Need your assistance in updating the nair woman file that you have restored.
Hello dear clpo13,
Please find the evidence below. The attire uploaded as nair women is wrong as it belongs to a minor child. As you can see in the following image the attire of women is different. Thats why i chose to correct the image uploaded as the image currently in place has been circulated and spreading misinformation across the internet including the google search results.
Need you support to fix this please.
Pictures deleted of page Georg Erhardt (Maler)
Three pics got deleted on my dads page: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Erhardt_(Maler) Why? I created the page together with the artist, just before he died. For example: File:Georg Erhardt, Ceasornicarie, 2002.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndereWelt2020 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Could you please undelete them? I don't see the problem…
- @AndereWelt2020: according to the copyright rules of Switzerland, the artist's native country, his art is protected by copyright for 70 years after his death. Since he died in 2020, his works will not become public domain there until 2091. Therefore, hosting copies of them on Wikimedia Commons is a copyright violation, unless you have permission from his estate to publish copies of his art under a free license. Such permission can be sent to COM:OTRS. clpo13(talk) 18:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
First of all, thank you so, so much for reviewing the copyright on my uploads and confirming that they are either mine or freely licensed whence I got them. That being said, there is the matter of the file of "Wikipedia Chanukah", which is an audio file by Jonathan Coulton and John Roderick. I believe I have enough evidence to prove that it is freely licensed. Allow me to demonstrate:
- As the title explicitly says, the lyrics of Wikipedia Chanukah are copied directly from Wikipedia, so the file is a work adapted and derived from Wikipedia. Since Wikipedia text is licensed with an Attribution-Sharealike Creative Commons license, the derived work must have the same license (save for copyright exceptions such as fair use and de minimis, which don't apply here). Ergo, Wikipedia Chanukah must be licensed with the same free license as Wikipedia itself, which is—as said–Creative Commons: Attribution-Sharealike.
- Jonathan Coulton said that Wikipedia Chanukah was licensed with a Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike license on his blog: https://www.jonathancoulton.com/2013/05/08/this-is-for-samuel/ (The "Samuel" to whom he is referring is me (we're neighbors)).
All that being said, we do not have permission from John Roderick. Is it implied, or should I contact him so that he may contact you (and anyone relevant at Wikipedia)? I do not want the media to be deleted, and I feel its presence on the commons is extremely justified. Thank you for your audience, IronCurtaiNYC (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- @IronCurtaiNYC: I passed that one up initially because the permission page didn't mention what version of the license the song is released under, which is important. Just saying BY-SA is ambiguous, since there are multiple versions of that license with slightly different terms. Now that I've had some more time to look into it, I see that Coulton uses BY-NC 3.0 for everything, so he most likely meant BY-SA 3.0, since that's the version Wikipedia articles use. He could have also used a later version, but BY-SA 4.0 didn't come out until November 2013, while the permission statement is from May 2013.
- As for permission from Roderick, I don't think that's necessary so long as it's clear that Coulton has the ability to license songs made by the both of them. I won't insist on it, but if you want to make absolutely sure everything is squared away, feel free to contact him and have him put a statement on a website associated with him or send it via COM:OTRS. clpo13(talk) 18:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC)