User talk:Colonestarrice

File:Michael Hainisch (cropped).jpg und File:Van der Bellen portrait (cropped).jpg

Hi Colonestarrice, diese beiden Bilder sind auf mehreren Projekten in Benutzung. Sie können nicht einfach so gelöscht werden, weil sie dann sofort von einem Bot auf allen Projekten ersatzlos entfernt würden, wozu keine Berechtigung vorliegt. Da du "temporary deletion for history cleaning" als Löschgrund angegeben hast, müsstest du zunächst zusichern, dass du sofort (!) nach der Löschung die bereinigte Fassung unter demselben Dateinamen hochlädst, um zu vermeiden, dass der erwähnte Bot loslegt. --Túrelio (talk) 09:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Yeah, I feared this was the case. Nevertheless, I think both files are really in need of a history purge, so I will attempt to re-upload them as quickly as possible, you have my word. Colonestarrice (talk) 09:59, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I though you were a German-speaker. Anyway, are you prepared for re-upload now? --Túrelio (talk) 10:00, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm ready. Colonestarrice (talk) 10:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Ok. First Van der Bellen. Gone. --Túrelio (talk) 10:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Now, Hainisch. Gone. --Túrelio (talk) 10:05, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks a lot! Colonestarrice (talk) 10:07, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Túrelio: While we're at it – and since you are a Commons admin and native German speaker – I would like to ask you, if you think that this image use policy of the Austrian national library means that their images are in public domain. Colonestarrice (talk) 10:29, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

As so often (and similar to the German de:Bundesarchiv (Deutschland))), it's not really consistent. On the linked site (and also at de:Österreichische_Nationalbibliothek#Verwertung – Copyright) they state that material, which was scanned by Google*, cannot be used commercially, i.e. is not compatible with Commons' and Wikipedia's licensing terms. * Such material is recognizable by that Google is mentioned as Kooperationspartner at the bullet “Information zur Zeitung”. --Túrelio (talk) 10:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, the information page for das interessante Blatt doesn't mention Google, and I didn't see Google being cited as a partner anywhere else either. So would uploading a scanned article of that (specific) news outlet be acceptable? Colonestarrice (talk) 10:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Túrelio: ping. Colonestarrice (talk) 11:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I went to the latest available issue of "Das interessante Blatt", which is from end of 1938[1]. When I found no reference to Google, I first thought, seems to be ok. But then I went again back to the above linked terms-site and discovered, what I had initially overlooked: "Es wird darauf hingewiesen, dass Rechte Dritter (z.B.: Urheberrechte) für jede Form der Nachnutzung individuell und unabhängig von der ÖNB zu klären sind." That destroys everything! It ultimately means: the ÖNB as the provider of the scans, allows you to use these scans, according to their terms. BUT, as they are not the copyright-holder of the content, they don't claim own copyright, but leave this responsability completely to you, as the re-user. The cited German sentence means, that for any re-use you have to make a full research/evaluation about who owns (or owned) the copyright and whether it is still in place. --Túrelio (talk) 14:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Ok, well, thanks a lot for helping me out here though! Since you're now too, aware of the 'copyright circumstances' is it possible to speedy-delete this image – I cited it as my own work because I was a bit careless (and dumb) when I uploaded it – if not, I will start a normal deletion discussion. Colonestarrice (talk) 19:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC)