (typically 3 or 4 appropriate categories), and this particular category was marked as a user category. The only thing wrong was that this user category was that you made it a child of topical categories, which shouldn't be the case, so I removed those parent categories.
By the way, moves like this are absolutely counterproductive. Users are allowed to have user categories to keep track of their own work, and in general other users should not be messing with those.
Not sure what you mean "with two files"; as you said elsewhere, there were over 400.
Above redirected category had 400 files. from User:Miansari66 page it appears that person is a specialist in food. User Takeaway unknowingly ended up collecting work of a culinury expert in one place. Mr. Ansari has uploaded food from across Indian subcontinent. -- Jazze7 (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The category was created by another user (not the uploader) who created it as a subcategory of a topical category with the name of the uploader as the sort key. The linked edit, by splitting that hybrid category into the topical category and the user category, looks like a rather reasonable and logical attempt at fixing that situation. At least I'm not sure why it would be called "absolutely counterproductive" in bold letters. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Asclepias: given that the category was not made by the user in question (which I hadn't noticed) the situation was a bit weirder than I thought. But, conversely, this wasn't really "split". It's true that Category:Cuisine of Karachi (already their) is more specific than the "Pubjab" side of that category, so no info lost, but if I had made a category like that for my work -- splitting out the files I did on a certain topic -- I wouldn't want another user turning it into a generic category that said nothing more than that it is my work. Putting this in the tree of topical categories in the first place was not good either (we'd only want to do that if the photographer were notable, e.g. Category:Navajo people as photographed by Edward Curtis, and even there the name isn't the greatest), but it would have been a lot better to turn it into a personal/hidden category than to merge it. - Jmabel ! talk00:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Imagen
Hola buenas, soy un trabajador de la empresa alquibarsa, y estoy haciendo un articulo para su creador, Salvador Barcelo Saez y quiero subir una foto que mi empresa tiene los derechos de autor pero vuestro filtro no me lo acepta ¿Que puedo hacer? AlejandroPeragon (talk) 11:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probablemente intentó subir un archivo de tamaño pequeño desde es-wiki, sín datos EXIF, y te encontraste con un filtro. Utilize Special:UploadWizard aquí en Commons, y por favor use el tamaño más grande de la imagen que tenga, nuestro sistema puede reducirlo según sea necesario. - Jmabel ! talk16:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Via Google Translate Talk This is not a real user.
I got a comment. What should I do?
I am a real (real) user
END via Google Translate
- Jmabel ! talk16:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kei Shirasaka: You don't indicate where you got this comment, nor from whom. It's not on your user page or talk page, and you have no prior activity on this site before posting this here on the help desk. Are you sure Wikimedia Commons is where you meant to ask this? - Jmabel ! talk16:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Via Google Translate: このコメントをどこから入手したか、誰から入手したかは示していません。 これはあなたのユーザー ページやトーク ページにはありません。ヘルプ デスクに投稿する前に、このサイトでの活動はありません。 ウィキメディア・コモンズがあなたがこれを尋ねようとしていた場所であると確信していますか? END via Google TranslateJmabel ! talk16:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sirs: In November we could download images of Raeville: St. Bonaventure, the Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy, in high resolution. Now we cannot. Could you help us please? In Christ, Sister Mary Nika, RSM
Dear Sirs: In November we could download images of Raeville: St. Bonaventure, the Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy, in high resolution. Now we cannot. Could you help us please? In Christ, Sister Mary Nika, RSM 216.163.51.22619:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why does this image have ALAMY WATERMARK when it is marked CCO [This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights]?
Unfortunately, Alarmy (and Getty Images) sometimes engage in false statements of copyright of media which are clearly legally Public Domain. See en:w:Copyfraud. (Also, if a good copy of the image without the obnoxious watermark can be found, uploading it would be very welcome.) -- 22:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, however, it can't be used with their mark all over it. The first time I'm seeing this. I didn't know that anyone could get a free image especially coming the public domain, and mark it their own HeyChris23 (talk) 23:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I know. But you don't take it off and rebrand it your own so that you can prevent others from use it freely.
It's ok to make your own version out of it but to take the original out completely for your own gain is greed.
I think the next thing to include in the licensing of a PD is to leave a note that the original can me copied, remodeled but can't be taken out completely for personal gain.
For God's sake, someone put their work there to benefit others and a greedy one comes and claim ownership. That's not smart!
