User talk:Jameslwoodward

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

1st half 2014
2nd half 2014
1st half 2015
2nd half 2015
1st half 2016

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikimedia Commons, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Commons itself. The original talk page is located at

My formal name is James L. Woodward, but I prefer to be called "Jim"

sang sûre is not accidental, it's censorship[edit]

24 mai 2016 à 14:12 Jameslwoodward (discussion | contributions) a supprimé la page Discussion utilisateur:Éric Messel (Accidental creation: content was: "Censure ? Pure et dure… -- Cyril Delacour (User talk:CyrilDelacour|<span class="signature...", and the only contributor was "CyrilDelacour" ([[User talk...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CyrilDelacour (talk • contribs) 17:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

explanation (fr)

(sorry, accidental 'enter' push)

Cyril Delacour (talk) 17:22, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is indeed censorship of a special sort. Both Commons and Wikipedia have no place for the personal art or opinions of users unless they can prove that they are notable according to our standards, which you have not done. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Notable ?

Personality cult… not good for your soul.

Some things I did are known, but not my name :

thumb|Le bonheur d'être simplement là

If you just want TV, books & newspapers, don't use internet, thanks, and don't call it "free". Political censorship, what else ? Do you hunderstand french ? And M. Éric Messel erase all entry of this on, of course. His censorship and yours don't give me a chance chance. Finance, debt, money system are NOT my personnal things, but perhaps yours. I like philosophy, art, my daughter and life. You're opinions are "personnal" too.

Look at the work of M. Messel (censorship) :

But here youre perhaps more "notable" than me, enough ..)

I realy don't like fascism. Cyril Delacour (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Commons has about 25,000 individual contributors in any month. We have rules, which are the same for all users. Commons is not Facebook or Flickr, so if you want to post your personal art and opinions, you must prove that the world as a whole values your art and opinion. As a general rule, Commons will not keep art from artists who do not have an article on their native country WP. So, you can't prove notability to me -- you must prove it to your colleagues on WP:FR, who, apparently, also believe that your uploads are not appropriate. You may think that having and enforcing rules is fascism -- my colleagues and I believe that not having and enforcing rules is anarchy.
Note also, that all of your cites above are to talk pages, which have a very different standard from main space. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:01, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
What do you want ? TV, newspepar, cinema ? Ok, so… here for TV : (videomaker and multimedia) this is for FR3 national (at morning, ok).
For newspaper about me : (w:fr:Manuel Pradal on the same page but with a shorter article)
For cinema I'm here (as actor but I was the photographer and the father of the youngest girl of the film : 4 years, 11 weeks of work as actress !) :
for my pictures of this movie it's here (only "perso" b&w, director ask me color for this film) :
and somme newspaper but I'm not a notable artist of my country. No. But as an activist, few seconds make that : (how many results ?éputé+terrasse ) but there is no my name. But if you want the justice act : you can read the Hollande président réaction, or prime minister and so…
BUT, more important : the picture "le bonheur d'être simplement là" : this picture is a "notable" work.
So I think I have my place here, and my work too. I just whant some respect for my work and myself like everibody here ! Respect… I don't want erase your work, or Messel's work ! So, just respect. My name erased from here : so don't search my name, look at with your eyes my work, think with yourself and not notable sources plz - Cyril Delacour (talk) 01:57, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @CyrilDelacour: Commons is not censored, and never will be. Your images were deleted because it doesn't conform with our project's scope. As Jim said above, you have to prove your notability at fr.wikipedia, not here. You may want to join a real-time chat in IRC at channel #wikipedia-fr (If you're new to IRC, click here). And no hard feelings please, your drama won't work. Thanks, Poké95 03:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Since you're French, maybe Yann (a native French speaker) can help you. Poké95 03:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
The "drama" is censorship about children's work for w:fr:Tom le cancre and my daughter rapt by justice, the "drama" is that w:fr:censure and about politics on money and so, the "drama" is with obscurantism and lies about "democraty".Cyril Delacour (talk) 15:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
This isn't getting us anywhere. All of our policies, including this one, are established by the consensus of our 25,000 editors. If you don't like the policy, you're welcome to try to change it, but coming to a well established organization and complaining that you don't like its policies is simply foolish. If you don't like it, either try to change it, or go away. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
« the consensus of our 25,000 editors » ??? Do you believe that !? Money is used whithout consensus by everyone, but ask them if they want an other money than the bankster's money : I think this question may made a consensus. But at this time, nobody can vote for that, and I'm an activist for a real democraty against this real plutocracy (this is not in encyclopedia but it is the truth and this truth is here an object of censorship, what else ?). Cyril Delacour (talk) 22:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Stop your trolling. This isn't about the file anymore. As Jim said above, if you disagree with our policies and guidelines, either fork, try to change our policies, or go away. Poké95 23:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Files are about money, democraty, philosophy and fiction. I'm not trolling, I talk about censorship and I don't want it. If this files will be erase you never see me again here ! Cyril Delacour (talk) 23:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Why the hell are you still saying that Commons is censored? Commons is not and will never be censored. See COM:NOTCENSORED. Just because we deleted your files, it means censorship. No. We deleted your files because they are out of our project scope. If you are not a child, then read the project scope. What is the point of keeping files that are out of our project scope? Wikimedia Commons only hosts files that are free and have an educational purpose. Again, if you disagree with our policies (including the project scope), change it, fork, or go away. It's simple. This shows that you're trolling. Poké95 00:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Plutocraty don't say about itself it is a plutocraty, plutocraty say about itself it is a democraty. Censorship don't say about itself it is censorship, censorship say about itself it is not in project scope. The project scope is "educational media content", and truth is "educational media content". My files say the truth so there are "educationals medias contents". Cyril Delacour (talk) 03:46, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I just saw your files that are nominated for deletion, and they seem to be used. Per COM:INUSE, I voted keep on all your files. I should have look at the files before commenting. IMO, your files are in scope. Thanks, Poké95 12:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Pokefan95, please reconsider your Symbol keep vote.svg Keep. Use on pages in the User namespace and in discussions such as the one here do not make a file in scope.

"An otherwise non-educational file does not acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a user page (the "User:" namespace) of another project..."

In order to qualify for COM:INUSE, the file must be used on a WP main space page or "for some operational reason such as within a template or the like." The only exception is for a "small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page" provided that the user is actually a contributor and not merely a self promoter trying to use Commons as Facebook. I think this case is borderline on the latter issue, but probably OK, so I did not nominate File:Cyril Delacour.jpg for deletion.

Quotes above are from Commons:Project_scope#File_in_use_in_another_Wikimedia_project. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:14, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

The files nominated by Éric Messel are :

File:Inversion des valeurs humaines par la valeur symbolique placée à la mesure de toute chose.jpg
File:Argent Roi - Dette Souveraine - Peuples Déchus.jpg
File:Confrontation avec le député PS Pascal Terrasse lors des européennes à St-Montan.ogv
File:Caricature Pascal Terrasse.jpg

And if you hunderstand french you can recognize the subjetcs : politic, economy, money, phylosophy, cinéma etc. Et si vous comprenez bien le français vous pouvez voir ici la portée de mon propos sur un "essai personnel" dont l'objet est de prendre en main les connaissances partagées par wikipedia sur les notions de démocratie et de souveraineté monétaire (dans un État que je dénonce être un État de non droit, preuves à l'appuis et autour de Tom the truant) : Banque Citoyenne de France Cyril Delacour (talk) 21:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

@CyrilDelacour: fichtre, ça rime à quoi, cette excitation? Tu es le troisième Français à la suite que je lis/rencontre et qui déraille lorsqu'il est confronté à une ou plusieurs demandes de suppression de fichiers qu'il avait contribué, alors qu'il s'agit simplement d'une démarche codifiée pour assurer un standard minimum de Commons dans le cadre du scope. Une explication de ce comportement m'intéresse vraiment! Sorry d'or interfering on tour talk page, Jim. But as Cyril is consecutively the third(!) Frenchman that I met on Commons who's getting really excited when confronted to something that he dislikes, I wondered if there's a chance of getting some more explanation about this way of acting..., Salutations, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Je ne sais pas pour les autres mais pour ma part j'ai été désigné par le député Terrasse comme "une personne localement connue pour présenter des troubles mentaux" et la presse nationale l'a relayé sans me laisser de "droit de réponse". Avant cela les médias relayaient les mensonges du réalisateur w:fr:Manuel Pradal pour couvrir le travail dissimulé d'enfants (dont ma fille) sans non plus vouloir me laisser le démentir avec comme preuves des documents officiels de DIRECCTE. Et encore avant cela l'image de ma fille a été utilisée lors de festivals internationaux de cinéma au mépris de mon opposition pendant que leur "justice" me retirait l'exercice de l'autorité parentale. Alors quand ça tourne à la dictature (et ça ne doit pas concerner que ma petite personne) il n'est pas étonnant que quelques-uns s'en plaignent, sauf bien entendu, ceux qui y participent : il n'y a pas de dictature sans peuple pour l'accepter, et y participer. Voir pour les preuves : la source 1ère c'est la réalité et la 2nd c'est un témoignage sincère (et sourcés donc, puisqu'il y a tous les documents "officiels"). Bon courage. Cyril Delacour (talk) 02:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

De la prison pour un œil-au-beurre-noir maquillé et se faire enlever son enfant pour s’être opposé à son travail dissimulé pour un film de cinéma, c’est cher payé vous ne trouvez pas ? Cyril Delacour (talk) 03:12, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Merci, je peut me faire une idée, à présent. Salutations, Grand-Duc (talk) 03:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Deleted photo of Nihal Atsız[edit]

Hi Jim,

I saw that a file that I uploaded, File:Nihal ATSIZ.jpg, was deleted as a result of the request at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nihal ATSIZ.jpg. Unfortunately I was away from Wikipedia at the time, so I could not join the discussion, but I believe the file was in public domain per Template:PD-Turkey. The user who requested deletion said "There is no proof that this picture is a public domain"; I am not sure what he/she meant by 'proof', but the photo is dated from the same time as File:Nihâl Atsız -11.jpg, ~80 years ago. The Nihal Atsız website that duplicates it cannot be the owner as it fits to the cases listed in the article 12 of the Turkish copyright law. The note at the bottom of the website state that we are free to distribute the content as long as we attribute it to the website, but in this case we don't even need to do that, as the file has already been released into public domain long ago.

COM:UNDEL suggests contacting the deleting administrator first to explain the situation. Is it possible to undelete the file, or would you advise listing it at COM:UNDEL first?--Cfsenel (talk) 12:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Although there are a few countries that start the clock running upon creation of a work, Turkey is not one of them. In order to apply the rule which you cite, you must show that the work was published anonymously more than seventy years ago. The fact that the author is now unknown is irrelevant -- the only thing that counts is that the work was published anonymously. As a practical matter, the only way to do this is to find a publication of the work before 1946. There is nothing in the file description or at the source that proves either that work was published anonymously or that it was even published at all until recently.
You are certainly free to post a request at UnDR, but you will get the same response there. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jim, thanks, and I'm sorry for the late reply, I can only log in to Wikimedia intermittently nowadays. Normally what I saw in Wikimedia is the interpretation of the article 12 of the Turkish copyright law does not require such a high standard of proof; on the contrary, it is applied very liberally, and there are a great number of similarly licensed files on the Commons, uploaded by Turkish users (although, come to think of it, it may also be because nobody bothered to report them), and if the correct interpretation is different, that is news to me. For example, does the other file that I mentioned, File:Nihâl Atsız -11.jpg, need to be deleted? That file has been on the Wikimedia Commons for 7 years without being deleted, and it seems you didn't speedy delete it for apparent copyright violation after I mentioned it.
As a second question, as I said, I think the deleted photo was from which says we are free to distribute the content as long as we attribute it to the website. Can the deleted photo be restored with a different license, like Template:Cc-by-3.0? They didn't attribute their photos to other sources, implying they own them; but then again, they may have just been sloppy and assume, as I did, that they are not subject to copyright.--Cfsenel (talk) 14:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
First, we have more than 30 million files on Commons and, although we have around 25,000 editors in any month, about a dozen of us do more than half of all the work. We have no systematic way to look at files, so my best guess is that at least 1% of all files should be deleted -- that's more than 300,000 files -- so it is not surprising that you can find examples of files that have escaped attention.
Second, the copyright rules for works where the author is unknown for one reason or another vary widely from country to country. It's not surprising that editors who are not very familiar with the rules might think that 70 years is the magic number, as indeed it is, but you have to be careful when the clock started. The Turkish law is clear -- the clock starts on publication, so you must prove that the work was published more than 70 years ago.
Finally, if the source site owns the copyright -- which is possible, although unlikely, then they can demand attribution, but unless they make the license irrevocable, the image cannot be kept on Commons. More likely is that they own a paper copy of the photograph but not the copyright. That gives them no rights -- their requirement of attribution is copyfraud -- either the work is PD, in which case no attribution is required or it is still under copyright, in which case they cannot license it. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)