User talk:Scriptor introductionum

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Scriptor introductionum!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Blocked Indefinitely
Blocked Indefinitely
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Commons. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.
See the block log for the reason that you have been blocked and the name of the administrator who blocked you.

azərbaycanca  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  hrvatski  Bahasa Indonesia  italiano  kurdî  la .lojban.  magyar  Nederlands  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  македонски  русский  українська  हिन्दी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:17, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "I'm not user:Slowking4, please unblock me"
Unblock reason: "Although I've not run a CU, speaking as a CU, I see no behavioural evidence that would suggest this account is a sock. For example, Scriptor introductionum is active almost exclusively on de.wiki, a project Slowking4 has edited only 10 times in 7 years (and indeed a language the latter does not appear to speak). Scriptor introductionum's problematic uploads followed a different naming scheme, and were made commiserate with the creation of de:Kyle Abraham. Any relationship to Slowking uploads seems mere coincidence. With no evidence or explanation whatsoever presented, this seems an entirely bad block. An RfCU would be needed. Эlcobbola talk 20:55, 27 February 2018 (UTC)"[reply]
This template should be archived normally.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  hrvatski  magyar  Plattdüütsch  português  suomi  हिन्दी  македонски  русский  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  中文(臺灣)  +/−

Deletion of images from MacArthur Fellow Kyle Abraham[edit]

@Ronhjones: The images I've uploaded (File:Kyle Abraham 2013 MacArthur Fellow 01.jpg, File:Kyle Abraham 2013 MacArthur Fellow 02.jpg, File:Kyle Abraham 2013 MacArthur Fellow 03.jpg, File:Kyle Abraham 2013 MacArthur Fellow 04.jpg) have an "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License", according to https://www.macfound.org/creative-commons/ (MacArthur Fellows Images and Video), so it's not wrong to upload them on Wikimedia Commons. Please restore them!--Scriptor introductionum (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are two licenses on that page. You need to read Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:MacArthur Foundation Images of Fellows for more information. If undeletion is possible then you need to get the original images undeleted (with the appropriate deletion history) - they are
All were deleted by user: Jameslwoodward - he would have more knowledge of the deletion result, I only deleted on the basis of a re-upload with a different name Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As noted by Ronhjones, and more fully explained at the DR cited above, the Foundation is willing to give the media a CC-BY license, but for all others, including Commons, the license is CC-BY-NC-ND. That is exactly what https://www.macfound.org/creative-commons/ says. As noted in the DR, I exchanged several e-mails with the Foundation's General Counsel and their intentions are clear. They understand completely that their license policy precludes use of their images on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So isn't Commons such "media"? Maybe there should be a note, that the further commercial use of the images is restricted only to other media? In most cases the images will not be used commercially (f.e. in Wikipedia article), and there are not much cases, where something other than media (which is a really general term) will use them.--Scriptor introductionum (talk) 08:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The attempt of the MacArthur Foundation to grant CC-BY licenses to "the media" but to "everyone else" just CC-BY-NC seems rather nonsensical to me, as the CC-BY license includes permission for third parties to reuse material under this license; so we couldn't upload material from the Foundation directly to Commons, but we very well could if we take it from "the media" where it was used under CC-BY. A CC-BY license can't just mutate suddenly to CC-BY-NC. But I think the intention is clear (they don't want their material here, apparently), so it's better to not upload it. Gestumblindi (talk) 22:16, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]