@HeyChris23: I'm not saying that Alamy are good guys, just that they aren't breaking any law with this. Nor are they breaking the law when they sell someone's CC-BY work, as long as they stick to the license. - Jmabel ! talk15:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HeyChris23: The image is in the public domain, so they can do whatever they want with their copy, including putting a watermark to indicate that they are the source of this copy, or mixing it with another image if they feel like it. It is not marked CC0. It is marked public domain. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Old Lance: Hi, and welcome. Google Earth is a for-profit service provided by Google. The images provided by that service are copyrighted by Google, with underlying images and information copyrighted by Google and sometimes others. What makes you think such images are free to upload? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Авторские права
Здравствуйте! Если музыкальный лейбл скинул мне на электронную почту файл с Яндекс Диска с фото одного из музыкантов лейбла и разрешили использовать его для Википедии - могу ли я его загрузить на Викисклад? Или им обязательно выдавать разрешение по шаблону? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KirillQQ (talk • contribs) 10:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
___________[reply]
Hello! If a music label emailed me a file from Yandex Disk with a photo of one of the label's musicians and allowed me to use it for Wikipedia, then can I upload it to Wikimedia Commons? Or does the label have to give permission to use like in the template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KirillQQ (talk • contribs) 10:24, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
KirillQQ (talk) 10:24, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@KirillQQ: Commons cannot accept content on the basis that it is "allowed for use on Wikipedia". We need it free-licensed.
As for uploading directly to Wikipedia (not involving Commons), each language Wikipedia has its own policy for "fair use". en-wiki generally doesn't allow non-free images of living people, so this presumably could not be used there, either.
If they want this on Commons (and on most Wikipedias) they will need to offer a free license. They could either post it to the web on what is clearly their own site (or a page under their control) with a free license (which must allow derivative works and commercial use) or they could go through the COM:VRT process. - Jmabel ! talk15:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
File deleted from The Commons - No file by this name exists...
I downloaded this photo last year or so to use later in a project. I never used it until now that I decided to check the status online and to my shock, it is no longer available here.
According to The Commons, "No file by this name exists, but you can upload it."
But I still have the picture and all the details surrounding the attributions.
Is it ok to use this picture for the intended purpose without anyone chasing me?
Is it a common practice for files to appear and disappear from The Commons?
What happens if I use it before and after it is no longer on The Commons?
The details I copied from the file at the time are as follow (by the way, I always save image particulars together with the image just in case):
Attribution:
Jusotil_1943, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons
Licensing:
This file is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
The person who associated a work with this deed has dedicated the work to the public domain by waiving all of their rights to the work worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law. You can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
@HeyChris23: At File:Picasso (40119265371).jpg you'll find a note that explains why the file was removed, which links to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Picasso (40119265371).jpg, where it's mentioned that Picasso died in 1973, which is less the 70 years ago and so his works are still in copyright in the European Union. I presume this file was a work by Picasso, and so it was never eligible for hosting on Commons. This kind of thing happens fairly frequently: people upload files with incorrect copyright information and eventually someone notices and they get removed. You can see how often in the deletion log. As for what this means for you, it certainly suggests that you shouldn't trust any copyright information that came with the file, and that the true copyright owner might have a claim against you. I'm not your lawyer, but I'd say you should stop using the file in any context where a copyright violation would be a problem. --bjh21 (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Germany Law: Sharing a photo with recognisable faces
I know the law in Germany prohibits sharing photos of people where they are recognisable. But when the people are not on the focus of the photo, can I share such a photo? To be precise, I have taken a photo of interior area of my university and face of some students and some staff are visible in the photos, however they are not necessarily the focus of the photo. Can I publish such photos? LastElement (talk) 01:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you mean by "sharing". You can "share" any foto with your family or a close friend. But your question is probably actually about publishing. You can publish fotos of people, if they either allow it ("model release") or it there is a public interest (fotos from public demonstrations or protests) or if they are only "Beiwerk" (de minimis). Beiwerk means, that there is a person (or more persons) on the foto, but the viewer will not recognize them normally because the motif of the foto is something different. A foto of a building can be legal, while a crop of this foto can be illegal, because the people become recognizable. But something else: you say "interiour of an uni". Freedom of panorama does not apply (Coprright!), but the owner of the building can forbid to take fotos or to publish fotos at all or outside social media. C.Suthorn (talk) 10:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I tried uploading some videos I took during my great grandmother's funeral, but I couldn't; the error message was, "Google does not accept mp4". How do I get around this?
