Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wikimedia---Laura-Klemens1.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.
This file was initially tagged by Didym as no permission (No permission since). This is a valid tag, as the image lacks metadata, but this appears to have been posted by a Wikimedia Germany account, and I'd like to inquire a bit more formally before I delete this for lacking evidence of permission. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Laura Klemens (WMDE) and Sandro Halank (WMDE): Can I get a bit of clarity here on this? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- As already written on User_talk:Laura_Klemens_(WMDE)#File_tagging_File:Wikimedia---Laura-Klemens1.jpg (here a translation): "The photo of Laura was taken by me as a WMDE staff member and was released [add: like all the staff photos taken by Martin Rulsch and me] under the licence given by Laura. It hasn't been a problem so far when colleagues uploaded these pictures and refer to other WMDE staff members as authors." Sandro (WMDE) (talk) 08:43, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
#File_tagging_File:Wikimedia---Laura-Klemens1.jpg){kind=link}
-20230724084300-Red-tailed_hawk-20230720020700){kind=link}
Keep. EXIF is not required and lack of EXIF is not a valid reason for deletion by itself. The author being "Sandro Halank für Wikimedia Deutschland e. V." should be good enough for any of us, as Sandro Halank is a long-time, highly constructive user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- That seems sensible to me. @Didym: Is there a specific reason that gives you significant doubt as to this file's freedom that hasn't been addressed here? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- I've never had any doubt on the file's license, but there are no exemptions regarding permissions for chapter accounts. However, this should be sufficient. --Didym (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- In that case, should I swiftly close this as "keep", seeing as there are no objections remaining? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 22:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- I've never had any doubt on the file's license, but there are no exemptions regarding permissions for chapter accounts. However, this should be sufficient. --Didym (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
- That seems sensible to me. @Didym: Is there a specific reason that gives you significant doubt as to this file's freedom that hasn't been addressed here? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
