User talk:Waltercolor

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Waltercolor!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文（台灣）‎ | 中文（简体）‎ | 中文（繁體）‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−
First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
  • You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
  • To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
  • You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
  • There are several tools to upload files.
  • Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.
Made a mistake?
  • Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
  • Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 14:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A wikiproject for science and academia

[edit]

Hello,

Allow me to introduce myself, I am a volunteer here, like you, that read through the questions and answers given at this year's Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) Board of Trustees elections and saw an interesting answer that you gave, namely that you envisioned Wikimedia wiki's to be able to take on the "The Crisis in Scientific Publishing". I actually have independently developed a wiki-based solution for this but haven't really "verbalised it" online yet, it was when I read your statement regarding this possible expansion of Wikimedia wiki's that I wasn't the only one who saw this solution to the crisis in publishing.

Let me start at the beginning, I can't remember if I had this idea in late 2020 or early 2021, I was planning on writing it and proposing it as a new sister project but due to me adopting a large number of other projects I just kept postponing it. Anyhow, it all started when I saw a YouTube video about "The Crisis in Scientific Publishing" and how there are financial incentives by major scholarly publishing companies that prevent a solution from coming "top-down". I can't remember if I saw the YouTube video on my mobile telephone or at my best-friend's house, well, maybe both, my best-friend has a Ph.D in biology and he's specialised in micro-biology and evolutionary biology. We often discuss scientific theories together and as a hobby I enjoy reading psychological studies, he doesn't trust them for the simple reason that the psychological field has a "Replication crisis" a methodological crisis in which it has been found that many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to replicate or reproduce. My favourite psychological studies are large meta-analyses and neurochemical psychological studies, these studies are a lot more reliable, but my best-friend still dismisses it when I bring up things like the Big 5 (Five) Personalities and various findings, especially when combined with medical sciences. Psychology is really easy, generally speaking it's just "Mathematics + (plus) Data", the larger the dataset and samples are the more trustworthy the conclusions are (depending on methodology of course, as I've read many studies with bad methodologies that came with rubbish conclusions because of it).

So, the thing is, we already have the solutions for these things, "the wiki-infrastructure" is actually well-equipped to handle scientific publishing, scholarly publishing shouldn't be entirely dependent on commercial interests, in fact most research is often government-sponsored and because of the current commercial system researchers often have to pay to have their research behind a paywall, this is not a desirable situation. This proposal is to empower people who don't have the money to go behind paywalls, it's for people that want to do research but don't have an academic subscription but wants the information, it's for everyone that wants to be able to read scholarship.

I have great admiration for the Kazakhstani scientist (and internet pirate) Alexandra Elbakyan and her Sci-Hub shadow library that makes research available for scholars in poor countries, while Wikimedia websites could never do this as no other websites take copyright as serious as Wikimedia websites, I would lie if I would say that I wasn't at least partially inspired by the innovative and progressive works of the Sci-Hub website and how it challenges the current academic publishing establishment. But Wikimedia's solution must be different, it must somehow be attractive. But the end goal of this is exactly what Jimmy Wales said in the quote below:

"Frankly, and let me be blunt, Wikipedia as a readable product is not for us. It's for them. It's for that girl in Africa who can save the lives of hundreds of thousands of people around her, but only if she's empowered with the knowledge to do so." - Jimbo Wales, Foundation-l mailing list (23 October 2005).

I believe that the "Wikiscientifica" website should be significantly different from other Wikimedia websites in a number of ways, namely:

One thing to note is that like other Wikimedia websites published articles there should have talk pages which would then be used by people to critique the works ("critique" in the broad sense including the positive interpretations of the word) and serve as "an internet comment section" like under YouTube video's or Facebook posts where people can generally discuss the content, as this could allow people to point out faults with the study or its methodology or ask for authors to clear up some things. Perhaps talk pages can even be called a "Forum" (Marketplace) to reflect that they are "Marketplaces of ideas".

Certain schools like the University of Ljubljana (Slovene: Univerza v Ljubljani) already require papers published through them to have the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license which would make importing these studies to the Wikimedia Commons and re-posting them on Wikiscientifica easy. The most important thing would be to attract new people rather than just importing old papers, those old papers most certainly have a place there, but if the website is just a bunch of old studies with no new active scholars it is essentially just "an archive of free studies" and not the solution to most of the issues in scholarly publishing we are facing today.

There are a number of ideas that I really want your feedback on. I have a number of concepts ready for this, I would like to hear your general thoughts below, and specific feedback for the individual ideas here.

