Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
VRT Noticeboard
Welcome to the VRT noticeboard

This page is where users can communicate with Commons Volunteers Response Team members, or VRT agents with one another. You can request permissions verification here, or anything else that needs an agent's assistance. This page is multilingual — when discussing tickets in languages other than English, please make a note of this and consider asking your question in the same language.

Please read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting your question here.

The current backlog of the (English) permissions-commons queue is: 2 days (graph)  update

Start a new discussion

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

VRT Noticeboard
Main VRT-related pages

Shortcuts: Commons:VRT/N • Commons:VRTN

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

User:KingJeya's uploads[edit]

Particular these uploads:

VRT: ticket:2008100510027116

I would like to question who released the photos in the VRT correspondence? or the clubs? or the user? These photos are of different players in different soccer clubs, and are attributed/linked to the clubs' social media. Did the clubs release the copyright to the website? Or did the website engaged someone to take the photos and pass them on the clubs?

I am asking particularly because the said user had also recently uploaded possible copyvio images:

I have to question as it seems like license laundering to me at the first glance.

Yes, I am aware of prior discussions but they didn't answer the questions I have:

Thanks in advance! Robertsky (talk) 16:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robertsky, ticket:2008100510027116 was discussed in great detail at
The bottom line is that supposedly had a statement in 2008 on the website that all the images on the website are released under CC license (I could not find actual archived link to verify this claim in true) and a person claiming to represent ("единственным обладателем исключительных авторских прав на фото-материалы портала") filed standard VRTS permission form in 2012. At a time nobody asked for clarification about how the website acquired all the copyrights from the photographers. According to the discussion on Russian wiki, it sounds like they are very skeptical of this permission and proposed to nullify the ticket. Also even if all the images at 2012 were owned by the website, it is unclear if the images uploaded afterwards were. --Jarekt (talk) 15:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By the way this permission is used on 11 thousands files, see here. --Jarekt (talk) 15:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The ammount of files in the ticket should not be a rationale to keep or delete. --Ganímedes (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ganímedes agreed, but if these photos are found to be uploaded, not in order, and/or possibly more, shouldn't the uploads in this ticket be questioned instead then? Robertsky (talk) 16:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I mean it doesn't matter if they're 5 or 500.000. If they're copyright violations, they should be deleted anyway. As I said downstream, we should not accept anymore files from this ticket without a proper clarification of his copyright status. --Ganímedes (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jarekt I will attempt to reach out the clubs in question for clarifications. Robertsky (talk) 16:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Robertsky I doubt clubs are the copyright owners of the images unless you have reasons to believe that they acquired the copyrights from the photographers. If you want to get any clarification I would try to identify the photographers and reach out to them. --Jarekt (talk) 16:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jarekt the photographs are uploaded through the clubs' social media with no other identifying marks to be found. Going to the clubs is the next best option. Robertsky (talk) 17:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the next step it's to contact the website and clear this problem. --Ganímedes (talk) 22:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have gotten response from one club with relation to the upload File:Kim_Shin-Wook.png. The file should be deleted. I have forwarded the email to commons-permission... which may be wrong. Ticket is 2022060110012718. Robertsky (talk) 18:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC) Also, I believe that the permissions should be relooked at. I have yet to dig into other photos, but the culture to avail materials to public domain or even Creative Commons in Singapore is still very much niche, outside of software development. Robertsky (talk) 19:00, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please open the DR. --Ganímedes (talk) 11:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Opened for Kim Shin-Wook file: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Kim Shin-Wook.png. I have not received any emails for the other two files. Robertsky (talk) 13:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@@Robertsky: : I've opened the other DR. --Ganímedes (talk) 19:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ganímedes (talk) 21:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Получение лицензии на изображение[edit]

Добрый день. Отправила запрос на получение лицензии на два изображения на Викискладе. В графе права вместо получения лицензии появился блок со ссылкой на VRTS-аккаунт. Я перехожу по ссылке, у меня нет пароля и логина, и зарегистрироваться на ресурсе VRTS нет возможности, так как там нет полей для регистрации, только поля для логина и пароля. Подскажите, что мне надо сделать, чтобы изображения были лицензированы и получили отметку с разрешением на размещение в Википедии. Elena89 345, 08:45 30.05.2022 (UTС)

File:Yoo Kang-Nam.jpg[edit]

