File talk:Noctilucent clouds over saimaa.jpg

I don't think this image is clearly a copyvio. The original uploader, en:User:Explo, says on his user page, "Some of my interests include photography [and] astronomy...." The user also was the one who added the image into the article page for en:Noctilucent cloud, and although the uploading of the image is not logged (since I assume the logs were deleted when this was transferred over to the Commons), without evidence to the contrary, we should trust User:Saperaud that the image was originally uploaded with {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} and we should trust that the original uploader took the image.

Regardless, even if this is not enough evidence to keep the image (a notion I would dispute, based on the above), this is not a clear cut case, and so not a speedy. Telso 01:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

If the uploader is also the photographer, the license needs to be changed to {{PD-self}}. If the uploader is not the photographer, there needs to be some explanation as to how the uploader acquired the image and gained permission to release it under the {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} license (which is a totally bogus license, but I'll save that debate for a later day). As it is, there is no way to verify the copyright status of this image. Kaldari 19:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[copied from User Talk page] Hi, after logging into Wikipedia after a long while I noticed a comment/question about the license of the noctilucent cloud photo (Image:Noctilucent_clouds_over_saimaa.jpg)I had shot and later uploaded into Wikipedia many years ago. As I had later uploaded the same image into my Flickr account under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 license and it seems to have been re-uploaded later into Wikimedia Commons with that license by another user, is there still something that I should do (other than check my account more often than once in every couple of years...), or is the matter already closed as done? Explo (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC)