User talk:DanSchultz~commonswiki

Do you really think we should use here different PD-state-official licenses for every single page of this passport? {PD-Poland-official} for p.1-16, {PD-Switzerland-official} for p.17, {PD-Italy-official} for p.18, {PD-Austria-official} for p.19, {PD-Czechoslovakia-official} for p.20, etc.? But what would you do with "Austrian page" (page 19) with Italian stamp from border crossing in Domodossola: would it be PD-Austria, PD-Italy, both or any?

This Swiss visa on page 17 was personalised for Marja S., my grandma, and was owned by her, not by Swiss government. The Italian visa, page 18. (back of 17) was owned by Marja S., not by Italian government, etc. That is the reason I have decided to use relevant licenses for whole document and for every single page.

And one more reason, just a formality, but very important: Image:CH1931visa.jpg is a derivative work of this full view and MUST be identical license as an original - Image:PaszportRzeczpospolitaPolska.1931.jpg.

Regards Julo 15:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think, you are correct (in principle). However, one could use the "because" tag and refer to the fact that it is works issued by authorities of Poland, Austria, .... However, if several persons create the work, they are all joint copyright holders. But what is clear: You do not hold any copyright to it.--DanSchultz 17:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

It is absurd to use five state-official licenses here. Imagine my grandmother visited hundred different countries during world-around trip... I want you to know, I choosed the cc-by-sa license only because of some pages with private data and private photo. I am not just an uploader, I am the heir of passport's owner rights, i.e I am the copyright owner of her picture, signature etc. And I want you to remember, the cc-by-sa license is a copyleft license, 100% free, the only request for future users of these images is to put Wikipedia's original picture as a source, nothing else. The PD and cc-by-sa are not relevant and can not co-exist in the same work. I make the revert edition for these pictures, because I prefer to use simple and clear solutions, and do not want to dispute philosophic or law questions for simple pieces of paper. Julo 10:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Post Scriptum: by the way, {PD-CzechGov} license is wrong, it is the license for Czech Republic, and there is an Czechoslovak visa (Czech + Slovak), you should use Czechoslovak license instead (if such license exists) or add Slovak license... Julo 10:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I understand you do not understand that you do not own the copyright of everything you are scanning. This is the intellectual level of square root or death. --DanSchultz 23:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I do not "hold the copyright of the Swiss visa only because I scanned it". I hold copyright, because I am the heir of the person, who was the owner of document. The state of Switzerland has nothing to do in this case, that's all. Julo 14:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:SchengenResidencePermit.JPG

And also:

• File:SchengenVisaNewType.JPG

Yours sincerely, Stefan4 (talk) 23:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called DanSchultz. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name DanSchultz~commonswiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

20:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

02:32, 21 April 2015 (UTC)