Commons:Help desk

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

Shortcut: COM:HD

This help desk is a forum for questions and help on:
How to use Commons

Anyone, from newbie to experienced, can ask a question here. Questions will be replied to here as well. Any answers you receive are not legal advice and the responder cannot be held liable for them.

Ask your question

or

In order to get quick answers consider the following points:

Resolved sections (marked by {{section resolved|1=~~~~}}) will be archived after two days. Sections with no discussion will be archived after ten days.

For quicker help, join our live chat room. webchat
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)
 SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 10 days.


Tried to use my own images for Wikipedia but identified as copyright violation[edit]

Thanks a lot for all the timely help regarding my own artwork. Given the complexity involved, I decided to stop here and retract what I asked. Once again, thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bnurs (talk • contribs)

Uploading my brand-new author icon to Commons[edit]

About a week ago, a Redditor by the name of "LeoTheFloofyDragon" delivered this portrait of my blue-furred tanuki avatar, which I intend to use not only as the top-left icon for my creative-venture wiki, but also my WP userpage portrait. (This becomes important in the commentary for an FTA post I'm currently preparing on MH, my first since late June.) Before any of you ask, here's a transcript from RDT chat on Saturday afternoon confirming his permission:

Routhwick: "Afternoon, Leo. Care if I give you a reminder before long?"

LeoTheFloofyDragon: "Reminder?"

R: "Yep. Uploading soon (with your kind permission) under my wiki's preferred PD waivers."

L: "Ofc!
"I just ask that you credit me as the maker of that piece somewhere if you don't mind"

R: "As I always do in my descriptions/commentary."

L: "Awesome, tysm :3"

If The Harvett Vault (talk · contribs) could do it (sorry if Commons gave you a hard time on your uploads recently), then so might I. Any further advice? --Slgrandson (talk) 18:22, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Slgrandson: if the artist wants attribution, I would recommend strongly against a PD waiver. That does not retain the right of attribution. Use {{CC-BY-SA 4.0}} instead.
I'm going to assume right now that the artist has not formally transferred copyright to you; if they have, then this gets more complicated. Say so below and I'll give you the more complicated version.
The simplest way to clarify permission would be for the artist to add a comment to that Reddit post indicating the license they are offering (again, presumably {{CC-BY-SA 4.0}}) and how they want to be attributed. Then anyone (including you) can upload that, citing that page as the source, and using the indicated license. - Jmabel ! talk 19:19, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Any moment soon, I'll remind Leo of COM:VRT (né OTRS) to save face. (Pinging now before this gets stale.) --Slgrandson (talk) 21:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Relayed your advice/my VRT suggestion to Leo via RDT chat. Still awaiting further consultation from another 1-3 Commons clerks before I move ahead. (Happy Labor Day!) --Slgrandson (talk) 00:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Just gave Leo an "ELI5" ("Explain Like I'm Five") on the licensing requirements + VRT. Any further developments, and I'll reach back. Anyone else to give us a hand? --Slgrandson (talk) 07:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Slgrandson: I agree with Jmabel on this. Five year olds may not license their content.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, but that "ELI5" bit is just an expression. --Slgrandson (talk) 08:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Sadly, Leo's had second thoughts about the Commons go-round; from what I heard from him on the 11th, he doesn't want his real name out (though I suggested his Reddit handle should be O.K.). Would you mind perhaps if I did the honours on his behalf instead? (Either under the terms you recommended earlier, or under my preferred ones.) Apart from @Jeff G., anyone else care to weigh in further? --Slgrandson (talk) 23:58, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Slgrandson: if you are doing on his behalf, then we need the VRT. And he may choose any attribution he likes. - Jmabel ! talk 01:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Groundbreaking for new Australian embassy.jpg[edit]

It would seem 11484857 is the NAA-image ID, but the link to the photo doesn't work. Does anyone have an idea how to fix this? APK (talk) 21:59, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The photo also doesn't appear in the JSTOR article that appears as the source...tried a google search, but wasn't lucky enough to find Mister Hasluck digging a hole. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 04:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding images & releasing copyright for specific images[edit]

I had added an image, File:AMT Lightning.jpg, to AMT Lightning pistol on 30 August 2023.

It was subsequently taken down & deleted from Commons on 6 September 2023.

