User talk:Belbury

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

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an article, file or the talk page of an article or file. If you find this page on any site other than the 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 Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than the Wikimedia Commons itself. The original page is located at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Belbury.

This is the user talk page of Belbury, where you can send messages and comments to Belbury.

  • Be polite.
  • Be friendly.
  • Assume good faith.
  • No personal attacks.
  • Please sign and date your entries by clicking on the appropriate button or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
  • Put new text under old text.
  • New to Wikimedia Commons? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers as soon as possible.
  • Click here to start a new topic.
1, 2

You've been nominated!

[edit]

Hello Belbury,

6 users have expressed their support for you becoming an administrator at Administrators/Nominations. This is a page created after the most recent discussion regarding unbundling the toolkit at the village pump. As you are the first user to cross this threshold, the next steps after this message aren't defined. If you would like to have your username removed from the page, please follow the directions on com:NOM. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 01:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old school RT Orks.jpg

[edit]
File:Old school RT Orks.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has 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 it, 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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
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!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Belinda2024.jpg

[edit]

Your copyvio tag on this file wasn't appropriate. If uploaders don't lie and are honest in telling about the source, we should give them a benefit of doubt, by just adding {{No permission since}}. However, if they claim own work - it is outright copyright violation. Regards, Aafi (talk) 11:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aafi: Hi, my reading of these kinds of social media uploads is that if the uploader provides the URL of a specific post, and that post when examined is not attempting to release the copyright in any way, and the user is not making any kind of statement about representing or being the pictured subject, I take the good faith interpretation that the user believes the post to be evidence of the image being public domain, but is mistaken about that.
The associated talk page template for CSD F1 says that the image has been "marked as a possible copyright violation" (not a definite one) and cautions that "unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here".
F1 has an exemption when there is "a reasonable possibility of discovering that the work is public domain through further research", but I wouldn't have said this applied to a typical celebrity Instagram photo. Belbury (talk) 12:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aafi: Would be good to hear your view on what I've said here, a lot of my Commons activity is flagging copyvios so I'd like to feel confident that I was doing it correctly. Belbury (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Belbury: Ideally, if a user claims a work as own which is otherwise found on internet; it is a clear ground for COM:CSD#F1 - simply because the uploader is lying. For the other case, where uploader doesn't claim own-work (but might or might not have permission) - our usual behavior is to tag the files with {{No permission since}}. Although this template is heavily worded, but elsewhere, as it says, "It (the file) is attributed to someone other than the uploader, or to an external site, and while a licensing tag has been applied, there is no proof that the author has agreed to release the file under the given license....." If permissions aren't cleared, the file is deleted in seven days. We do this in all cases where it could be said about permissions/licensing that there is ""a reasonable possibility of discovering that the work is public domain (other compatible licenses) through further research (or perhaps through VRT)." To clear up, where ever there is a honest attribution of author/source, permissions template is the right thing, and not a CSD copyright violation tag. Let me know if I make any sense here. Regards, Aafi (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Belbury&oldid=977631346"