User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2018/February

Active discussions

Yellowhead Highway

Hello, Marchjuly! I was too slow to comment at the VP or the DR, but I think the head-&-trees graphic belongs to the TransCanada Yellowhead Highway Association; at least two different drawings of it appear on their website, incorporated into various logos and sign graphics. Although the organization dates to 1947, I doubt the logo is earlier than the ’60s; while the copyrights might have lapsed in Canada, that wouldn’t have been before the URAA date for the USA. I don’t know whether the four provincial highway departments use it under licence or share in the ownership. Anyway, I might try and contact the association for more information. Meantime, I thought you might enjoy this ‘news‘ item (and note the image credit).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:45, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Odysseus1479. Thank you for the message. I have no problem with the close if that's how Commons and Wikipedia wants to treat all files using the same imagery. It only becomes a problem if Commons and Wikipedia feel that different files using essentially the same Yellowshield imagery need to be licensed differently. The administrator who closed the DR is Yann, so you can, if you wish, point out what you've found and ask how to proceed if you believe further discussion is needed. This is something which can be done on English Wikipedia per en:WP:CLOSECHALLENGE, but I'm not if such a thing is possible on Commons. Just for reference, Fastily (an English Wikipedia admin) is also not sure whether the ticket should be applied.
It's also possible that OTRS ticket referred to in Commons:Deletion requests/File:RedCoatTrail.png could be extended to cover files such as en:File:Red Coat Trail highway shield.png since it's essentially the same logo as well.
Anyway, the same upoader has upload quite a number of road sign files as "own work" which also might require review. The uploader seems to be under the assumption that all these signs are in the public domain (which may be true), but is unable to clarify why they feel this is the case. They also might not fully understand COM:DW and COM:CB#Road signs in that simply creating your "own version" of such a sign does not automatically mean the original copyright no longer needs to be considered. I'm involved in similar discussions at English Wikipedia's FFD regarding Canadian road signs with this person; they make lots of claims, but so far have not really clarified how these claims are supported by relevant policies or guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
I’m not in any position to dispute the close, without more definite information, and the OTRS ticket (whether or not it’s entirely adequate or applicable) serves as something of a talisman to ward off COM:PRP. Procedures here aren’t quite as elaborate as on enWP, and I don’t know of a venue specifically for appealing closures; where the result is Delete I believe the next stop would be COM:UNDEL, but for a Keep it’s just another DR. That would be likely be regarded as disruptive without offering new evidence. As for dubious own-work claims on DWs, there’s a veritable plague of them here; I put a lot of the blame on the Upload Wizard‘s offering it as the default source. Paved with the best of intentions, no doubt.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 08:19, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
That's fine. Jeff G. seems to be working on getting the OTRS ticket clarified, so perhaps it will all be sorted out eventually. Any clarifiction of that ticket would make things over on English Wikipedia easier to resolve as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
@Odysseus1479: Well things have taken an unexpected turn in that ‎the uploader has been blocked. So, if you do find out anything more about the copyright status of the original Yellowhead shield imagery, then perhaps posting it on the uploader's user talk might help clarify things. However, given some of the comments made in Commons:Deletion requests/File:CanucksBySeason.png, the uploader seems to be mistaking what Wikipedia and Commons policy allows for what is typically allowed under fair use and is assuming en:WP:ITSFREE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, edit-warring with a sysop to get ‘the last word‘ in a closed discussion can only end one way, never mind the preceding shenanigans. Should I find out more I think the best place to post it would be the file’s Talk page (or perhaps Category talk:Yellowhead Highway), pinging involved parties.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 03:40, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
You're right that the file's talk page would be a much better place: more centralized and easier for others to participate. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

TTTE&StarWarsFan2018's message

I did not upload that image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TTTE&StarWarsFan2018 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

What image are you referring to? Also, please try and learn how to sign your posts. The easist way to do so is to add four tildes (~~~~) to the very end of your post before clicking the "Publish changes" button. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

What's wrong with the SAPP LOGO.jpg?

May I know the reason that SAPP LOGO.jpg send to be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kititto (talk • contribs) 06:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

The file was uploaded under a "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International" and the copyright holder/source is listed as "Sabah Progressive Party", but there is no information provided (e.g., a link to a website, etc.) which shows that the file has been released under a free license. While it's true that the file can be seen being used on the party's official website, there's nothing (at least I couldn't find anything) which clearly says that the content of the website has been released under "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International". Commons does not accept fair use images per COM:FAIR which means an explicit declaration of consent from the original copyright holder needs to be emailed to Wikimedia OTRS for verification purposes. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:27, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Marchjuly/Archives/2018/February".