User talk:Jameslwoodward
Add topicThis 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 Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Commons itself.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 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jameslwoodward
My formal name is James L. Woodward, but I prefer to be called "Jim"
.
I know this is being used, but what makes you think this isn't a copyright violation? It is very low resolution with no evidence of permission. IronGargoyle (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
There is no US copyright for typography and the only thing on the whole banner that is not type is a single oval -- nowhere near the ToO. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:27, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I think they meant that the file description attributes the photo to
Virginia Historical Society staff
(i.e. not own work), but no evidence provided that the photographer has licensed the photo under a free license - needs COM:VRT. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 16:32, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
- Aha. Good catch. That issue was not the subject of the DR and I didn't look at it. Feel free to tag it with a new DR. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
The following is an email from User:Nwidmer
[edit]Dear Jim, Sorry to disturb you. I have seen your two requests for deletion Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Francois_Widmer_Nestec.jpg and Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_on_Antoine_Favre_(juge). Could you please advise on the best way to resolve this issue? How can I use VRT now?
- Thank you very much for your help. Best regards,
Nicolas
As I noted in both DRs, the owner of a physical or digital copy of an image is rarely the copyright holder, so permissions from such owners are not useful. We require evidence that the copyright holder, which is almost always the actual photographer, has given a written free license. A stamp on the back is not a valid license -- most countries require a written license signed by the copyright holder.
Note also that for images whose country of origin is France (and most others), any image first published after 1929 will still have a US copyright. An image only 70 years old will most likely also still have a French copyright -- copyright in France lasts for seventy years after the death of the photographer or, if the image was anonymous, 70 years after first publication. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:32, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
HE4D W0LF
[edit]- I made these images! these 2 rquest dont know that i am the one who made them, what am i supposed to do, ask myself?! HE4D W0LF (talk) 19:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
- you realize that you have just deleted HOURS that i took to make this page because you didnt bother to ask if i have the rights to these images like youre supposed to? fix it NOW! HE4D W0LF (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
Commons policy does not require asking in advance of a deletion when the subject is an obvious violation of Commons rules. Commons galleries are for collections of images, not words, so I deleted your gallery on sight. It may have taken hours to create, but it has no place on Commons. The images have not yet been deleted, but will be unless you follow the clear instruction at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by HE4D W0LF, "Logos and album covers require a free license from the actual copyright holder using VRT." . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
Deletion of Stadler FLIRT Pic
[edit]Hi, you have deleted File:Stadler Flirt 3 Eurobahn 2024-09-25 JM 5D415930.jpg. What was the reason for that? Background of my question is that the (now deleted) pic is used as a half of another pic (File:Stadler Flirt Titelbild.jpg). I remember the discussion (on deWP) about the request of some authors to show a new FLIRT (v3), not the old one (v1). I answered that v1 has to be shown as that nose is known as "Stadler FLIRT" – and if v1 is not shown, some people might think that they are on the wrong page. The question is now: what about the combined pic? Does it also have to disappear? --ProloSozz (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
The license User:Johannes Maximilian/Autor is unacceptable. We stopped taking the GFDL license some time ago. I have deleted File:Stadler Flirt Titelbild.jpg as it has the same license. See Commons:Licensing#GNU_Free_Documentation_License . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
...is still not deleted after your closing. Thanks, Quick1984 (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Thank you. Sometimes the bot that Admins use for handling DRs misses one. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Redirection of deleted file
[edit]Hi Jim! Re Commons:Deletion requests/File:Etiquette at the Ball.jpg, is there any way to get any uses of the low-res file to redirect to the higher-res one that has been retained? Sdkb talk 21:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)
Done @Sdkb: reverted the delinker bot and ran global replace. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Sdkb talk 00:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Next time, perhaps tag with {{Dupe}} instead of a deletion request. Just a suggestion. (We should want to redirect to the large file, in order to let old edit revisions of Wikipedia articles not to have broken files unnecessarily). --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 00:30, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Sdkb talk 00:27, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
Center for Investigative Reporting images
[edit]Hello Jim. Some images, such as Sevlid Hurtić CIN.jpg and Lidija Bradara CIN.jpg from the Bosnian Center for Investigative Reporting, have been uploaded locally on to Wikipedia with the Center for Investigative Reporting license. Also, when you go to the very bottom of the website, it says, translated from Bosnian: "Acquisition of content from the Center for Investigative Journalism is permitted with the obligatory reference to the source www.cin.ba". I am now wondering whether these images can be exported to Commons. Also, it says in the aforementioned images that "If this file is eligible for relicensing, it may also be used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license", but I have been made aware that I can just ignore this redirection as it is used mistakenly on en.wikipedia. Still, I am wondering if the license used on these images is okay for me to go ahead and export them to Commons without the images getting deleted. Bakir123 (talk) 14:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
The translation I see is "Downloading of the content of the CIN is permitted with the mandatory reference to the source at www.cin.ba." "Downloading" is limiting -- I don't think it covers reuse. Your "Acquisition" also doesn't speak to reuse. Perhaps you might ask the center to change the footer to a CC-BY license. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:19, 20 August 2025 (UTC)