I thought I'd outlined the permission properly in Addition of File:AMT Lightning.jpg, since we at GunBroker.com own the copyright and want to allow its use, but perhaps I missed something or don't understand the process? (I'm a disclosed paid contributor.)

The message on my User_talk:LoVeloDogs indicates it was removed because it was a violation from https://www.gunbroker.com/item/999306970, but we hold the copyright for those images.

The Category:Wikipedia requested images of firearms project would benefit from our images, and we would like to grant permissions for specific uploads to those pages.

Any help that anyone can offer would be greatly appreciated, thank you! LoVeloDogs (talk) 21:59, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@LoVeloDogs: I deleted this file. Please contact COM:VRT so your permission for a free license can be verified. Abzeronow (talk) 16:10, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the information! I've submitted it now. LoVeloDogs (talk) 17:30, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Got it all wrong - sorry[edit]

This commons file is taken from a full page from The Tatler in 1928: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tatler_(Society_publication)_-_Captain._A._L._and_Mrs_Middleton_-_Page_34_-_4th_January_1928.jpg

Is this OK - I hope ?

Please let me know - I did a separate file on the "Middleton family" page (Wikipedia) which has only the centre pic as the file.

So sorry

Srbernadette (talk) 02:56, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Srbernadette: I don't know what to make of your claim that it is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International. Who are you saying owns the copyright and has issued that license? - Jmabel ! talk 03:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not coping with this (so sorry) - I am assuming that as the Tatler publication is 1928 that all is OK. I got the whole page from "Find My Past" website as I have shown. I did not mean to state that "it (the photo/file) is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International".


Look at the "source" which is another commons page:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Tatler,_4_January_1928_(page_34)_(Center_pic)_Captain_Alan_Lomas_Middleton_and_wife.jpg

which is the FULL "Tatler" page form 1928 - which includes the middle pic that I made a separate file for.

Please help and I am truly sorry

115.70.23.77 03:29, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Srbernadette: Both of those files are still tagged with a CC-BY-SA-4.0 license and not with any other license tag. Are you saying that the January 4, 1928 edition of the Tatler is in the public domain in the United Kingdom and also in the United States? If so, why? It might be {{PD-UK-unknown}} if we don't know who the photographer or the author of the text is, but in the U.S. works that were published in 1928 are still in copyright until 2024. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 07:33, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Getting it all fixed

This new file:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tatler_(Society_publication)_-_Captain._A._L._and_Mrs_Middleton_-_Page_34_-_4th_January_1928.jpg

should be OK now, (please look at the "Source" in the Summary section).

So please remove the red box all about the incorrect licence.

Thanks so much115.70.23.77 03:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photos (scans) of old postcard/s not personally held[edit]

Hi all, I recently uploaded an image of an old (Australian) postcard (this one: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lismore_Railway_Station_early_1900s.jpg) on the understanding that being pre-1920, the image in the postcard was out of copyright in the US. Now I plan to do another one or 2. The issue being, I do not have the actual postcards in my possession, just some scans of them uploaded elsewhere (e.g. blogs, facebook, articles by others) and the actual physical instances of the postcards may be identifiable e.g. by unique creases, damage or discolouration, handwriting (which actually I removed for the instance above, for clarity/closer approach to the original), or whatever. So, at least in theory, someone could say, "hey, that's my image, and I did not give you permission to upload it"... just wondering if this has come up before, and whether it is something I should worry about. Response, thoughts appreciated. Tony Rees, Australia Tony 1212 (talk) 06:31, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tony 1212: Many people and even organisations, such as museums and libraries, claim copyright over images that are clearly slavish copies of public domain images. This is copyfraud and so long as you are certain of the copyright status then you should be fine using those images. However be aware that both US and country of origin copyright laws apply and also review the URAA restoration date rules. Ww2censor (talk) 10:53, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ww2censor: Thanks, from reading that link it does sound that it is OK to re-use someone else's digital copy of an out-of-copyright printed original. Regards- Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 18:15, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, I have uploaded the next image I had in mind, with the "intermediate source" duly noted, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lismore_Railway_Station_postcard_2.jpg . Hopefully this will not put anyone's nose out of joint. Regards Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 07:01, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

English version of File:Rinitis medicamentosa mucosa nasal.png?[edit]

Is there an English version of File:Rinitis medicamentosa mucosa nasal.png? If not, could someone please create one? It's for the W:Rhinitis medicamentosa article on English Wikipedia. 206.204.236.63 19:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You might get more bites if you post this at Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 01:42, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you CalendulaAsteraceae! I'll post there. 206.204.236.63 22:20, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

POTD - Picture of the day (mistake)[edit]

Hello,

I added a new POTD and it was incorrectly edited earlier for the day (Potd/2024-10-03).

