File talk:Heidi Cruz MontTXFundraiser Feb 27 2016--two3.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

[edit]

NOTE: The following comments by me were taken from the Administrator's noticeboard in Commons (link here) and placed here by MaverickLittle. I have added the response given by Cirt for complete context. Winkelvi (talk) 03:01, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have serious concerns regarding copyright and origination over two photos recently uploaded: [1], [2]. The uploader claims to have taken the photos, however, the metadata for each differs completely from a photo he truly did take, here. Is it not true that if he had taken the photos with a camera, rather than copying them from elsewhere, that the camera metadata would be intact and show up when uploaded to Commons? That seems to be completely missing with the two photos I have concerns about. Winkelvi (talk) 02:07, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with copyright concerns by Winkelvi (talk · contribs). Both the images in question are low resolution less than sixty (60) kilobytes. Tagging both for COM:OTRS permission to resolve this. -- Cirt (talk) 02:26, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Let me be clear that I took the pictures. I attended the fundraiser in The Woodlands, Texas and I took the pictures. Let me also be clear that Winkelvi has been complaining about the other picture that I took of Heidi Cruz in Houston, Texas. He has been attempting to get that picture removed from the Heidi Cruz article on Wikipedia. You can review one of his attempts to get it removed here: Winkelvi's complaint about the long version of Heidi from the Houston rally. You can review the whole debate here: Winkelvi expressing dislike of the Heidi picture from Houston. Also, if he really has legitimate concerns about the pictures, which he should not because both of the pictures were taken by me (I live in The Woodlands) then why did he take one of the picture, edit it, and then put it in the Heidi Cruz article. You can review that edit here: This is where Winkelvi edited the picture he supposedly has concerns with then puts it in the Heidi Cruz article. That action proves that he really does not have a concern. Also, he is going through an ANI right now and the majority of the people reviewing the case think that there should be an interaction ban (IBAN) placed upon him. You can review that ANI against Winkelvi here: Please note that many of the people that oppose the IBAN still state unequivocally that they are not fans of Winkelvi's editing style. I commented on his editing style in support of the IBAN (he completely deserves it for things like he is doing here) and now he is complaining about my pictures to get back at me for telling the truth in the ANI. You can read my comments here: My support of in his ANI for an IBAN. Also, why did not he give me a heads up that he was making this complaint? I tell you why he did not give me notice because this is NOT about the pictures. He did not want me to respond to his half baked concerns and he did not want me to tell you the whole back story to our disagreements and his ANI, which he is losing by the way. I attended Cruz's headquarters opening in Houston and I took those pictures and I attended Heidi's fundraiser in The Woodlands and I took those pictures. This is about an editor who wants to get back at me for telling the truth about his editing style. Once again, if he is really so concerned about the copyright issue then why did he take one of the pictures that he is complaining about, edit it, and then place it back in the Heidi Cruz article? Why? The answer is simple. He is not concerned. He just wants to control the situation and get back at me for telling the truth about him in the ANI.--MaverickLittle (talk) 02:44, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
None of your comments here relate to the concerns I, and another Commons editor, have about the copyright status of the photo. In answer to your question about why I retouched one of the photos in question: I did it and added it to the Cruz article before I looked at the metadata and had the concerns I relayed at the noticeboard. Simple as that. Hopefully, your claim to have taken the photo is true and can be proven here. I hate to see photos deleted because they are copyvios. Winkelvi (talk) 02:58, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You might be right about the other editor, but you really should NOT speak for others, only yourself. The metadata is missing on the pictures from Ukraine also. Why? I scanned the photo into a scanner and the original metadata for the cell phone camera was not there. I also edited the scan with photoshop. It is as simple as that. But I did go to Ukraine and I did adopt my children over there. So the concern is misplaced. And yes, you are probably right, the other Commons editor is probably not concerned at all about the issues I raise about you above, but they are real issues and they clearly part of why we here right now. You are upset that called you out in your ANI and you are upset that I want to place the full picture of Heidi in the Heidi Cruz article, while you want the little one where you took my original and butchered it beyond recognition. Also, everyone that sees your version finds it horrendous and you can't stand that criticism. It is as simple as that. But I walked through the copyright issues as I was asked to by the admin Commons editor and we will move forward. You did not give a notice did you? Of course not. That's how you roll.--MaverickLittle (talk) 03:26, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You really need to get past your feelings and just take what I'm saying on good faith. I only care that there is a possible copyright violation happening, that's it. Same for Cirt, I'm certain. Winkelvi (talk) 03:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Heidi_Cruz_MontTXFundraiser_Feb_27_2016--two3.jpg&oldid=192117230"