Open main menu

This is the User talk:Oceanflynn for Wikimedia. My main [User talk page is here at Wikipedia. And my main User page is here at Wikipedia. I keep track manually of my global contributions so I can update them more easily here. It is not as accurate as the Contributions link on my Wikipedia editor page. The Contributions link at the top of this page show limited contributions.Oceanflynn (talk) 18:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

* See also User:Oceanflynn page


File tagging File:Orunamamu.jpgEdit

беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | lietuvių | македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | Türkçe | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−
 
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Orunamamu.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, and Commons:Permission if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own.

Unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Dman41689 (talk) 05:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

DoneOceanflynn (talk) 19:29, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


Notification about possible deletionEdit

 
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 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 (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | 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)‎ | +/−

Kelly (talk) 08:04, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

File:PG&E-compressor-stations-overview.jpgEdit

 
File:PG&E-compressor-stations-overview.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 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 (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | 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)‎ | +/−

ViperSnake151 (talk) 18:38, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Wrong licence and categories on File:NASA Atmospheric river AsiaNA2017 10 26.jpgEdit

  1. This image is from NASA and the licence should be {{PD-USGov-NASA}}
  2. The categories on this image should ONLY be :

All the others are unrelated and/or too vague.

Please change them.

Pierre cb (talk) 14:11, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you @Pierre cb: for bringing this to my attention. Administrators notified me that it has been done.Oceanflynn (talk) 02:35, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
My pleasure. Pierre cb (talk) 12:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Dale Hodges Park, Calgary, Alberta stormwater panelEdit

Hi @Pierre cb: I have just uploaded a photograph I took of a pedagogical panel in a newly-opened urban public park for an article I just created. The article is Dale Hodges Park and the image is here: File:Dale Hodges Park, Calgary, Alberta stormwater panel.jpg I am assuming that because this panel is in a public park that there is no copyright limitations. Am I correct? Thank you.Oceanflynn (talk) 21:49, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

I do not know in this case but {{Fair use}} is not accepted in Commons. Better ask Commons:Village pump. Pierre cb (talk) 22:07, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks @Pierre cb: I will check with them.Oceanflynn (talk) 22:18, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

GLAM permissionsEdit

Hi @Pierre cb:RodhullandemuJmabel I may be collaborating with a local university as a GLAM Wikipedian. What is the preferred way for a GLAM institution to submit images? I understand that if the institution chooses to participate, they set up a user account. I am guessing that account would then upload images/files as any Wikimedia editor would, but I am not sure how relevant "Uploader" fields regarding image/file ownership would be completed.

I found this Commons discussion helpful and I pulled together the most salient points from your comments.

I would like to have a better understanding of the most recent and most efficient steps to manage images/files copyright issues when working with others. I am assuming that the institution, not the person I am working with, would hold the copyright of potential images/files. How do they use their official site, that is clearly under their control, to grant the CC BY 4.0 license? Ideally they would publish their works under CC BY 4.0 license at their own website first and/or add a CC BY 4.0 license field in the EXIF part of a jpg file. Are there any other options?

I understand from the Village Pump discussion that third party uploads "are usually troublesome" and getting OTRS approvals can be a slow process because of backlogs. In my situation, there may be occasions when the third party option upload will be necessary. How do we make it more seamless to avoid unnecessary work for the OTRS, ensure there are no legal issues, and encourage the archives to continue sharing their content.

I wasn't sure where to post this.

Thank you in advance for your suggestion on this.Oceanflynn (talk) 19:41, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Any account should be associated with an individual. It can mention the institution in the name, and certainly should mention the institution on the user page, but the account is for a person, not an institution. E.g. an account name like some-person (name-of-GLAM) is good.
  • Does the institution already have its content online somewhere? In a database offline, but with metadata? Answers to those would help me (or others) tell you how best to proceed.
    • Insofar as the institution owns the relevant rights, the institution can initiate a single OTRS process to indicate what accounts are acting on their behalf. That is often simpler than image-by-image OTRS process. They can indicate you as one of these trusted uploaders, if they wish.
  • You write, "I am assuming that the institution, not the person I am working with, would hold the copyright of potential images/files." I wouldn't assume that the institution holds copyright on archival materials. Physical possession is a completely separate matter from having intellectual property rights. For example, a museum that owns a Picasso is unlikely to own the copyright of the Picasso. Libraries rarely own copyright on any significant portion of their holdings. Conversely, older works are liable to be in the public domain. Again, specifics of the nature of the GLAM would help.
  • User:Fæ probably has more experience with this sort of thing than anyone else. Mention here should notify him of this discussion, but I believe he is on vacation at the moment. - Jmabel ! talk 22:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Thanks PJMABEL (PJmabel) for responding so quickly. Thank you also for your very useful guidance and questions. I will know more after my first interview with the University's archivist next week. I wanted to do some homework first to understand some of the current issues and policies at Wikimedia and this institution. I am sure that it will take a while to get anything actionable set up so User:Fæ might be back from vacation by then.Oceanflynn (talk) 16:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Oceanflynn".