Also, I think that we can learn a lot from existing websites like Academia.edu and others and try to improve upon them, notably add the things people believe they are missing. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait Marthe Gautier

[edit]

Bonjour Waltercolor et merci pour le portrait de Marthe Gautier ! Est-ce que je peux l'ajouter à la Category:Portraits (Les sans images) ? (comme le portrait de Agathe Rousselle) --Celinea33 (talk) 16:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ! Oui tout à fait bien sûr. J'ai fait ça à l'arrache tout à l'heure et je n'ai pas eu le temps de le rajouter. Waltercolor (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, Mussklprozz (talk) 11:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Drawtober les sans images

[edit]

Bonjour, concernant "les sans images", s.v.p. suivre les indications suivantes concernant les catégories (Drawtober les sans images) :

MHM (talk) 12:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merci ! Je ne comprends pas si ces 3 catégories sont utilisables ou non :
Category:Portraits (Les sans images)
Category:Drawtober les sans images
Category:Drawtober les sans images 2022
Waltercolor (talk) 08:36, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ellinah Wamukoya.jpg

[edit]
File:Ellinah Wamukoya.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

— Rhododendrites talk |  03:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do so. Waltercolor (talk) 10:38, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Belbury (talk) 10:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do so. And also tell me : if the files are supressed on Commons, do I get my own copyright back ? Or are my files under free licence stuck indefinitely nowhere ? I want to be able to publish these portraits on my site or on articles or books and need to know if the deletion by you on commons also frees my works from any precedent licence I had approved when uploading my works. Thanks for a legal answer. Waltercolor (talk) 15:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We can't give legal advice here, and I am not a lawyer, but you have your copyright regardless. When you upload something here, that doesn't in any way restrict what else you can do with it. It just means that other people can use/modify your work, too, as long as they give you credit and release derivative work under a similar license). The reason these are nominated for deletion is because, as derivative works, they also include the copyright of the image the illustrations are based on, and we don't have that person's permission to share them with a free license. For some uses, and depending on the country, you can make a fair use argument for publishing them elsewhere, but you'd probably want to look into that, especially before doing anything that involves making money from them (i.e. if the original photographers/artists notice, they could argue they'd be due a cut of any proceeds). For us, being a deriviative work means someone browsing Commons is not actually "free to use or modify them for any reasons" as is required for all uploads here. They could use the image, and then get sued by the original creators.
Technically, Creative Commons licenses are irrevocable, so if someone did use one of these uploads and if they wind up being deleted, then they would still have the rights to the derivative portion of the image under the CC BY-SA license, but you're not obliged to continue publishing them with a Creative Commons license, and it's highly unlikely anyone would realize they ever were published that way.
Your contributions are appreciated, by the way; it's just the unfortunate reality that we have to err on the side of caution when it comes to this sort of thing. The illustrations we can keep are those that can't be tied directly to any particular existing images (typically involving looking at many images and trying to synthesize them into a new perspective/look/expression). — Rhododendrites talk |  16:32, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, don't make me the whole TOU speech. I had a look to the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:KGerstein.jpg case judgment for about 10 years which is your jurisprudence. Beaucoup de bruit pour rien. You would have typically deleted Andy Warhol's Marylin Monroe serigraphy image for copyvio. Who cares today about the photography from which it derives ? Nobody. That's what art does. Waltercolor (talk) 16:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You would have typically deleted Andy Warhol's Marylin Monroe serigraphy image for copyvio. - True.
Who cares today about the photography from which it derives ? - The people whose photography it derived from. We're not doin this to protect them, though. We have strict rules because we are first and foremost a free media repository. People all over the world use media they find here for a wide range of projects (not just Wikipedia), and we need them to be confident that if they use an image hosted here, they can do so safely. When we host derivatives of copyrighted work, the owners of the copyrighted work could, if they so chose, take legal action against those people who use the derivative content. Maybe not like for some of these, but the rules are set up to avoid such gambles.
I'm not familiar with that Gerstein case, but a [very] quick scan of the discussion shows people don't see it as a clear derivative (or rather, nobody has offered an original image which it's a clear derivative of). Likewise you can argue in the deletion discussions reasons why these images are not derivatives of the links provided. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is not true. The owners of the copyrighted work could only take legal action against the artist who drew the image, not the users. And be sure, with such an ultraorthodox way to judge the cases how you are so proud to do it, be SURE people all over the world will NOT find the media they need on wikimedia platforms as you delete every reasonable attempt to provide valid illustrations. People will look anywhere else than at us. That's what a fanatic application of a politic leads to. There are softer ways to apply rules and it would be more beneficial to the projects. You bear the responsibility by overrating the big "danger" of drawing a rewriting from a valid source. You believe you save the projects by your inflexibility ? Perhaps you rather kill them year by year. Waltercolor (talk) 19:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The owners of the copyrighted work could only take legal action against the artist who drew the image, not the users. - Not sure about this, but it's possible (and also possible it varies by jurisdiction). There are venues like COM:VP where you can make the case that the policies should not be as they are. — Rhododendrites talk |  19:16, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion

[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely, Belbury (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for having to reopen this, and thanks for the permission that you'd already confirmed there. I really don't know why an admin closed this halfway through! Belbury (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Claude Grison.jpg

[edit]
File:Claude Grison.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!
Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward), I'm participating to the project les sans images from les sans pagEs, as well as to WikiUnseen. Perhaps you never noticed these projects which give visibility to the underrepresented communities. I invite you to discover them.
@Rhododendrites, @Belbury, @Mussklprozz : what were we discussing during hours about my drawings ? Was it about my notability as an artist ?
And are you ok with the mass deletion of @Jameslwoodward even if I lost a lot of time for asking permissions and changing my drawings to fit to the rules ?
At a certain point, if you come each time with another point, this will be really unfair.
Pages deserve portraits and I'm an artist and can do that as well as non notable editors of Wikipedia can write texts.
Waltercolor (talk) 15:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The issue I had was explicitly COM:DW. There were some illustrations which were [IMO] clearly based on specific photographs which were not compatible with Commons. I'd encourage Jameslwoodward to strike the latter part of his recent deletion rationale (we do not keep personal art from non-notable artists). In fact we have a ton of illustrations by people who are not themselves notable and several initiatives (backed by the WMF and various affiliates) to recruit illustrators to create images for Wikipedia articles. There have been class projects to have students (obviously not notable artists) produce scientific drawings, etc., too. What we don't typically keep are images that do not have educational value by non-notable artists, but these images are absolutely in COM:SCOPE as illustrations of notable subjects. The challenge would be the extent to which they're derivative. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you read COM:SCOPE where it explicitly says that "Artwork without obvious educational use, including non-educational artwork uploaded to showcase the artist's skills" is out of scope. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jameslwoodward: That's not what this was. It was artwork with educational value. Illustrations are notable people are of educational use, as is obvious by the fact that we have hundreds if not thousands of user-made illustrations used all over Wikimedia projects. — Rhododendrites talk |  21:38, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fine -- that brings us back to the DW issue. It's the same catch 22 issue we see any time a user tries to make a drawing of a copyrighted work of any kind to illustrate an article. If the drawing closely resembles the copyright work or, in this case, photograph, then it's a DW and cannot be kept on Commons without the permission of the creator of the underlying work. If it doesn't closely resemble the work, then it is not useful to illustrate the article. In this case, if you go to get permission from the photographer, you might as well get permission to use the photograph rather than a drawing made from it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got the permission from the photographer. I'm not here to put photos from other persons on Commons. I'm a professional illustrator and my portrait does the job. There are a lot of similar photographies of that person done by different photographers. My drawing shows correctlly the face ident which cannot be copyrighted. Waltercolor (talk) 22:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you email evidence of that permission to COM:VRT and tell them the filename (whether or not it's deleted), they should be able to undelete it IIRC. — Rhododendrites talk |  13:52, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Rhododendrites. This has already been done. There was a long process of obtaining and transmitting all the permissions. If there is a new layer of deletion for other reasons, I'll have to investigate what's going on. But thank you for your advices. It's precious. Waltercolor (talk) 14:44, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, yes, I see the tag is placed on the file. This was an erroneous deletion nomination, and it will almost certainly be kept in the end -- no need to worry about this one. There are now several files affected and several different deletion nominations, so it's difficult to keep track of what's going on. Were any files deleted which were either (a) not clearly derivative works according to COM:DW, or (b) derivative works, but there was permission from the artist whose work it was based on? — Rhododendrites talk |  17:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind. I see the discussion you started about this elsewhere -- we can just continue there. — Rhododendrites talk |  17:37, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Rhododendrites. Waltercolor (talk) 13:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]


File tagging File:Galyn Görg (1964-2020).jpg

[edit]
العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Galyn Görg (1964-2020).jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the VRT-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded ([[:File:Galyn Görg (1964-2020).jpg]]) and the above demanded information in your request.

Not own work, clearly COM:DW, source: https://www.castforward.de/members/profile/galyn-gorg --Chianti (talk) 21:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Waltercolor&oldid=918287252"