Last modified on 17 December 2014, at 03:06

User talk:-revi

Return to the user page of "-revi".


/Archives

Filing cabinet icon.svg

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days .

Evolution-tasks.png Pending tasks for -revi: edit this list - add to watchlist - purge

My home is currently 12:07 PM. (Update cloak / Real-time clock)

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 Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than the Wikimedia Commons itself.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 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:-revi.

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

čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | français | italiano | 한국어 | മലയാളം | português | русский | +/−

  • Be polite.
  • Be friendly.
  • Assume good faith.
  • No personal attacks.


User talk

English | Español | Magyar | +/−


CC license via OTRS for PD-USGov Files?Edit

Hi, I was surprised to see your latest edits at File:USGS ovis canadensis GNP bighorn rams 0.jpg and File:USGS oreamnos americanus GNP mountain goat2.jpg. Can you please tell me, who sent the OTRS message and why you changed the license? Kim Keating is a full time staff member of USGS http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/staff/kkeating he takes lots and lots of pictures as part of his professional duty, su they are in the public domain. Why would you change the licenses? --h-stt !? 13:19, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, it was mail from Kim Keating, indicating he gave the "permission" to use the file to USGS, and after reviewing source link ( http://nrmsc.usgs.gov/node/433 says "Photo courtesy of Kim Keating, USGS") and his comments on ticket, I believed his arguments are valid. I asked him if he can provide the file in free license, and he said he would provide two images under CC BY 3.0. Whym also agreed that his arguments are valid, so I changed the license, and put {{PermissionOTRS}}. Hope this helps, — Revi 13:23, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I believe when USGS asserts it is "courtesy", we should treat it non-PD. For example, it might be that he shoot them on his free time. (I'm not saying this was confirmed nor claimed - just a possible explanation.) whym (talk) 13:43, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. I'm still skeptical, whether he really can determine the license of those pictures. In my book he has no copyright in the first place, as he did them for the federal government. But as a free license makes no big difference for our use, I won't complain. But of course there is an issue here with reuse. If one of the pictures was already used outside of Wikipedia without naming Keating - due to us showing the picture to be PD - the reusers might now feel in jeopardy. So we should not be generous with permissions just for courtesy. --h-stt !? 15:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
@H-stt: I think this is more or less resolved, but just to clarify before this gets archived, I didn't intend to say that we should credit him just to be nicer. As I understand, by putting the wording "photo courtesy of Kim Keating" on their webiste, USGS affirms that Kim Keating took the photo privately (not on duty) and then allowed USGS to use it. It's about trusting USGS, not about trusting the one researcher's claim alone. Of course, USGS might sometimes make mistakes in distinguishing what is on duty and what is not, but I see nothing proving them wrong in this case. As for confusion on the reuser - I agree it's confusing, but keeping showing it as PD won't help either. I believe we should try improving the information we provide, as we know new facts. whym (talk) 12:49, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

photo of Lee DuheeEdit

https://www.evernote.com/shard/s194/sh/bdd3ff55-2e5b-4b12-a82a-8ee80ef151e0/612cb92e508f0a6faac8e6d8bb048ba1 can you see the link above? thank you. Sorry for not leaving sign(No idea how to do it since it is different from wikipedia).