Commons:Deletion requests/File:ענת ברנע לסקר.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope. Wikimedia Common is not a personal photo album. Wikicology (talk) 11:33, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Wikicology, May you please explain? The photo was uploaded for an article in Hebrew Wiki. Ravit (talk) 18:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ravit, may I respectfully ask if you took the image yourself? The image looks like a selfie taken by the subject herself. Wikicology (talk) 21:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Wikicology, She's not someone I know, and I didn't upload this photo (I just follow the article). I'm just curious, is there a policy in Wikicommons against selfies in articles? Thank you, Ravit (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ravit, of course there is no policy against selfies but only the person who took the photo can claim ownership of the work. Neither the uploader nor the owner of the equipment is the copyright holder of the work. The fact that this image has been used on he:wiki is enough to keep the photo but looking at the image in question, it looks like the woman took the photo herself which raise concerns about copyright. Thus, I am struggling to see how the uploader is the copyright holder of the work. Are you familiar with Monkey selfie controversy? Wikicology (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Of course
... Thanx for the explanation, now I understand that it's just a common problem of copyrights (and not what was written in the template as the reason for deletation).Well, the name of the uploader is the same name of the doctor in the article - ענת ברנע לסקר (Anat Barnea Lasker). So it seems like she has the copyright, in my understanding (she is the human who took the selfie...). Am I right? Thank you. Ravit (talk) 20:24, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ravit, I knew the woman took the photo herself. The logic is, if someone take a photo of herself for example and User:XYZ upload it as "own work". This simply suggest that User:XYZ is the one in the photo. If User:XYZ describe the upload as "Janet Jones" for instance, this is likely to be User:XYZ real name. If User:XYZ create an article for "Janet Jones" on Wikipedia, it means they have created an article about themselves in violation of WP:COI. In this case, the article should be tagged appropriately and the editor should refrain from editing that article. I don't know if you could look into that at he:Wiki. That being said, per COM:SCOPE, images uploaded to Wikimedia Common must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Self-portrait photograph rarely meet this threshold. Hence, my rationale for deletion. Now that I'm aware that the photo has been used on he:wiki, I am willing to close this debate per COM:SCOPE#Excluded educational content. I will close it tomorrow, you can help with the closure if you wish. I over stress myself today. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 22:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- The file is in scope but we need permission from the photographer. In this case depicted peerson.
- Ravit, I knew the woman took the photo herself. The logic is, if someone take a photo of herself for example and User:XYZ upload it as "own work". This simply suggest that User:XYZ is the one in the photo. If User:XYZ describe the upload as "Janet Jones" for instance, this is likely to be User:XYZ real name. If User:XYZ create an article for "Janet Jones" on Wikipedia, it means they have created an article about themselves in violation of WP:COI. In this case, the article should be tagged appropriately and the editor should refrain from editing that article. I don't know if you could look into that at he:Wiki. That being said, per COM:SCOPE, images uploaded to Wikimedia Common must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Self-portrait photograph rarely meet this threshold. Hence, my rationale for deletion. Now that I'm aware that the photo has been used on he:wiki, I am willing to close this debate per COM:SCOPE#Excluded educational content. I will close it tomorrow, you can help with the closure if you wish. I over stress myself today. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 22:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Of course
- Ravit, of course there is no policy against selfies but only the person who took the photo can claim ownership of the work. Neither the uploader nor the owner of the equipment is the copyright holder of the work. The fact that this image has been used on he:wiki is enough to keep the photo but looking at the image in question, it looks like the woman took the photo herself which raise concerns about copyright. Thus, I am struggling to see how the uploader is the copyright holder of the work. Are you familiar with Monkey selfie controversy? Wikicology (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Wikicology, She's not someone I know, and I didn't upload this photo (I just follow the article). I'm just curious, is there a policy in Wikicommons against selfies in articles? Thank you, Ravit (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ravit, may I respectfully ask if you took the image yourself? The image looks like a selfie taken by the subject herself. Wikicology (talk) 21:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
עברית: Ravit רווית, בכל מקרה שמעלים תצלום צריך אישור של הצלם. רק במקרה שאת צילמת בעצמך האישור לא נדרש (גם תמונות ישנות שהזכויות פגו). בכל אופן תדאגי לשלוח אישור למייל permissions-he@wikimedia.org על פי ההנחיות בוויקיפדיה:OTRS.
- -- Geagea (talk) 22:35, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- עברית: Geagea, תודה לך. כנראה שאני לא מבינה, לא באנגלית הקלוקלת שלי וגם לא בעברית, מה הבעיה עם זכויות היוצרים כאן. הרי היא עצמה נרשמה לוויקישיתוף והעלתה תמונה שהיא צילמה בעצמה, ושחררה אותה ברישיון חופשי, אז איזה עוד אישור צריך?... אנסה לפנות אליה באימייל בעיקר כדי להציע לה לשלוח תמונה קצת יותר ייצוגית מתמונת סלפי, ואז כמובן שיש צורך בשליחת אימייל עם האישור המקובל לפי ההנחיות וכו', כי היא צריכה להצהיר שהזכויות הן שלה ולא של הצלם שצילם אותה; אבל במקרה של הסלפי היא עצמה הצלם... אשמח להסבר, ותודה על הסבלנות :)Ravit (talk) 18:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ravit, I don't think she needs to send permission to COM:OTRS again. Now, I see that the file title bears the name of the author and the photo has been described as "self-photographed" by Geagea. I think this addressed concern about copyright. For a self-portrait, where the subject of the photograph is also the photographer and/or uploader, consent is assumed, provided they are capable of giving appropriate consent. Now that we all agree that the image is in scope, this debate can be closed. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:42, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. The photographer is the uploader. My mistake. -- Geagea (talk) 01:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ravit, I don't think she needs to send permission to COM:OTRS again. Now, I see that the file title bears the name of the author and the photo has been described as "self-photographed" by Geagea. I think this addressed concern about copyright. For a self-portrait, where the subject of the photograph is also the photographer and/or uploader, consent is assumed, provided they are capable of giving appropriate consent. Now that we all agree that the image is in scope, this debate can be closed. Warm regards. Wikicology (talk) 00:42, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- -- Geagea (talk) 22:35, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per above. --INeverCry 02:00, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