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MuaMee (talk • contribs) 07:23, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have to transcode the videos to WebM format. you can co that locally or with v2c or with any other tool, that is capable of transcoding mp4 to webm. C.Suthorn (talk) 09:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Wikimedia Commons does not accept MP4 files. As @C.Suthorn suggested, you'll need to convert your videos to a different file type, such as OGG or WebM, before you can upload them. You can find more information about this process here: Help:Converting_video. Udehb-WMF (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do not use OGG. And if you do use the .ogv file extension. The only reason for ogg would be, if the file was originally an ogg file. webm is the better encoding. C.Suthorn (talk) 14:39, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy
Hello, So I'm new to the whole {{SD}} thing - I normally go to AN for anything and everything, Anyway have I speedied this file correctly ?, The CSD box isn't big and red which makes me believe I've done something wrong?, Thanks –Davey2010Talk15:48, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh.... okay, Genuinely surprised I got it right! :), Ah okay Well technically the uploader and yourself have disagreed with me so I will say no more there, Thanks for your help Jmabel, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk16:15, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How to share my image?
This is the image: fy:W:Ofbyld:Kladblok.png
This is the result: Currently, I can't share the image on Commons.
Background: Someone in the past "didn't understand the language of the Wiki he stole files from". Let's keep it at that. I largely gave up on the file sharing issue, as it clearly resulted in illegal images. But by know, I expect you figured out how to deal with such things, so I'm trying to upload a simple image, and hopefully we'll find out what you did.
(I expect I mis-coded the images link, but the information is there; it's just that newstyle comments don't let me see.) Aliter (talk) 18:09, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Kladblok. I never saw any specific need to share it beyond fy:W, but it may serve a purpose here. Plus, there might be other notepads that need a heading. So, it works if you pretend that Commons is in everybody's namespace? Does that work for everything, or do I do need it for other projects? fy:Wikt:Sanna does use the project. So, how does this work if I explicitly do want to say Wikipedia? But, yes: That one. Aliter (talk) 21:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean by "I can't share the image on Commons." If you are just saying that Commons cannot see the image on a different wiki, that is absolutely true. Other WMF wikis can use images that are on Commons, but not vice versa. But, assuming that the licensing on fy-wiki is valid, there is no reason in the world that you couldn't upload it to Commons, presumably using {{CC-0}} in place of a license. - Jmabel ! talk20:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have some sort of a scheme for getting Commons to find images on other mediawiki, as I understand it. Just like uploading from your desktop, if it's not the desktop it's on. That's all I know, and that it said it couldn't get it. I hope it's unrelated to the earlier problems, as that means you (you-all) found a way to resolve the chaos at Fy:, or at least accepted it as an issue not worth bothering about. But if here's my innocence of those times resurfacing: If it doesn't allow me to upload it, I assume it means it doesn't want to upload it, and if I down- and up-load it's going to complain I'm creating a copy. Of course, I am. The image on Fy: is as close to an original as it's going to get. Unless some broken down computer here holds some graphics files, there will not be anything more original than what Fy: have. So, what I am trying to do, I guess, is to get Commons to recognise that is has the right to do so. (See, the difference between sharing in PD, and actually sharing with everybody: I declared it PD, since I couldn't declare it free of rights. As a result, I am still its caretaker.) Well, did I blabber away enough to get you an idea of the problem? Feel free to ask me again tomorrow. Aliter (talk) 21:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Frysk Wikipedia (that is obviously about the Frysk language of northern Netherlands, and not about the version of Frysk spoken in Northern Germany) claims on its main page that it is GNU/FDL licensed (it also includes the note at the bottom that it is cc-by-sa-3.0). Many information looks heavily outdated. (And the image in question appears not to be specially interesting). --C.Suthorn (talk) 22:23, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes? You must be German to make that comment. I didn't say "Frysk" anywhere, and even so in Northern Frsian they call it "Northern" and either "Frees" or "Friis". Their pronunciation of the name is with a long vowel. It's only here in the west that we say "Frysk", with a short vowel. But what I did say was "fy:", which is clearly not a way to spell "Frr:". Still, I'll note on a talk page that there are people who would like a clearer indication of Frysk being Frysk. Where does it say that the front page is "GNU/FDL", where does it say it is any form of CC, as I don't see that either, and which one would be the current license and can we get there from what we claim to be? Yes, FY: is a small W:, and today I would not have tried to breath life into it. Still, is that a reason for some ten users