I don't know or probably I don't have the right to revert to the previous version or simply to reinstate the Potd template...

Can an Administrator do it for me, please?


Thanks.

Terragio67 (talk) 04:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Terragio67: I am not an administrator but I requested speedy deletion because it was accidentally created. Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 11:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, the speedy deletion worked... Terragio67 (talk) 14:54, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can't add photos[edit]

That's why Akshaykumarka26 (talk) 04:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Akshaykumarka26: You are going to have to be a lot more specific for anyone to help you. You don't even say whether this is from a phone or a computer, let alone what software you are using and exactly what happens. - Jmabel ! talk —Preceding undated comment was added at 15:03, 14 September 2023‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I upload an old photo with Creative Commons licence[edit]

The licence is (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)? Cho Lantigua (talk) 10:49, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cho Lantigua: No, we cannot accept Creative Commons (CC) licenses with either the NC or ND restrictions, because all images uploaded here must be free to use, including commercial use and modification.
Can you clarify what you mean by "old photo"? Where did you get it from? There may be other copyright issues to consider. Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 11:11, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Its from here: https://photo.araba.eus/s/photoaraba/item/57351 Cho Lantigua (talk) 11:29, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Spain. Photographer lived until 1992. Has to be still copyrighted. - Jmabel ! talk 15:10, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Self certification for photographers who do not have an official website or email address[edit]

I am planning to ask amateur photographers to provide photos in the near future. This is my first attempt and I am carefully checking the procedure so as not to bother them.

I am planning to use COM:VRT, but I have one question: the description of the source of the email that should be sent to VRT says:" For instance, if you are releasing images shown on a website, your email address should be associated with the website or listed on the contact page of the website."

Many photographers here use Instagram as a portfolio, communicate externally via Twitter, and complete their communication only on social networking sites and do not disclose their email address.

In these cases, how can photographers prove their identity? How do usually deal with this? 狄の用務員 (talk) 12:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@狄の用務員: For an official answer, you should post the question on the page Commons:VRT/Noticeboard. (But someone who posts photos online can specify a free license with them directly there.) -- Asclepias (talk) 13:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AsclepiasI understand. I will ask the question there. Thank you. 狄の用務員 (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Block of my first page! I’m angry[edit]

I did write my page with my name, my writer work, my pic and Someone did block. It’fun Salvilgreco (talk) 22:20, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Salvilgreco: Your only prior edits on this wiki were to upload and then once edit a picture, presumably of yourself. It's still here. Nothing has been deleted, and the fact that you can edit here says you are not blocked. Possibly an issue on some other WMF wiki, and you are complaining on the wrong site? I see that you have edits on the Italian Wikipedia, Italian Wiktionary, and a single edit on the Sicilian Wikipedia. - Jmabel ! talk 00:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Ty v much. I’ll try to see that page.
    regards Salvilgreco (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Again: Salvilgreco is my nick, my true name is SALVO FIGURA. Salvilgreco (talk) 17:24, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Uploading my own pictures?[edit]

I've tried to upload a picture of a county courthouse that I took, that I own, that also appears on my own website, but I got the message that Wiki couldn't validate, or something like that. How does one upload your own picture? I'm quite confused by this. Thank you. WikiSimon4Stand (talk) 02:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi WikiSimon4Stand, have you tried the Upload Wizard? I use that one and its pretty easy. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 03:45, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@WikiSimon4Stand: According to your logs, you triggered the "cross-wiki upload filter" when attempting to upload two files. That means that you probably tried to upload from a website other than Commons. Try uploading directly from Commons. -- Asclepias (talk) 12:58, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@WikiSimon4Stand: Hi, and welcome. I am sorry to inform you that you have triggered Special:AbuseFilter/153 by trying to cross-wiki upload a smaller (<50,000 bytes or <2,000,000 pixels) jpg photo as a new user. The photo you tried to upload is smaller, and you indicated it's your own work. Usually when someone uploads a smaller photo, it is a copyright violation taken from the web. If you took the photo yourself, please upload the full-size original of it per COM:HR, including EXIF metadata. If you did not take the photo, please see Commons:Licensing for why we can't accept it, and have the photographer post permission on their official website or social media or send the photo and permission via VRT with a carbon copy to you. If you can't get a compliant license, the photo may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F because we don't allow Fair Use here. If you use our Upload Wizard instead, you should be able to avoid that filter.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

things necessary to do before uploading[edit]

I have pictures of a monument that I'd like to upload. What legal stuff should I do before uploading? Trueconscience (talk) 09:28, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you try to follow the instructions of the Upload Wizard.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"A monument" is very vague. If this is something over 120 years old, then probably no special issues. Anything more recent than that, and in some countries the object itself might still have copyright protection. Unless you are more specific, no one can give you solid advice on whether this image would be acceptable for Commons.
Also, your choice of the word "monument" makes me wonder: is this for one of the "Wiki Loves Monuments" competitions? - Jmabel ! talk 18:22, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for replying! yes, I wanted to submit for "wiki Loves Monuments". I've followed the steps and submitted a picture. Now, I can see them in the "user uploads" section.
Does that mean I've participated in the competition? What should I do now? Trueconscience (talk) 09:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is a bit strange: did you submit File:Qutub shahi tomb.jpg through the tool specific to entering the contest? Because just looks like a normal upload, and is not marked as submitted to WLM. You'll want to put {{Wiki Loves Monuments 2023|in}} just above the categories on that file page. You might ask at Commons talk:Wiki Loves Monuments 2023 in India whether there is anything further you need to do. - Jmabel ! talk 16:21, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh yes you're right,Thank you. I did go through the tool but didn't follow all the steps correctly. Now I've submitted other files to the contest. can I put this File:Qutub shahi tomb.jpg now into the contest? after uploading it normally? Also, can I put these images submitted in the contest in stock photography editorial sections? Trueconscience (talk) 19:24, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can copy-paste the relevant tags from File:Qutb Shahi Tombs,Echoes of History in Stone.jpg to File:Qutub shahi tomb.jpg. If you go into the mode to exit the wikitext of both in two different browser tabs, it should be pretty clear what needs to be copied. - Jmabel ! talk 21:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot! Trueconscience (talk) 08:47, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upload pictures from archive[edit]

I have picture that I would like to update to the wikipage that I received from the local authority. These picture coming from the archives. I already tried to upload them once but were deleted because of the copyright rules. What do i use as copyright for these documents? Kim Stroo (talk) 10:48, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kim Stroo: If it is copyrighted, then only the copyright-holder can grant a license to use it.
I see three images you have uploaded that have been deleted:
All of these are recent enough that copyright certainly persists. You give an archive as the author, but clearly the archive did not shoot the pictures. If you do not know who took the pictures, then there is probably no legitimate way to get a license for these images. - Jmabel ! talk 18:28, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upload of a public domain image[edit]

Hi Folks!! I'm working an editor who wants to upload an public domain image for the en:Cameron Prize for Therapeutics of the University of Edinburgh article. The editor has received and image from en:Drew Weissman who wants to update the image that is currently on commons. How does the Weissman prove the image is his. Scope creep (talk) 16:27, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Scope creep: I'm not sure I follow here, on at least two points. (1) We almost never replace or "update" images on Commons. Distinct images belong under distinct filenames. en-wiki can then change which image it uses, but that is not Commons affair. (2) You say the image is public domain and then you say that it belongs to a particular individual. Offhand that makes no sense at all. Can you clarify? - Jmabel ! talk 18:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: I'm looking to upload several images as public domain, helping another editor who is new to wikipedia. These images have been sent to this editor by the people who are on the en:Cameron Prize for Therapeutics of the University of Edinburgh. How would they prove the images were them and they were offering them for public domain. They have agreed to use to the "CC BY-SA 4.0" licence for the images. I think three or four to upload. Scope creep (talk) 06:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Scope creep: This still doesn't really make sense.
  • If the images are in the public domain, then no one owns rights on them, so no one can offer a license, nor is any license required. Perhaps you are confused about the meaning of "public domain," but I can't guess what you may think it means, so I can't understand your question.
  • "How would they prove the images were them…": we don't usually require any proof that images show the people they claim to show (though of course if they don't then they are pretty useless). The issue is that the only person who can issue a license is the copyright-holder, which is almost always the photographer or their heir (there are edge cases, but not likely to arise here). If the images are previously published, we will need the copyright-holder to go through the process outlined at COM:VRT. - Jmabel ! talk 19:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pagina personale con foto[edit]

Come si crea una pagina personale Salvilgreco (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Salvilgreco: Non dovresti farlo. Questo non è un sito di social networking. Le persone con contributi significativi sono benvenute ad avere una Pagina Utente, che può includere un piccolo numero di foto personali; sicuramente non hai ancora dato contributi significativi. - Jmabel ! talk 18:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need to revert a crop tool mistake[edit]

I was trying to create a separate cropped version of this image of the KUMU museum File:Õhuvaade Kumule ja Kadrioru pargile.png but mistakenly hit the "overwrite" button and now the cropped version is the default image (this image is used on lots of WP articles). How can I revert this mistake? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 23:27, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've reverted the change using the little (revert) link next to the version to revert to. --rimshottalk 23:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much for that! Aszx5000 (talk) 11:10, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In need of AWB tool[edit]

It's been precisely two months since my last request, so I'm wondering what I need to do to gain AWB access after having two requests lightly denied. Please help, I need the tool to fix file descriptions. See Commons:Requests for rights/Denied/AutoWikiBrowser access/2023 for context. 20 upper 07:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@20 upper: It looks like there was an active decision not to give that to you. Twice. And not terribly long ago. I'd really suggest waiting a year or so. - Jmabel ! talk 16:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OH MY, OH MY, OH MY. I must assume that despite doing nothing wrong on Wikimedia Commons, I won't be granted any rights or permissions. Sad world we live in. 20 upper 17:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@20 upper: How exactly do you want "to fix file descriptions"?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible hoax[edit]

There is a deletion discussion on WP, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fanery. If this is a hoax, something should probably be done about the article-creators Commons-work, Uploads by Expedition2010. Not sure what the procedure is. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Judging by the turn that discussion has taken, while the en-wiki article might not be fully verifiable, it's not a hoax. Looks like nearly all the relevant sources are in French, if a French-speaker would like to go over and help them out. - Jmabel ! talk 16:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The images may very well be "legit", even if none of them are currency. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:32, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

using pictures[edit]

I received pictures from photographer JP Swirko ,some portraits of my father. I can freely use them. What do I have tot do ? Erik De Vree (talk) 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Erik De Vree I assume JP Swirko is the copyright holder. That means they have to license the pictures under one of the "ok" licenses here: Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses. The can do so by registering a user account themselves, and upload them at Special:UploadWizard. OR they can do so via mail-contact per COM:VRT. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upload Own photo work with Creative Commons[edit]

I want to upload my own work to update the image in a certain wiki page, but they don't specifically allow CC License with CC BY-NC-ND, As I am only willingly allow and authorize Wikipedia/Wikimedia to use on this License only NutShards (talk) 09:13, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Follow up on this, I am willingly allow Wikimedia to use my image on all of its subsidiaries or what-else, I just don't want any other companies to profit without my explicit written permission to use my work NutShards (talk) 09:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@NutShards See Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses. If you're not ok with any of the "ok" ones, that's how it is. Thanks for wanting to contribute. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To be more clear: no, those are not acceptable licenses for Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 16:32, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

about profile page[edit]

When click on my profile it says "This page does not currently exist. You can search for this page title in other pages or create this page." what does this mean? Trueconscience (talk) 09:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Trueconscience In short that since you haven't made a userpage, there is none but you can make it if you like. It's not mandatory in any way, but it's a place to say "Hi, something about me, this is what I do/like to do on Commons." Just type and hit "Publish page". More at Commons:User pages. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! Trueconscience (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I advise you not to think of it as "your profile page", as that may easily suggest things that you should not put on User pages. ColinFine (talk) 14:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right, profiles are for social networks.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trying to understand some finer details[edit]

Hello. I wonder about a case like this image here File:Portupee veltveebel Hugo Siim.jpg. The context is COM:ESTONIA, PD from life + 70 years, the photographer died 1945. All well and good.

But then we come to the next part of File:Portupee_veltveebel_Hugo_Siim.jpg#Licensing, the US parts. Points 1 and 2 seem unproblematic, but then comes 3, "it was in the public domain in its home country (Estonia) on the URAA date (1 January 1996)."