File:Yoo Kang-Nam.jpg lists its source as, which states This official Republic of Korea photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way. Also, it may not be used in any type of commercial, advertisement, product or promotion that in any way suggests approval or endorsement from the government of the Republic of Korea.. Does the VRT ticket listed on that page (ticket:2014070110000717) legitimately override the ND and NC disclaimers on that image? Ahecht (TALK
) 18:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahecht: : I think the permission is valid, yes. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 00:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep photos Rwanda 2021 by Gerard van de Bruinhorst Ticket#2022052010007968[edit]

Dear VTRS people,

A number of photos are threatened by deletion although permission by the author has indeed been sent:

There is a proposed licensing template at to be used for further photos of the same collection and author.

  • Could you please remove the deletion tags?

Thank you, Hansmuller (talk) 07:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC) Wikimedian in Residence Leiden University[reply]

By the way, i was not notified on my Discussion page of this threat, as would have been good practice. Cheers, Hansmuller (talk) 08:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, @Hansmuller. I've added the ticket number to the template in each file. That step was missing. From now, there is one month to finish the process. BTW, please note that files could (and probably be) edited to remove the data and hour in them. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 09:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Ganímedes ! A great consolation. I note that the message in the template: "However, the message was not sufficient to confirm permission for this file." is not correct, as author (and his employer Leiden University i work for) have granted permission CC-BY-SA-4.0 as you might check with Google Translate.
* So it would be great if you could conclude this matter and give your VTRS blessing... (Formally, i think i should have stated my request in Dutch, my apologies. I'll do so below in brief.) Thank you, Hansmuller (talk) 09:10, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the language it's the problem. I can't finish the ticket because of it. Sorry. --Ganímedes (talk) 11:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alstublieft VTRS toestemming voor de foto's van Rwanda 2021 door Gerard van de Bruinhorst Ticket#2022052010007968[edit]

Beste VTRS-ers,

Excuses, ik stelde hierboven een vraag in het Engels.

  • Kunnen jullie VTRS-toestemming geven? Verder is alles met de meel van Gerard al geregeld? Dank jullie wel, Hansmuller (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2022 (UTC) wikimedian in residence Universiteit Leiden[reply]


Please check if the ticket for the low-res photo File:Prem Rawat, Barcelone, mars 2018.jpg is also valid for the hi-res photo File:Prem Rawat 2022.jpg from the same source, thank you. --Achim55 (talk) 14:21, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Achim55: At first glance, no because the ticket is from 2019. A Francophone agent may have more to add.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 14:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: The year 2022 is wrong, it's the same photograph from 2018. --Achim55 (talk) 15:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fred Wudl.jpg[edit]

Please seeing Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fred Wudl.jpg. 23:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 00:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ganímedes (talk) 00:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Doug Mastriano.jpg[edit]

Can I get an update from VRT on the permission for File:Doug Mastriano.jpg? I raised it with the uploader on the talk page but they didn't seem to understand the process and I'm wondering if they contacted VRT properly. ― Tartan357 Talk 02:11, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ganímedes (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:FC Schmiere Wimpel.png[edit]

Does ticket #2015091510017259 cover both File:FC Schmiere Wimpel.png and File:FC Schmiere Wimpel (2).png? They're DW's of each other. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ticket it's in German. --Ganímedes (talk) 08:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Please check not only this one but all the uploads of images by Kurt Tauber by user Rudolfo42. On his museum website (where most of those photos are published), Mr. Tauber makes an extremely clear statement to protect his copyright: "Bitte beachten: Alle Texte und Bilder sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede ungenehmigte Veröffentlichung (auch im Internet, z. B. bei eBay) ist untersagt."

Of course he might have put this on his website later which obviously wouldn't undo his consent. Or the uploader gave his consent and the VRT person was not aware that this was not the copyright holder he was dealing with. -- 15:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ticket it's in German. --Ganímedes (talk) 08:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I addressed the uploader on his German WP user page about this, and he replied that the VRT consent was in fact given by Mr Tauber himself, and that Mr Tauber is aware of the implications of the licensing, whatever he may write on his museum website.
This sounds trustworthy, and as far as I am concerned, we can close this request. Unless someone of course wants to take a glance at the ticket just to be sure. I would assume that even for non-German speakers it should be easy to see at a glance if the VRT conversation was actually with Mr Tauber himself. -- 16:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]