Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cjmodica

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.

Files uploaded by Cjmodica (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The uploader originally uploaded "Tommy Byars.jpg". It was deleted bacause them ditd not provide a permision by VRT. According to them own words them tried to upload that file again, but was not successful, as the file was identical to the deleted file. Then them continued to upload this four files and tagged the files as own work, even though that is highly unlikely (missing EXIF, small resolution, foto from 1912) The DR can be closed once the uploader provides a permission by VRT and corrects the description (i.e not own work).

C.Suthorn (talk) 07:52, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@C.Suthorn, fwiw, the last of these has ticket permission. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Das hatte ich tatsächlich in dem Moment, als ich den DR machte, vergessen. Aber: Dieses Ticket müsste eigentlich für ein weiteres oder sogar alle 5 Uploads gelten - und wenn nicht ist es womöglich auch für das eine Bild fehlerhaft. Ich habe keinen VRT-Zugruff und will auch keinen. Ich gebe aber davon aus, dass dieser DR entweder zu VRT permissions für alle Uploads führt oder zur Löschung der meisten. C.Suthorn (talk) 09:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your language. How can I translate your statement to English? CharlemagneJane (talk) 04:09, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How do I provide the permission to use the pictures? When I try to upload the picture, it denies it. I have the permission in writing but don't know where to send it. Cjmodica (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously you did sent a permission for one of the 5 files to VRT successfully. But you need to do the same for the other 4. You cannot reupload the deleted one, but it will be undeleted once VRT clears it C.Suthorn (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep File:Byars Harley Davidson Dealership.jpg and File:1952 Tommy Byars.jpg. According to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States, images from before 1927 can be used. And the last one already has permission received by VRT. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I am waiting on Wikimedia to approve the other picture of Tommy Byars at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Daytona_Monument_Wall. I have already sent the signed permission form to Wikimedia and they have been notified by the owner of the picture and have received the form for Ticket#: 2022101610000731. Just waiting for their response! I am trying very hard to learn the proper procedures here, but it is a grueling process. After numerous emails to Wikimedia, I finally found the form on my own. IT would have been simpler if someone would have just sent the form to me rather than referring me to a website where I had to find it on my own. Cjmodica (talk) 23:51, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: I have struck out part of my !vote because the VRT ticket deals with only one image, File:Tommy Byars -63.jpg, and none of the others. I have declined permission for that due to information in Commons:Monuments and copyright and meta:Wikilegal/Copyright of Images of Memorials in the US#Freedom of Panorama as it Relates to Memorials and Monuments. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • VRTS Ticket:2022101710000194 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 03:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    For three files there is now a VRT permission. But not yet for Byars Harley Davidson Dealership. And there is the file "Tommy Byars.jpg" that can be undeleted, if a VRT permission is sent. C.Suthorn (talk) 05:42, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @C.Suthorn: The VRT ticket linked above deals with only one file, and I have declined permission for it. See the comment under my !vote above. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What is the VRT permission? Both pictures have been submitted with permission using the form from your website. Both individuals sent the permission form from each of their ip addresses for Wikimedia to verify. They also sent me a copy and I forwarded it to Wikimedia. Why is Wikimedia asking more questions as to how they became the sole owners of the pictures? Is it illegal for a person to take a picture of a public monument in a public domain? Both pictures were taken by each individual. One lives in Florida near the monument and the other lives in Texas. I have sent permissions in two different ways, the first via email with a statement and the second via email from the individuals using the form for giving permission. Still not heard anything! Why is it so hard for those two pictures to be approved? Both pictures are supporting references for the article. Cjmodica (talk) 15:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not a VRT agent. I cannot see the tickets. Ask the VRT agent who handles the case. Looks like it is Krd (as Krdbot added the ticket info here). C.Suthorn (talk) 15:47, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. How do I find him/her? Don't know how to get to his/her area! Cjmodica (talk) 16:01, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @C.Suthorn: @Cjmodica: I am a VRT agent, and I just responded to that ticket. The permission email was sent by someone asserting ownership of the photographs but has not positively identified herself as the photographer. One picture also falls under Commons:Monuments and copyright. As I see it, we actually have no valid permission yet. The monument picture we might be able to reduce in resolution and use as a non-free fair-use image, but that cannot be on Wikimedia Commons. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I sent FOP for the Monuments and Copyright because it was a digital picture of a public monument in a public place taken by a private individual that volunteered to go and take the picture for me. The permissions dept has received her form with permission to publish the picture that she took of the name Tommy Byars #63 on the monument and she received their acknowledgement via email that they received her permission and issued Ticket#2022101710000194. CharlemagneJane (talk) 04:05, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Byars Harley Davidson Dealership was taken in the late 20s prior to the 30s. The picture is over 94 years old. There is no copyright on it; however, the owner of the picture has given permission to use it and it has already been approved. I have already received an email confirming this. Why is it even part of this discussion?Cjmodica (talk) 16:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's the date of first publication and not the date of creation that typically matters more when it comes to the copyright assessment of a photo. Under US copyright law, content created by a known author first published prior to January 1, 1927, is considered to be with in the public domain per COM:HIRTLE. So, if you know who took the photo and can show it was first published prior to January 1, 1927, then it is public domain. Otherwise, a photo taken by an anonymous author with an unclear publication date is still considered protected by copyright for 120 years after creation. You should also understand that owning a physical copy of a photo doesn't automatically make someone the copyright holder of the photo, and it's only the copyright holder of a photo that can give their COM:CONSENT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The Ray Byars Harley Davidson shop picture (File:Byars Harley Davidson Dealership.jpg) was taken by Ray Byars in the late 20s. He died in 1952 and his son, Tommy Byars, was his legal heir and became the rightful owner of the picture. Tommy Byars died in 2017 and his wife, Mrs. Byars, was his legal heir and the rightful owner and copyright holder of the picture. Mrs. Byars, the legal owner and legal copyright holder, gave me permission to publish the picture. The permissions dept has already confirmed and acknowledged this and they sent me an email telling that I was correct. CharlemagneJane (talk) 03:15, 19 October 2022 (UTC)CharlemagneJane (talk) 03:15, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • What else do I need to do to get these pictures approved?
    Byars’ Name Carved on Wall
    File:Tommy Byars -63.jpg
    Byars and Friends in Front of the Monument Wall
    File:Daytona Monument Wall.jpg
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjmodica (talk • contribs) 14:36, October 17, 2022 (UTC)
    You created file:Tommy Byars.jpg uploaded 15 sept 2022 16:17 curid 123016129 digest f36ad6b0b3427dae501909f0762a4b366f73886c and it was deleted. Do you not want to have it undeleted?
    You still claim that the 4 files are your own work and give wrong dates for them. Please fix it.
    C.Suthorn (talk) 07:15, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    How do I fix it? I claimed that it belongs to me, not that I took the pictures. I have put in writing numerous time to Mr. Alfred Neumann and I also found the tag for FOP. The people that took the pictures have notified the permissions department and they have received a comfirmation. What else can I do. I know I did not do it correctly and never claimed that I took the pictures. I may not have used the correct form but have asked for help on numerous occassions to no avail. Wikimedia has the permission from the original photographers and they have not gotten back in touch with the people that took the pictures. CharlemagneJane (talk) 22:24, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I am the one who uploaded the pictures. I NEVER claimed that I took the pictures. I have always been honest as to who took the pictures. I had permission in writing from both parties who took the original pictures and I submitted the permission in writing to the permissions department. They in turn asked me to ask the people who took the pictures to send the form directly to them, WHICH THEY DID. The permissions department sent back to the original people who took the pictures comformation ticketS and the ticket numbers were forwarded to me by both parties. I don't know what else to do. Would you check the permissions department and ask them to check their email because the forms were sent to them by the original people who took the pictures and THE PERMISSION DEPARTMENT confirmed it? I have it in writing. CharlemagneJane (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cjmodica: Even though you sound pretty frustrated, you still need to be patient since sometimes VRT verification takes time. If emails were sent into to VRT, a VRT member will eventually look at them and figure out what if anything still needs to be done. If the emails are OK, the VRT member will add the template {{Permission ticket}} to the files' pages and everything will be OK. If there's a problem with the email, the VRT member template {{Permission received}} and explain what the problem is to the person who sent in the email by email. VRT members aren't permitted to discuss the specifics of emails they receive with anyone other than the people who send them in and other VRT members. They are also not permitted to discuss such details on any public pages. You can ask general questions at COM:VRTN, but you will only get general answers in return. Even if, by chance, one of these files ends up deleted before it can be VRT verified, it can be restored once the verification process has been completed. All Commons editors are volunteers and even VRT members get busy with other things. So, sometimes it just takes time for the process to run its course. Finally, please try to avoid using all caps in your posts as much as possible because such a thing is often seen a "shouting" at someone online and doing it too much is going to lead to others tuning you out and not wanting to help sort this out. If you yell at your TV, you probably got zero response. Think of the Commons as being similar to your TV in that respect: if you start yelling too much, people are just going to move on to something else and leave you to sort things out on your own. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marchjuly: I don't see a ticket for anything except File:Tommy Byars -63.jpg, and I have declined permission for that due to Commons:Monuments and copyright and meta:Wikilegal/Copyright of Images of Memorials in the US#Freedom of Panorama as it Relates to Memorials and Monuments. We may be able to use it on Wikipedia as non-free fair-use, or we could even use it here if the memorial was built before 1927 or even 1977. The other images are still in question. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Section break