Assuming the PD rules of Estonia was the same in 1996, the photographer had not been dead 70 years by then. So, does this mean that this pic (and pics in the same situation) fails the US part of the PD rules, and should be removed from Commons? I assume the US rules are there because Commons is based in the US and has to follow those laws. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:56, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: If the pictures were published in the U.S. within 30 days of their publication in Estonia, then they are OK in the U.S. If not then, yes, URAA comes into the picture, and they won't be in the public domain in the U.S. until 95 years after publication. So anything published (anywhere) before 1928 is good: {{PD-old-auto-expired|1945}}. This picture is from 1927; was it published promptly when created? - Jmabel ! talk 16:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel Interesting. IMO, it's extremely unlikely it was published in the U.S. within 30 days of its publication in Estonia. Per source [1], we know it was taken in 1927. But I have no idea of the context. Was it a private "thing", a portrait for Hugo Siim himself or his family, or for military files or a local newspaper? It may not have been published before the Estonia National Archives Photo Information System put it on their website. So, what then? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I'm not an expert by any means, but I've read a lot of previous discussions here about what exactly constitutes publication, and I don't think I'm misrepresenting the general consensus when I say that it's probably safe to assume that this particular photo counts as "published" for copyright purposes. In a discussion earlier this year, Carl Lindberg, who is one of the courts of highest appeal for this sort of thing on the Commons, wrote that "when it comes to publication, we do often assume works were published around the time they were created -- most works are made for a reason. Commons policy requires there to be no significant doubt; it does not require that there be no doubt at all or preclude making some assumptions. While it's theoretically possible for a work to have remained unpublished for decades, but then fortuitously published before some cutoff date to create a very long copyright, it's exceedingly unlikely and those usually do not amount to significant doubts. In other words, it's usually safe to assume that a photo was published around the time of its creation unless there are good reasons to assume otherwise. Sometimes there are good reasons -- for example, if this were obviously an unposed family snapshot that had remained in a shoebox or a photo album for decades after its creation, it would make sense to treat it as unpublished. But it's not. It's a posed portrait taken by a professional photographer, and most professional photographers expect to be paid for their work. If he had not sold the photo, and the original negative had remained in his archive without ever leaving his possession, that too would be a reason to treat it as unpublished. But if he gave or sold prints of the photo to members of the general public, or even to just one person without any restriction on further public distribution by that person, then that normally counts as publication.
In this case, it's pretty clear that the photo was indeed distributed to others besides Siim himself, because the one in the Estonian archive appears to be a presentation copy with Siim's signature on the front. Most people who label photos for their own information or as aids to memory write the labels on the back, not the front, because they don't want to mess up the photo itself. The main reason for signing a picture on the front is to give it to someone else as an autographed presentation copy. And if the photographer sold Siim the photos to do whatever he wanted with them, and if Siim was giving out signed copies to others (the explanation that best fits the available evidence), then it satisfies the publication requirement as far as US copyright law is concerned. Since the photo was taken in 1927, it's reasonable to assume the publication took place in 1927 as well. And if that's the case, you don't need to worry about anything else, because as Jmabel says above, if it was published anywhere in the world before 1928, then it is public domain in the US. So in my opinion it's perfectly fine to keep it on the Commons, although the license should be changed to {{PD-old-auto-expired|1945}} as suggested by Jmabel. (Others who know more than I do will no doubt correct me if my reasoning is faulty :) ) Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The U.S. definition of "published" was pretty tortured in that era, as courts had to come up with a definition. Different U.S. circuits came up with different tests, so the law itself is not uniform, but if copies were given out without restrictions on further publication, that often did qualify. There is always some uncertainty with questions like this, but to me they are usually just theoretical doubts, not something that rises to the "significant doubt" level of COM:PRP. Once copies leave the control of the photographer, most of the time that would result in publication (although different countries can have different definitions of that, really). A private family photo from an archive might be different; that would probably require more attention to the question of publication. In this particular case, the term in Estonia on the URAA date was 50pma, not 70pma, so if the author died in 1945, they became PD in Estonia in 1996, so were PD in Estonia when the URAA took effect. Estonia later extended their terms to 70pma, but that does not change the URAA status. See the Estonia section at Wikipedia:Non-US copyrights. And actually reading a Google translation of that old law, photos may have been 50 years from publication, not 50pma, anyways. So, I think it's also {{PD-1996}}. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:21, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Choliamb@Clindberg, many thanks for your comments. I watched The Paper Chase recently on Youtube, and this discussion strongly reminds me of that tv-series. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Btw, is there some Commons-gadget where I can enter data like made in Estonia, author dead 1945 etc, and it spits out the appropriate PD-templates? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:12, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On that last, I don't think there is such gadget; it sounds like a cool idea, but to assemble and organize all the relevant data to make it cover everything would probably take a bare minimum of 6 person-months (and I do mean a bare minimum, wouldn't be surprised if it were multiple person-years), and I bet a lot of cases would still come up as "unclear". This is tricky stuff, with a scary number of edge cases. - Jmabel ! talk 21:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I like the idea though, such a thing could make a lot of discussions (like this one) easier. Builders could start with US, then EU (both not without complexity), then add more as the thing is used and tested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:34, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For U.S. there is the Hirtle chart but if you look at that you'll easily see how complicated it gets, how many different issues can come into play just for one country, and how many images there are out there where some of the factors that would determine copyright status are themselves difficult to determine. And that's without even getting into the question of what constitutes "publication." - Jmabel ! talk 16:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe we should just ask ChatGPT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
+1 from me for such a gadget. I have also asked for a licensing gadget a few days ago and was told that what I had in mind could be done with the VisualFilesChange. The description is not that easy to follow, and I haven't tried it yet, but maybe it works for your aims? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Paradise Chronicle: VFC is useful to change the license on a relatively large number of photos at once, but will do nothing to tell you what license is desired. It performs the action efficiently, but you have to tell it what action to perform. - Jmabel ! talk 22:10, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