to stop working on it? What would help would be, being specific. "Much information looks seriously outdated" doesn't even tell me if you're complaining about us being unable to keep up with "We think we will force you to learn things anew." or about the world not stopping while we try to catch up. And what part of "I never saw any specific need to share it beyond fy:W, but it may serve a purpose here." is giving you problems? Still, if you're volunteering to help get the Wiki less far behind, just say so. Aliter (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aliter: I'm almost completely confused. Instead of talking about what Commons "knows" or what some unidentified entity has prevented you from doing in the past: what is it that you want to accomplish? Do you want this file transferred to Commons, or are do you want something else and, if so, what? - Jmabel ! talk02:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yet, she says "I'm trying to upload a simple image". But you're right in the sense that I want the image on Fy: to remain available as the original. I have seen too many images on Commons that had become unsourced, as they were uploaded from their W: (see, that's the thing I try to do), to Commons with the W:-version specified as the original, after which the W: deleted that original, since it now was on Commons. Right; back to checking plurals on fy:Wikt:. See you tomorrow. Aliter (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Exporting an image to Commons I assume "Export to Commons" is what you are looking for. The export retains all the version history of a media file when moving the image to commons. I have checked, your image in fy shows the export tab, you can simply use it. That is, if I assume correctly what you are after. If you do you will absolutly need to attach a machine readable license template to it (there is non in your image at fy. At commons a bot would mark it for deletion within an hour). And I don't know if dutch law actually allows to declare a work that meets the treshhold of originalty to be declared PD (If yes, you can use one of the PD templates, otherwise you could use cc-zero). C.Suthorn (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A quick reply as this resulted in the message I didn't see on Commons. Cl, icking that tab results in: "This file cannot be imported to Wikimedia Commons because it is not marked with a compatible licence. Wikimedia Commons does not allow such files. This might be resolvable, but most probably means the file is not compatible. Please consult the Wikimedia Commons community policy and talk pages about licensing.". That was the one. Obviously, someone who has not done this before, will basically not know what the writers are talking about, and will get ganged upon by three for saying "Frisian" even if fact they don't, etc. Yes, I expect you're assuming correctly, as it would explain why I could not find what function on Commons was causing this effect. So, this would suggest in the early days of new license, this did not work as it does now. (I may have to modify my comments on my talk page about that, it this turns out to work now.) So, now that we determined what the problem was: What do we need to change it? I'm not sure how this would even work for an old license with many authors, but for now, we're looking at something simple: One author. What will we need? And it's time for groceries, so I expect I'll see you again tomorrow. Aliter (talk) 19:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aliter: as was said above, given that you were the author in the first place and given your intention to put this in the public domain, use {{CC-0}}, which is the cleanest way to fulfill that intention or, if it legally can't be placed in the public domain, give equivalent rights. - Jmabel ! talk00:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, actually using a specific Public Domain template is a problem, but some code <nowiki>{{CC-0}}</nowiki>, which in itself has no meaning is preferable? OK, I'll see what we can do. Aliter (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weird. Pinging @Aliter, are you concerned to have the history on Commons contain anything beyond what date you first uploaded to fy-wiki? I'm presuming not, since you had intended to dedicate this as PD, anyway. - Jmabel ! talk23:46, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, is it really so much of a saving of time, to delete my message even though it is clearly relevant to the topic but I just lost my cookie. (What ever the local term is.)
So what is template "pinging" supposed to differently from just using @ ? But I don't know what you're asking. Jeff demonstrated typical foreigners behaviour, by coming in to try something on our wikipedia, without bothering to tell US if it was a success or a failure, no apology, nothing. Are you surprised people at Fy: assume that anything from elsewhere will cause a problem? But, Jmabel, I don't know whether you are asking if I consider a test-case not functioning as a test-case being a problem. Obviously I would. So, I would expect there must be some significance in the test Jeff performed. So, you judge it as "Weird". Should I still continue trying to get permission for your CC-0 message, or has that train of testing broken down? Aliter (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aliter: there are no deep differences between {{Ping}}, {{Pinging}}, {{Re}}, overt link to user page with or without "@", and several other ways to tag someone in a message. The only thing I can think of is that some of these (e.g. {{Ping}}) automatically put a colon after the link.
We established (above) that the automated method will not work to move this particular file to Commons. I gather that you still want it moved. What I am asking is whether you are concerned about preserving its history in the version that ends up on Commons, beyond crediting you and indicating what date you first uploaded to fy-wiki? If that suffices, then it's pretty easy to do the move by other means. If not, then this has been all sufficiently out of proportion to an effort to move a not terribly important file to Commons that I think I'm done trying to help with this one. - Jmabel ! talk23:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Upload of schematic drawings
Hello, for a Wikipedia article about electroreceptors in sharks I made several schematic drawings based on illustrations in books and scientific publications. They are not simply copied, but drawn and labeled by myself. If I upload them to Wikipedia Commons, can I claim that it is my own work and refer to the respective sources in the description of the image?
Thanks in advance! Simon Bauerle (talk) 20:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Simon Bauerle: I assume you mean "Wikimedia Commons" (this site). I'm not aware of a "Wikipedia Commons".
Probably good, as long as all you took from your sources is facts, not how those are represented. You can't copyright a fact, just its expression. - Jmabel ! talk20:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hypothethical question
If you send the creator of a image a message asking if they have given permission for a picture to by uploaded to Wikimedia under CC-BY-SA license and they say no do you still have to go through the normal deletio request procedure? Trade (talk) 02:42, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: Probably it would still be better to go through a DR. There might be some cases where this would be a speedy-delete, but I can think of a lot of potential problems with that, especially since I presume you got this information through private correspondence that other editors here can't access. If you have a less hypothetical and more specific scenario, though, my answer might be different. - Jmabel ! talk03:00, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Country's eligibility
Hi
I want to take part too in the wikilovesfolklore there fore I just want to know my country Papua New Guinea's eligibility in the competition..
or is a Papua New Guinean eligible to contest.?
I would like to upload three images to accompany the English Wikipedia article "David Funchess" (here). I just wanted to post here to make sure any (or all) of these images would be OK to upload, and if so, which copyright information I should provide for each one.
I'm about 90% sure the first one is OK; it's his mugshot with the Florida Department of Corrections. (I'm not 100% sure how to prove this, but I know the picture was taken in either 1975 or 1976 based on the style/backdrop/posing, so it would qualify for the pre-1978 copyright notice. The earliest article in which I've found the exact same mugshot [but in lower quality] was published in 1979, but I could keep looking to see if I can find an earlier article. I don't think the picture exists online outside of news articles, since the Florida DOC doesn't consistently provide mugshots taken before ~November 1996.) (1982 news article featuring this photo - 1979 article with same photo)
The second one is a picture of him in a U.S. Marines uniform. I'm iffy on that one because I know it was taken in the 1960s and published in at least one newspaper article about him (so it might qualify for the pre-1978 copyright notice), but it's also very clearly a personal photo that was given to a newspaper expressly for use in an article published about him in 1986. (1986 news article featuring this photo)
The third is the iffiest one. It's a picture of him placed amongst a bouquet of flowers at a Vietnam War memorial protesting his execution. The picture is of him in the 1960s, but the photo taken OF the picture was taken between April 20-22, 1986. The photo would be great to include towards the end of the article when discussing the protests, but I don't know what the rights for that one would be. (1986 news article featuring this photo)
Marine uniform one seems unlikely. Presumably, that use in a newspaper was the first publication of the image, so it's no more available than any other image published in that newspaper.
Thanks so much for the help and explanations! Pretty unfortunate that #2 and #3 likely cannot be used, especially because I'd hate for the only picture representing the article to be a mugshot - but I totally understand.
I did want to ask about some more pictures, though, because apparently pictures posted by the Florida Memory Project are in the public domain (according to this picture from the Ted Bundy article - featuring the following by the "Permission" section:
Note: In accordance with the provisions of Section 257.35(6), Florida Statutes, "Any use or reproduction of material deposited with the Florida Photographic Collection shall be allowed pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1)(b) and subsection (4), provided that appropriate credit for its use is given."
Florida seal
The Florida Memory Project has multiple photos depicting the memorial to David Funchess. In fact, they're in much higher quality than the similar photos included in the newspaper articles linked above. Would those be OK to include, as long as I use that? A few are linked below; all were taken on April 22, 1986.
@Afddiary: They certainly seem to make that claim, but I don't understand how they would have acquired the rights to these photos. You might want to contact them to see if they can clarify that. - Jmabel ! talk00:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: Works held by Florida Memory require clear provenance, transfer of copyright and physical ownership to the project. See:
Which states: "Copyright/Custody: Materials chosen for digitization must have a deed of gift or transfer form assigning copyright and ownership to the State Archives of Florida." --dsprc(talk)00:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
With the copyright assignment being: "1. The Donor(s) being the sole and absolute owner(s) of the materials described on this form, do hereby give, transfer, and deliver all right, title, and interest in and to these materials, together with all copyright and literary property rights that the Donor(s) hold herein, to the Florida State Archives."
FL Dept. of State also seem to indicate they take care to withhold materials which can not be reproduced here in §7 of this FAQ when "copying is specifically prohibited" as well. --dsprc(talk)02:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Здравствуйте! Пишет и обращается к вам певица Нина Бродская. Компания kedoo_Entertainment_Russia Ворует мои права, уверяя меня в том, что принадлежит вам! Помогите разобраться!!! Нина Бродская.
Здравствуйте! Пишет и обращается к вам певица Нина Бродская. Компания kedoo_Entertainment_Russia Ворует мои права на Youtube, уверяя меня в том, что относится к вам! Помогите разобраться!!! С уважением, Нина Бродская. 68.192.147.25518:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
via Google Translate Hello! The singer Nina Brodskaya writes and addresses you. Company kedoo_Entertainment_Russia Steals my rights, assuring me that it belongs to you! Help me to understand!!! Nina Brodskaya.
Hello! The singer Nina Brodskaya writes and addresses you. Company kedoo_Entertainment_Russia Steals my rights to Youtube, assuring me that it applies to you! Help me to understand!!! Sincerely, Nina Brodskaya
END via Google Translate
It would appear that your grievance is with kedoo_Entertainment_Russia, not with us. Commons basically owns almost no rights to anything: we host public-domain materials and materials whose rights-owners have granted free licenses. - Jmabel ! talk19:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
via Google Translate
Похоже, вы недовольны kedoo_Entertainment_Russia, а не нами. Commons практически не владеет правами ни на что: мы размещаем материалы, являющиеся общественным достоянием, и материалы, правообладатели которых предоставили бесплатные лицензии.- Jmabel ! talk19:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The file containing a picture is a screenshot taken from a YouTube video under Creative commons license. But I don't know which cc license is that, 3.0 or 4.0 or etc. So shall I wait for any reviewer to take that task?
I would like to add a new page in honor of a legend, Dr. Vithal C. Prabhu whose life's work was to address the taboo in India related to sex education. He was a great friend and peer to Dr. Mahindra Watsa because of the common interest in educating the masses with accurate sex education information.
Dr. Prabhu's audience were mostly in Maharashtra because his first sex education book was written in Marathi, a local language of Maharashtra State in India.
One of his biggest achievements was his Marathi book on Human Sexuality publication in 1982, “Niramay Kaamjeevan” which has marked approximately 40 editions and has been translated in multiple Indian languages, and also referenced for a digital sex education app.
He wrote 17 books on General Health. In addition, he authored over 18 books on Human Sexuality, presented over 50 scientific papers at various National and International Conferences, wrote over 750 articles in newspapers and periodicals, lectured over 800 public and professional speeches, including the first human sexuality talk given on the All India Radio in 1985.
Dr Prabhu was the Founder Member and Chairperson of the Council of Sex Education & Parenthood International (CSEPI). For his distinguished work in Sexology and other health areas, he received multiple awards and recognitions, several are missing in this list:
· “Golden Lamp” Award, the highest honor by CSEPI
· Lifetime Achievement Award at a National Conference of Sexology
· Award at the First Asia Pacific Conference of Sexology
· Chainakaar Arvind Raut Award
· Shalayushi Medical Journalism Award
· P.C.I. Trophy at the General Practitioner Association Conference
· Maharashtra State – Best Literature Award, three times recipient
· 7th World Congress of Sexology – Award in 1985
· Other
Although I don't have all the information, I am hoping to start one and update it as more information gets gathered by his followers, or have them request the owner of copy rights to grant permission to the Majestic Book publishers to release the wealth of information that could share about all his publications.
Looking forward to a response in my email Leena.mehta7@gmail.com that is linked to my Wikipedia account.
Thank you.
Regards,
Leena Mehta Leenudi (talk) 19:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that to write an article in Wikipedia, you will need to find sources independent of the subject. For example, you will want to find things that newspapers, magazines, academic papers, etc. have written about Dr. Prabhu. Similarly, for awards given to him, you need to cite a source like that or from the entity that gave the award, not from the person who claims to have received the award. - Jmabel ! talk00:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wow That piece is likely a derivative work of another – likely non-free – photo featuring Reagan, and thus, unlikely to be allowed.
