Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Warsaw Uprising - Karl Ammunition.jpg

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.

Image:Warsaw_Uprising_-_Karl_Ammunition.jpg

I don't think this image applies to the Licensing. It is unlikely that this was made by a Polish photographer or published for the first time in Poland and simultanously Poland and abroad. There are some images in this category with same problem. Avron 22:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• Note: I accidentally closed this DR. I was being a bit trigger-happy with DelReqHandler.js ;\ Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 05:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  • What does in mean "unlikely that this was (...) published for the first time in Poland"? Read carefuly {{PD-Polish}}:

    ...all photographs by Polish photographers (or published for the first time in Poland or simultaneously in Poland and abroad) published without a clear copyright notice before the law was changed on May 23, 1994 are assumed public domain.

It was published in Poland 1994 (source referred); the experienced uploader knows rules and no reason not to trust him. Julo 06:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no proof at all that this image was published for the first time in Poland.

Additionaly they may be PD in Poland, by not in the rest of world. In Germany there is also a freedom of panorama but this images are not allowed on commons.

Don't take me wrong, I want to have this pictures on commons but at the moment I doubt the license is OK.--Avron 10:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You've been given the proof that the facts are as they are. You have any proof that they go another way. Only unproven doubts... And you think that it is enought and honest to make a rumor? Electron 10:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The uploader has to proof the licensing, not me. --Avron 11:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

So you've been done. If you have unproven doubts it is you who has to prove their are likely... Electron 08:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

You proof that you have no clou about licensing issues. So learn about this or stop arguing here.--Avron 21:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I live in a free country and nobody have rigth to stop me talking and saying my opinion (even it is uncorfortable to him)... So OK. On the other hand. I'll go your way: I have doubts that you have daubts that I have daubts that you have doubts about the fact the licence is rigth or not. There are two opinion: the first is proven the second it is only unproven doubts... In my opinion it is you who should prove it. It is quite hard to prove that you are not a camel. Even you have proofs and the opponet only doubts. Is it clear? Regards :) Electron 06:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

• •  Keep As Julo...Electron 07:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  •  Info I agree with Avron that "it is unlikely that this was made by a Polish photographer", but I assumed that the image was "published for the first time in Poland". There is no way for me to prove that there were no earlier non-Polish printings, and if any are found than I think it would be appropriate to delete the image, but I think you should prove it. There are hundreds of images of German forces (Germans, Ukrainians, Cossacks, Azerbaijanis, etc.) from Warsaw Uprising (see [1] or [2]), but most images on Commons are the few that I can find in book sources. --Jarekt 12:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I know there was a long debate about a similiar case Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Stroop Report but it was clear that the pictures were published in Poland for the first time. In other case Commons:Deletion requests/Image:The Bochnia massacre German-occupied Poland 1939.jpg it was made clear that this image is polish property.

Here this is much more difficult. Some other questionable images like Image:Karl16.jpg don't even show the publication origin. I didn't nominate all of the images, just one, to clarify the status. --Avron 12:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Any {{PD-Polish}} images that do not have proof of publication (or other form of official printing) in Poland should not use that license and likely should not be on Commons. I consider them a separate and different group, which should be discussed separately. --Jarekt 19:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that is enough. PD-Polish can only apply when photo was for the first time published in Poland and not because it was once published in Poland. That is the crucial difference. It can't be this way: someone finds photos in a polish book, uploads it on commons and automaticaly claims it as PD-Polish. --Avron 08:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with your statement above. That is why I am not uploading WWII pictures of Hitler or battle of Stalingrad using {{PD-Polish}}, which I have plenty of in Polish books. I am uploading pictures from Warsaw Uprising and Occupation, since I assumed that people outside of Poland are less interested in those and those pictures were unlikely to be printed for the first time outside of Poland. However if there is any proof of prior printing outside of Poland before the earliest date of publication listed with the image, that would be a good reason for removal. --Jarekt 13:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Finally I've found this picture in German Federal Archives [3] as "Bild 101I-695-0424-08A" --Avron 10:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

• And this is a right way you should go at the beginning. Regards Electron 10:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

As I said before, you don't have a clou about licensing on Commons. Also as I said before, the uploader is responsible for the appropriate licensing, not anyone else. Commons:Licensing is a good place to start on this topic. --Avron 11:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

You are right but you don't right, too. What would you say if I declared that you are not an European citizen because I doubt about it. I know that you are probably German but it is not enougt for me... I think that it is a similar situation and in a such situation it is my way to prove my doubts not you. To sum up: You have doubts and you (in the end of all) move your but... and did what be to done on the beginning. BTW: it is very simptomatic that especially Germans have such a strict copy right law about the pictures that were taken during WWII. It is quite strange and say very much for that who remember what Germans did during this time... OK. But law is a law and it is not my buisness what kind of law is now here in Germany... Regards and I wish you a good day :) Electron 12:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Electron, If you are trying to be helpful in this discussion, I think you should stick to facts and not your opinions about other users. --Jarekt 13:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. I've tried to tell this from the beginning: only facts, please - not undocumented doubts... Regards Electron 06:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Avron, It is interesting that you found this picture in German Federal Archives. A lot of the same WWII pictures you might find it in American, Russian and Polish archives as well. What is significance of your find to this discussion? Does it mean the picture was printed in Germany? --Jarekt 13:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I know, I'm taking the role of devil's advocate, so I'm not liked ;-) As I said I would like to keep the pictures but I also want to assure that one can trust the PD-Polish to the best of our's knowledge. There are some indications not to trust in this case. Usually commons has strict rules so the licensing should be credible.

To your question, what is the significance of this image in the German Federal Archives:

• The author is a certain Mr? Leher of german propaganda troops
• The ownership of the nagative is on the German Federal Archives

This proves not much in this case, but the indication is that a polish book of 1994 is unlikely the first publication of this image. Nothing more, nothing less. It's up to the admins, which have a deeper knowledge of licensing, whether to trust PD-Polish or not in this and similar cases.

But what annoys me a bit is the attempt of establishing a reversal of the burden of proof for the licensing, like me had to proof that the image is not copyrighted. That is not the way Commons work.

--Avron 16:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Your role as "devil's advocate" is appreciated, since it might clarify boundaries of which images are acceptable and which are not under this license. The last thing I want to do is to invest a lot of time researching, organizing and documenting a collection of images and to have them all deleted. I also understand your annoyance with burden of proof, but I can not think of a better alternative. If I upload any PD-Polish image of unknown photographer (and it is very rare to see photographer's names in many Polish books) I usually can not guarantee his nationality or that it was not published before in other country. But, if there is high probability that photographer was Polish or that there would be little interest in the picture subject in other countries, than I use PD-Polish and document books I found the image in. I might document multiple books in search for the oldest one (see for example Image:Gesiowka.jpg). I also understand that if prior publishing is found than the image will no longer meets requirements of PD-Polish. This the process I observed being used with PD-Polish and I can not think of better alternative.

As for this particular image it all boils down to probabilities. I was guessing that it was likely published in Poland first since I assumed that there was much more interest in subject of Warsaw Uprising in Poland than in other countries. However, I can see that late publishing of the book (1994) and physical location of the negatives in Germany are a problem. I will let others judge the likelihoods. --Jarekt 19:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Deleted. Photo taken in August 1944 by a photographer Named Lehrer of the Propagandakompanie der Wehrmacht. German Urheberrecht has clearly not yet expired. Trying to apply PD-Polish is a stretch in such cases. Lupo 14:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)