User talk:Alpha Quadrant/Archive 1

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Alpha Quadrant!

Copyright violations

Hello. I closed the deletion request of your image since Nard withdrew it, however, I would like to make you aware that it is not just the job of new page patrollers to check for copyvios. New page patrollers are fallible and things slip past them sometimes. Besides, there isn't a new image patrol group set up. It is the duty of every commons user to report potential copyright violations, or images they feel might be borderline, when they find them - they should not let them go because "new page patrol didn't see it". What one person thinks is ok may not be, either through a simple difference of opinion, or just ignorance of some obscure copyright caveat in the country of origin.

I am sad to see that you have decided to leave commons over people arguing against you in a deletion request. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I may come back some day. Just not now. I will continue to work at [1] wikipedia, just not in the file space. This is the third disagreement I have had with this group of users in 10 days (one on wikipedia and two on commons) over wether a image is copyrighted on not. I brought this problem to ANI after the first disagreement (one of them was a administrator in Wikipedia and speedily deleted it before consensus was reached). I was then accused of being a sockpuppet and of being stupid when it comes to copyrights. That discussion was put in the ANI archive before it was resolved and I didn't bother pursuing it because it was a uphill battle. During the ANI discussion I stated that another image had cited the same web site as one on commons. That one is currently going through AFD and will likely be deleted because they all voted delete. I attempted today to close the discussion so the image would not be deleted, but one of the users had it on their watchlist and reverted it. They then proceeded to spam my talk page with vandalism warnings. I then decided to retire temporarily. I turned my talk page into a redirect and put the retire template up. Then Nard proceeded to post a template stating that I could not remove comments from talk pages and nominated the one file I uploaded to commons for deletion because it "violated copyright". At this time I had logged out of commons and was checking my wikipedia watchlist and noticed that the image I uploaded was tagged for deletion. That is why I am upset. So I have decided to back to work at Wikipedia Articles for Creation. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 22:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Note: Thank you for not deleting the file I uploaded. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate that sometimes it can be annoying fighting for what you think is right here, but I would ask you to accept that sometimes decisions go against what you believe to be right, and that when a user comes pretty much out of left field to close a deletion request in their own favour, it is rather frowned upon. I suggest that should the image be deleted you take it to COM:UDEL. As for your own image, it is incorrectly licenced, and it is clearly a derivative work of Trek generally, but probably not anything enforceable. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and don't bother with Talkback, I have this page on my watchlist. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
What license should it be put under? --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 16:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
You can choose any self-published licence - PD-self, CC-BY-SA-3.0, CC-BY-3.0, WTFPL, etc. Thing is it is not a work of the US Govt, so the current licence is incorrect. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)