Commons:Deletion requests/File:杉原千畝氏の戸籍の出生についての記載.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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.

File:杉原千畝氏の戸籍の出生についての記載.jpg

[edit]

Family register information. Privacy does not exist, but it can not be released freely. Confirm the "戸籍法" in Japan. アルトクール (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • 日本の戸籍法に違反だと主張されていますが、具体的に日本の戸籍法のどの条文に違反だというのですか？戸籍は日本国民についての出生、親子関係、婚姻・離婚、死亡などを「公証」（公に証明）するためものです。戸籍の当事者がそれを公開をするのも正当な権利であり、プライバシー等の問題がなければ何の違法性もありません。 --さかきばらたいら (talk) 00:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete I agree with アルトクール. In Japan, people who can duplicate family register cetificate are limited to the following range. "Principal, spouse, direct ancestor and descendant". A proxy letter is necessary for a person outside this range to duplicate family register certificate. --Rienzi (talk) 16:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image is neither the privacy violation nor the copyright violation. However, the Article 10 of the Family Register Act says only a close relative, an employee of a goverment agency or a worker who has a license such as an attoney with a legitimate purpose can request to get a copy of the family register. This is because the family register contains privacy information and it is one of the identity documents. I wonder if we need OTRS permission, or they should be banned as they may have the risk of misuse. Darklanlan (talk) 02:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is no reason for deletion. As さかきばらたいら says, Gifu shimbun (2016-07-12) reported that Chiune's son requested a copy of the family register and visited the place of his birth. This family register is significant enough for providing an evidence where he was actually born in. It seems open to dispute over neutral point of view, but we won't concern how the image is used in the article, as Dwy says. Darklanlan (talk) 03:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep The claim of illegality is misunderstanding and misunderstanding the law.As Mr. アルトクール said by himself, , there is no copyright or privacy infringement in this case, there is no problem.And in Japan, the Family Register Law is restricted to relatives for those who can request the issuance of a transcript of family register at No. 10, but this article does not prohibit the release of family register.There is no illegality under the Family Register Law and there is no illegality in this case.--さかきばらたいら (talk) 09:43, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment 戸籍法第十条の請求権に関する条文。アップロード者が「アップロードするための目的」で第三者として入手したならば、入手目的が不適当となる。アップロード者は直系・卑系親族あるいは配偶者または、これらの請求が認められている代理人、公務員であることを証明し、アップロードに際して許諾が得られていることを説明しなければいけません。戸籍は例え死亡していても、だれでも自由に入手することはできません。（戸籍法第十条。If the uploader got it as a third party for "uploading purpose", the purpose of acquisition is inappropriate.）--アルトクール (talk) 03:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Comment 杉原千畝の戸籍の出生に関する記載をトリミングしたものであり戸籍そのものではありません。したがって本記載がアップロードされていることをもって第三者に戸籍を交付されるわけもなく戸籍法第10条違反はありません。そもそも戸籍法第10条が示すことは，限定された請求資格の請求者の請求によってのみ戸籍が交付されることです。そして，この戸籍は交付の請求者である杉原千畝の親族が、千畝の出生地を公に証明する目的で交付を請求し取得しており，千畝の親族が戸籍を取り寄せた事実は岐阜新聞および中部日本放送によっても広く報道されています。⇒『千畝氏の出生たどる　戸籍記載の美濃市の寺　四男が訪問』. 岐阜新聞 (2016-7-12).この戸籍は報道されている戸籍と同一であり，交付請求者は明治31年に施行され厳格化された戸籍法により「公証」された、千畝の出生地が「上有知町」であり八百津町役場にその出生届が「受附入籍」された事実について広く知られることを望んで公開について承諾しているのです。本削除請求について特別に戸籍法第10条を理由に違法性があると主張するならば、それを主張する側にその違法性の立証責任が発生するというべきです。戸籍法第10条違反ではなく，使用承諾について疑義があるというのであれば，はじめからそのように指摘をすべきです。--さかきばらたいら (talk) 11:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep戸籍法に基づいて八百津町に発行されており、何の違法性もみられません。 --Minowashinosato (talk) 05:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete As stated here and here, Commons is not a repositiory for public records. Public birth records and family registries are generally out of the project scope. --Dwy (talk) 11:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep This is a record of the details about the famous birth of Sugihara Chiune. This is written written in Mino City. However, until recently there was one that was born in Yaotsu-cho. This is a remarkable content. --126.213.0.100 02:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep This is a historical official fact about the birth of Sugihara Chiune. It should not be deleted. --Highestever (talk) 12:48, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  CommentIn Japan, Yaotsu town tells UNESCO that the town is Chigeo Sugihara's birthplace to register his relics in UNESCO Memory of the World , but in reality his birthplace is proved from the description of this family register that the land is not there but Kozuchi Town. It has become a hot topic in Japan, and it has been reported in television and magazines about this. Birthplace to that described in this family register is just as important as Obama's birth records. --さかきばらたいら (talk) 17:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinging Whym, Yasu and Miya to look into the situation. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 07:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Has historical value, no privacy concerns. If we can keep Obama's birth record, then why not Sugihara's? Yasu (talk) 15:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
>If we can keep Obama's birth record, then why not Sugihara's?
I initially thought it was because whilst there was a notable controversy over Obama's birth place, Sugihara's case was not so notable (for educational purposes, at least) and Commons should not help promote the non-notable minority view.
After some further research, however, the dispute over Sugihara's birthplace appears to have a bit more press coverage than I thought. I also understand that NPOV is not a reason for deletion. I now withdraw my delete vote.--Dwy (talk)

Kept: as above. --Yann (talk) 12:19, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:杉原千畝氏の戸籍の出生についての記載.jpg&oldid=229895053"