Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from SIRIS

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.

Add {{delete|reason=Fill in reason for deletion here!|subpage=Photos from SIRIS|year=2024|month=December|day=18}} to the description page of each file.
Notify the uploader(s) with {{subst:idw||Photos from SIRIS|plural}} ~~~~
Add {{Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from SIRIS}} at the end of today's log.

Photos from SIRIS

Photos from SIRIS catalog created during SOS! program transfered via Wikipedia Saves Public Art flick photostream. The license and authorship information are bogus. Don't really see a reason why these pictures are free. See also w:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia Saves Public Art. --Trycatch (talk) 02:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Smithsonian Copyright notice. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 07:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep None of the images above were taken from Smithsonian Images, so how can that be relevant to the SIRIS images? (And yes, some are NOT from 1923 or before, such as "Flying" which I believe should be up for deletion?, but most are!) SIRIS is also listed as a resource for PAINTINGS (no resource listed for sculptures) via Wiki Commons "Free Media Resources" As you can see from the link posted above, our project has not only been requested to Keep but is also being currently being revamped into Wikiproject:PublicArt, the proposal is currently. If you read the deletion attempts for WSPA, you will see that many of our uses of the SIRIS SOS! images are deemed agreeable or logical i.e.: "SOS! is much different than the Art Inventory projects that are hosted on SIRIS (not only in scope but in fact that all of the artworks in the SOS! database are outside). Referencing that site isn't the definitive statement on the copyright of the SOS! images. The SOS! project was funded for three years: 92-94 (way, way before wikis, and when we all rode the interwebs on stage coaches). Without funding, SOS! is basically dead now. Finding all of those volunteers who took those photos and asking for copyright permission would be a Herculean task, but my guess is that somewhere, on the forms that the volunteers submitted, each person signed a copyright release that gave control of their images to the S.I. I hope that you can continue to go down this road as far as it will take you. Having your insight & experience may prove to be helpful. And, finding out the true nature of the copyright of those 32,000 entries that are stored in the SIRIS database would be extremely beneficial to all. Here's hoping you find some good information!" Missvain (talk) 15:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is copyright notice on every SIRIS page, and it's very clear on the commercial use of their content: "Commercial publication or exploitation of Smithsonian files is specifically prohibited." Moreover, I still don't see a single reason why these pictures are free -- of course, absence of a specific copyright notice doesn't make the content free, copyright is automatic and you don't need to follow any formalities to acquire copyright protection. Trycatch (talk) 23:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reached the same conclusion as Trycatch, reading the same copyright notice, but he hit the SAVE button before me. And both of us are assuming, with Missvain, that all the photographers executed copyright transfers in favor of the Smithsonian -- if they didn't, as she says, it would be Herculean -- probably easier to go out and rephotograph them all. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. I also see this on the same copyright statement page: "In keeping with the spirit of the Internet, it is the policy of the SI and SIRIS to permit casual, non-commercial redistribution of this information; that is, redistribution of information where no commercialism is involved. This means that an Internet user may download a file and share it with others for no personal or commercial gain." I'm not saying I'm in the right to have uploaded these images, but, at times things are conflicting and confusing to users who aren't mega geniuses who get all the lingo (I'm starting to realize I'm not the only one out there on Commons :) ) - especially when coming from sources like this. But, experiences like this are teaching me a lot, and I'm grateful for that (as long as fellow users stay friendly!). Missvain (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We all try to work together and each contributes. We would not have realized that we were citing the wrong page for the copyright if you had not pointed out the difference. The fact that Commons requires that an image be free to use commercially is one of the most common mistakes made here -- after all, Wikipedia is not commercial. But, Commons is a repository for the world -- as an example, all of the off-Wiki use of my images has been commercial.

BTW, if you have changed your mind about keep --- your "Gotcha" suggests that you have --- then it is usual to strike-through your vote above, like this

which displays like this

~~Keep~~

Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 20:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from SIRIS

Photos from SIRIS

Navigation menu

Search