In the USA, a PD dedication like this is probably OK. Public Domain dedication outside of that is… complicated… depending on where a particular work is created, or (re)used, and some countries do not recognize such dedications at all. Countries such as France, do not allow one to waive their moral rights, for example, and would require something like a CC0 license applied to the original work. I believe Germany may be similar to France, but don't know enough about those legal frameworks or jurisprudence. --dsprc(talk)03:17, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
About the notation fluctuation of past events in Commons:Wiki Loves Folklore 2023/ja
In the part that mentions similar events in the past & wiki love love, there are differences from the actual past titles (translation, original language, kana writing, etc.). I think it's better to match here, but what about IP? I can't seem to fix it, so please let me know if you can.
I'd normally give this a day or two to settle out. From what I've seen, sometimes this is just a caching problem. Pinging @Yann, for that reason, I probably wouldn't have reverted so soon. - Jmabel ! talk20:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted once to the old version, and once to the new version. I heard this may fix the issue, but it didn't. You could eventually try renaming if waiting is not an option. Yann (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I use to use Wikipedia a lot and contributed occassional. The format was easy to use and broadly availabe. When I try with the the current format none of my former searches seem to be possible. Do you have any suggestions.
<email redacted> Concerns.solutions (talk) 19:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I found this file in Facebook, and I mentioned the subject uploaders contact as (ߡߊ߬ߡߘߎ߫ ߕߙߊߥߟߋ߫ «Mamoudou Traoré») the both written system, I thought that it might be freed license!
I will continue recheck it for further information. Thanks!
I am filling the form with all details that the poster/ logo is used exclusive for a purpose, source informed. It is not providing me upload file option, for it to get officially verified. BrightsForever (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi BrightsForever. Commons doesn't accept non-free content of any type as explained in COM:FAIR. Commons only hosts content that can be licensed in accordance with COM:L. Some local Wikipedia projects do allow non-free content to be uploaded and used, but only in accordance with whatever local project policies and guidelines have been established for the use such content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:35, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nuestro carnaval de Mazatlán
Hola buen día!
Tengo una duda, nuestras fiestas de Carnaval están por comenzar aqui en mi ciudad. Fotos tomadas de desfile tipo Rio son aceptadas como parte de Folclóre? La música local de banda también? Y que tal la historia de el carnaval que ya tiene mucho?
@CentzontlePatasalada: La música tendría derechos del autor (por los musicos), y por eso no podemos aceptarlo en Common faltando una concesión de derechos por ellos (que es poco probable que puedas obtener).
Pero los aspetos visuales no deberían ser un problema (con la posible excepción de signos, etc.). Y está bien claro que es todo bastante folklórico. - Jmabel ! talk05:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SVGs dont render properly in their previews. Why?
The title says my question, so I'll say it again.
When looking at this file's History, I found out that the rendering was glitched for some reason on the preview. I remember a even worse glitch happened on the Qing Empire's flag too! Even the Naval Jack of the USA isn't safe!
What in the world is going on here? Why is this happening? Is this being fixed or not?
(I tried to look at it using Firefox. No dice. [i use arch btw] I then used Safari on my iPad. Fail. It's consistent on everything.) Kxeon (talk) 03:52, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kxeon: It's consistent in all browsers, because the previews are just plain old PNGs. The problem is that Wikimedia Commons' SVG renderer, which creates the PNGs, doesn't render elliptical arc commands correctly, when an arc flag is next to another number without any space, comma or negative sign between them. You can circumvent this problem by using your favorite SVG editing software to re-encode the paths. We've known about this problem since at least 2019, but it always takes a while for bug fixes to make their way through the pipeline. Nothing to worry about. TilmannR (talk) 19:22, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! For anyone interested in what the problem was: The width and height of the image were given in "pt" units, which apparently don't get converted consistently. TilmannR (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. TilmannR (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A Letter to Three Wives
I read that the movie, A Letter to Three Wives, “...is in the public domain in the United States because it was published in the United States between 1927 and 1977, inclusive, without a copyright notice.” Is that verifiable? Is it true? 2603:7000:6106:C67F:E92E:F555:9:711919:47, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Canadian buildings with microwave antennas on the roof
I'm trying to expand the article on DATAPAC, a microwave-relay data network in Canada. During the 1980s it was common to see dozens of dishes connecting financial company buildings to the network, and in Toronto the most connected was First Canadian Place whose roof was covered in them. I have looked through various categories on Toronto buildings, microwave connections and First Canadian Place, but I cannot find an image from that era that shows the roof.
These were just as common on other buildings across Canada, I'm sure there are examples in Montreal and Calgary that would be just as iconic. But I don't know these cities nearly as well. If anyone reading this is from those areas and remembers that era, perhaps you might suggest some images I could look at? Thanks!