[edit]

Here is my assessment of these images.

That's my view on these.

The file information on all of these pages need to be fixed. It is clearly not the uploader's "own work". ~Anachronist (talk) 00:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re Daytona Monument Wall: Built in 2002, so not before 1977.
The picture of the Harley Davidson dealership would have have been published before 1927 to be PD, creation before 1927 is unfortunately not enough. Felix QW (talk) 07:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Some minutes ago a bot added the VRT ticket of 1952 Tommy Byars.jpg to SDC. I looked through @Cjmodica's contributions and came to the conclusion that it is more or less a single purpose account to create the Tommy Byars article at en.wp. This article is now published and it seems unlikely that Cjmodica will return to fix the false descriptions in the files uploaded by them. In the contrary them added themselves as author to SDC. The question is now: Will the article in en.wp stay with the wrongly attributed files? Will someone else fix the file descriptions or should the files be deleted? I do not think that files should be used in an article at en.wp, when for example a foto from 1952 is described as being made in september 2022 by the uploader. C.Suthorn (talk) 09:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, 2 photos have VRT-permission, 1 is already deleted. I decided to delete file:Byars Harley Davidson Dealership.jpg. Considering, that the photo has multiple posters with "1928", the it cannot be taken earlier than 1928, which is likely year of creation. Shop owner Ray Byars (died in 1952) is likely either photographer or copyright owner. Considering nature of the photo (self-promotion), the photo was likely published on the same year of 1928. Considering nature of the photo (advertising), the photo was likely published either with no copyright notice or the copyright was not renewed, but this needs evidence. I mark the photo for undeletion in 2024 (95+1 years from creation/publication). I'll delete almost-copy file:Ray Byars Harley Davidson Shop.jpg due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Cjmodica&oldid=718437119"