Soulbust
|
File:Goofy sock monkey.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. |
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. |
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, DMacks (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violations edit
|
Hello Soulbust.
You have uploaded one or more files that are copyright violations. You have done so despite requests from editors not to do so, and despite their instructions. See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter useful. This is your last warning. The next time you upload a file that violates copyright, you will be blocked. Please leave me a message if you have further questions. |
--DMacks (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- Seriously? The trailblazer gator statue is on flickr, uploaded via creative commons so I just figured it'd be fine to upload here. The other statues I uploaded years ago. Not like it's I got this warning and then continued to do that. I honestly didn't know about the statue thing. You gave me the warning about a horse sculpture in Dec. 2020 (and i didn't reply to it, so I feel in this moment, you can perhaps take away from that that I may have glossed over that notification). I uploaded those UF Heisman statues in Jan. 2021 and I'm getting the warning over 2 years later. If you want to delete them, that's cool. If you want to look through my uploads now, so that they won't be considered as future violations after seeing this message, that's cool.
- I'll say sorry about those uploads but blocking someone that is trying to legitimately add image content to this project, and may have just been confused about proper policy, seems counterintuitive. Soulbust (talk) 03:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Please note, the messages you have left me occurred in:
- Nov 2020 (about statues in South Carolina) - images uploaded on March 11, 2019
- Dec 2020 (about Rory artwork) - image uploaded on October 24, 2017
- So these 2 warning should, with logic and fairness to a good faith contributor, be considered one - considering that I had already uploaded the Rory image and wouldn't have known about your Nov 2020 notification.
- This May 2023 warning you are giving me is about images uploaded mainly in January 2021. And fair enough, this was after the 2020 notifications. As you can see here in my commons editing history, I haven't edited on my user talk page previously. I just try to add images that I figure would be fine to add, and if others seek to remove them for whatever reason, I won't try to complain about that really b/c I see the image policy as WAY more strict and therefore WAY less flexible to argue against than something like AfD on the English Wikipedia project. So I'm fine with things getting removed here for that reason, and don't really try to intervene with that process. But I hope with that in mind, you can tell I'm not really paying attention to this talk page. And no, I'm not using that ignorance as an excuse or anything like that. That's on me. But this project like all the other Wikimedia ones, I hope can have some sort of leniency with good faith contributions. Because, otherwise, I would find it legitimately ridiculous to be blocked for this.
- This would obviously apply to other editors' notifications about other images I've uploaded. The policy that would delete (for example) the image about a stuffed animal sock monkey that I have no way of tracing back its origins to (in order to determine proper copyrighting) seems excessive in its caution/bureaucracy to me. It's a sock monkey I own and received as a gift. It doesn't seem that deep to me. But if the COM:TOYS says the image should be deleted, then that's fine, so be it. Again, I have no issue with that.
- If I have any other images you think are supposed to be deleted go for it. But I hope these wouldn't be considered "further batches". Soulbust (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- @DMacks: would like a response. I also want to upload images of buildings such as this one. I am unsure if FOP applies since it is a building in the U.S. Soulbust (talk) 05:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- Also, would like to add to my comment ("But I hope with that in mind, you can tell I'm not really paying attention to this talk page"), by stating that going forward I will be making an effort to check on my talk page here to hopefully avoid these types of situations. Soulbust (talk) 05:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Soulbust, thank you for responding. I did not have your talkpage watchlisted, so this ping was the first I saw of any of it. Looking at your talkpage, I saw several years of warnings and yet the continued behavior continued, so I increased the sharpness of the notifications and I am glad that it has finally gotten you to pay attention. I don't doubt good faith and am happy to extend leniency when there's a clear recognition and desire to improve (on enwiki, one would say WP:AGF has a limit at WP:CIR). Feel free to ask if you need help figuring out what's free, what's allowed, what special tags are needed, etc. I'll keep this page watchlisted for a while. Obviously there are lots of subtlties or things that "seem ok but really aren't", but commons needs to protect itself and users need to follow its policies rather than bumbling on. A big one is that a photo of a thing is a COM:DR of the thing itself, so license rules require identification and license-clearance of the original. If you think the sock-monkey is ok, then please do respond at the DR for it (that wasn't mine), and it might be too generic or utilitarian to be protected. DMacks (talk) 05:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- @DMacks: Thank you for the response. I'll ask you any questions if they pop up in my mind. Right now I am just thinking about staying away from uploading any images that aren't of people or nature. And perhaps of buildings, but I'll be aiming to familiarize myself with the policy about that pretty well before uploading. On that topic, I want to see if I'm reading the policy on FOP in the U.S. correctly. I want to upload an image of Blount Center, which was opened in 2022 (and construction of it began in 2020).
- I'm confused because according to that policy, the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act applies to buildings post-1990. However, the related template states "architectural copyright in the United States does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work." So that makes me think that it would be okay(?) to upload an image of Blount Hall. If you'd be able to help me discern if it would indeed be okay (or not) to upload such an image, that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you also for assuming good faith on my end.
- As for the sock monkey image, I think I'll just let that nom run its course and have that image deleted. Hopefully in the future I can make one of my own and take a picture of it and upload that (although I guess I'll have to check if that's okay as well haha).
- Best wishes, Soulbust (talk) 06:11, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- @DMacks: would like a response. I also want to upload images of buildings such as this one. I am unsure if FOP applies since it is a building in the U.S. Soulbust (talk) 05:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- Please note, the messages you have left me occurred in:
 |
File:Mia Khalifa in 2019.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.
The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)
|
User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : D&Dr.
I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 03:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
|
|
File:Mia Khalifa in 2019.png 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. |
|
Gridiron football punters has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! |