Transparent PNGs do not render in various image viewers
I tried to share the Wikipedia article for "Robin Hood" - but the image used there is a transparent PNG - which renders on several popular graphics viewers and editors as a black square.
So, I use Paint.NET to convert this image to a (non-transparent) JPEG. I was tempted to upload the resulting image but hesitate because this image is widely used. Do others agree that the transparent (why transparent?) PNG should be replaced with a non-transparent image that renders on all graphic viewers and editors?
@Jmabel: The issue is that transparent PNG images do not render as expected in some graphics programs, or when sharing on social media. I am not sure if the issue is specific to transparent PNG or if the same issue arises, say, for a transparent GIF. So, perhaps you would be kind enough to explain why a PNG could not be replaced with a JPG. I am not sure if the issue is with PNG or transparency - I suspect it is the latter. If so, replacing the transparent PNG with an opaque PNG would, presumably resolve the issue. Uploading a "derivative" JPG would be beside the point, especially if the issue that I raised at the outset is not resolved.
Hi Yhyhyhyhy. That would depend on various things. It's best to assume that most images you find online are protected by copyright and then work from there as explained in COM:NETCOPYVIO. If you can provide a link for the images you want to use, then it might be easier for someone to give you a more detailed assessment. Without knowing more about the images, the best answer anyone can probably give is that most likely you shouldn't upload them to Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:34, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, and admittedly slightly less polite (but I think clearer): when a random person says something is "not copyrighted," they are usually showing that they don't know much about copyright, not that the thing in question is not copyrighted. So please indicate what images you are talking about. - Jmabel ! talk16:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Request to delete temporary file
I needed to replace File:Cifrão_symbol.svg with a revised version (currently at File:Cifrão_symbol-temp.svg to facilitate verification before committing, as this image is widely used.) That work is complete (see template talk:dollar2 on en.wiki) and I have replaced File:Cifrão_symbol.svg with the new version. Consequently there is a file duplication warning. The test version, Cifrão_symbol-temp.svg, may now be deleted, please. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@John Maynard Friedman: I think the right thing to do in this case is to tag it with {{Duplicate}}, which requests that the file be deleted and replaced with a redirect to another copy. So use the "edit" link on File:Cifrão_symbol-temp.svg and add {{duplicate|Cifrão_symbol.svg|Please delete temporary duplicate used for testing}}. You might also request deletion under speedy deletion criterion G1 (test page) or G7 (own unused recent upload), but I don't think those would be as appropriate. --bjh21 (talk) 13:51, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
is it ok to upload to the contest a picture with my signiture
Can my images be from a provider of images say like shutterstock or unsplash.For this case im using Picryl.Is it allowed or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yhyhyhyhy (talk • contribs) 17:36, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
And what kind of copyright is i is it 4.0 3.0 2.0 or 1.0 and by any means do you have other copyright systems? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yhyhyhyhy (talk • contribs) 17:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Yhyhyhyhy: : it's not clear what exactly you are asking here. If you are asking can you offer your own photographs under some license on Shutterstock and also upload them under a free license here on Commons, yes, you can, though if you place it on that other site first you should go through the process described at COM:VRT to establish that it is your own work.
In general, we cannot accept third-party images coming from Shutterstock, etc., because they do not offer licenses compatible with the requirements of COM:L.
I have no idea what you mean by listing various version numbers for a "kind of copyright". Copyright doesn't have a version number. Some licenses have version numbers, but listing a version number means nothing without also saying what license. - Jmabel ! talk20:51, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OpenStreetMap
Hi, So I've read https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright and am still none the wiser - Lets say for instance I wanted to replace a copyrighted map on a Commons image with a similar one from OpenStreetMap (screenshotted and edited on Paint.NET, Can this be done providing authors of that OSM map were credited ?,
@Davey2010: I'm not sure what you mean by "replace a copyrighted map on a Commons image." Generally, any "copyrighted map" on Commons should be free-licensed, so there should be no particular reason to replace it.
Hi @Jmabel, Ah sorry, I was secretly trying to say I wanted to replace the map on this image with a free one if I could,
Thank you so much - I had looked at COM:Maps/resources as well as the COM:maps page but didn't ever think of looking at the OSM categories, Many thanks for your help it's greatly appreciated, Thanks –Davey2010Talk21:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RodRabelo7 (talk) 16:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Done Yann (talk) 12:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}