Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bryanskaya Gorozhanka by Bella Gorodetskaya.jpeg
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.
(changing from {{Copyvio}}) What is happening here? This file is distributed under Free Art Licence 1.3. This file has been reviewed by a reviewer. How on Earth is this image anything even remotely something that "does not have sufficient information on its copyright status"? ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 17:02, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Magog the Ogre and Jcb: Please comment on this. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 17:03, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- The current license template is not recognized by the system as a license. (As far as I can see this is the only file using this FAL 1.3 template). So there are basically two options if we want to keep this file:
- Getting the FAL 1.3 license accepted by the system (the content of the license is probably fine, so that just somebody who is familiar with the coding will have to make this template recognized.)
- Finding another suitable license that is recognized by the system.
- Jcb (talk) 21:44, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- What "system"? Commons is here to collect educationally useful content available under a free licence. Ok, there was a disaster when a community has decided to abandon GNU FDL, but there was no such concensus against FAL ever. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 04:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Every new license template needs to be registered as an official license before it can be used. (I am unfamiliar with that part of the process). The file is now in the Files with no machine-readable license problem category. Jcb (talk) 09:48, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm not only unfamiliar, but didn't even know that there was some process to accept the files apart from OTRS/licence review. I guess... thank you for teaching me something new. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 06:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Gone Postal: see COM:MRD#Machine readable data set by license templates. You will notice several hidden spans on Template:FAL which contain the data. Your template should do the same. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 14:44, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm not only unfamiliar, but didn't even know that there was some process to accept the files apart from OTRS/licence review. I guess... thank you for teaching me something new. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 06:21, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Every new license template needs to be registered as an official license before it can be used. (I am unfamiliar with that part of the process). The file is now in the Files with no machine-readable license problem category. Jcb (talk) 09:48, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- What "system"? Commons is here to collect educationally useful content available under a free licence. Ok, there was a disaster when a community has decided to abandon GNU FDL, but there was no such concensus against FAL ever. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 04:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- The current license template is not recognized by the system as a license. (As far as I can see this is the only file using this FAL 1.3 template). So there are basically two options if we want to keep this file:
Deleted: still no readable license. Please feel free to request undeletion as soon as either the license is fixed or another valid license can be applied. --Jcb (talk) 15:49, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
