Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cartell Referèndum 1 Octubre.jpg
According to this
Generalitat de Catalunya permet la reutilització dels continguts i de les dades sempre que se citi la font i la data d'actualització, que no es desnaturalitzi la informació i que no es contradigui amb una llicència específica
no es desnaturalitzi la informació" = do not "alter"? information = not a free license. Extra-requirements wrt "data d'actualització" (modification date) are probably an issue, too.
Strakhov (talk) 13:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Source is not www.ref1oct.eu. Original source is www.referendum.cat Updated license properly. Please remove Deletion request. Nico 1984 (talk) 16:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Comment there is no difference between both pages wrt licensing, sorry. Strakhov (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
License has been updated to "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International". Could you remove deletion nomination?Nico 1984 (talk) 08:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment No, I won't. Where has the license been updated to "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International"? In your imagination? Could you stop ...filibustering this deletion request and accepting facts? Linking a non-functional webpage does not help your cause. That one said exactly the same. Strakhov (talk) 09:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete The Generalitat does not allow derivatives (so this cannot be published here as the possibility of making derivative works is a must in Commons) and explicitly claims against the addition of other specific licenses as was made here. Qoan (dis-me!) 10:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep I have changed license for {{Attribution-gencat}}. "no es desnaturalitzi la informació" means: Not distort the meaning of the information. (see moral rights).--KRLS (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)- Comment Updated source and author fields 81.19.101.146 09:16, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Generalitat says:
- "citar la fuente, no alteración ni desnaturalización de la información"
- do not alter nor distort
- I think this whole "Generalitat-freelicense-template" issue is kind of wishful thinking. IMO "do not alter information" does not pass as "moral rights", sorry (it's nearer to "do not make derivative works"). Generalitat only explicitly allows "reutilización de los contenidos" not their "modification". Strakhov (talk) 09:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Please, don't change the actual source of the image. Although it might seem to be obvious, a proper source for license verification is needed.
- On the other hand, the actual wording of the notice in the Generalitat web pages seem to be right. Although the supporting article in the Spanish law is definitely not compatible with Commons (see here: Que el contenido de la información, incluyendo sus metadatos, no sea alterado / Que el contingut de la informació no sigui alterat), the Generalitat seem to have dropped such item and left only the following one ( Que no se desnaturalice el sentido de la información / Que no es desnaturalitzi el sentit de la informació). This one is usually thought to mean what @KRLS: has mentioned: moral rights. Thus, IMHO, Keep --Discasto talk 15:25, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Full legal notice reads explicitly "the Administration permits [...] the transformation of the work in order to make derived works". To do "not distort the meaning of the information" is a notice about moral rights. --V.Riullop (talk) 10:04, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Per Vriullop. "Distort" has to do with moral rights.--Leptictidium (talk) 16:09, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Historically important! I agree with Discasto's take on this. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 22:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: per V.Riullop. Ruthven (msg) 13:50, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