referencing[edit]

hi do i need to reference author and creator of image like johari's window . its made by Joseph and harry but in your website the author name is someone who created it . so i need to mention both and the license ? Les cricris (talk) 12:31, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't understand what you mean.
Si vous préférez en français, vous pouvez demander sur Commons:Service d'aide‎. Yann (talk) 12:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ou vous pouvez poser votre question ici (plus clairement, s'il vous plaît) en français. - Jmabel ! talk 16:40, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

is there a video i can watch, when i use an image , should o download and copy all what says copy like licencing n author name and paste[edit]

Icant find any video to help start Les cricris (talk) 16:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Attributions[edit]

I have created a Powerpoint presentation, using a poem I wrote, with images found on Wikimedia Commons. It will be very awkward to credit each image as it appears since it will disturb the flow of the video. Will it be acceptable if I put all attributions at the end, numbering them in order of appearance? AnnaOdds (talk) 17:31, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @AnnaOdds: Yes, that is normally an acceptable way to attribute in a video. A little trickier if your slides may ever stand on their own outside the work, though. Ideally, additionally, you could but just a minimal credit (Image by FOO) in a small subtitle on the respective page of the Powerpoint. That way if the individual slides are separated from the whole work, the credit isn't totally lost. - Jmabel ! talk 21:56, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Putting the attributions (correct attributions - in the case of a cc-by-sa license name of author, image-file and license and links to them) at the end of the video is a good solution. If you are going to publish the video at YouTube, you can additionally put the attributions (with working links) in the video description at Youtube. The same should be possible with other video platforms (for example Peertube - you can look at my Peertube videos as an example of that) and also if you publish the video at your own website. Putting a (additional) minimal credit on the individual pages of the powerpoint as suggested is not wrong, but as people do not care (or even know) about copyright in practise it may be more Effort, than it is worth. But if you want to make the effort, it may be an idea to add a short url that links to the actual published video, where the full attributions can be found. With "image by FOO" people are likely to thinks it is a sufficient attribution, while in many cass it is not. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm - p7.ee/p) (talk) 09:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

question[edit]

hi, I requested a rename at [2] how long does it usually take to have the request looked at?...thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:31, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You asked this 11 minutes after making the request, and it's about 40 minutes now. Normally, someone gets to these in a day or so, though there can be a backlog so a few days is not unheard of. I don't see any emergency here, am I missing something? If not, please, in the future: following up minutes after requesting something wastes admin time. I could have handled half a dozen requests like this in the time it takes to tell you to be a little bit patient. - Jmabel ! talk 22:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you (very kind)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:42, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ozzie10aaaa: Now moved. I also fixed the licensing (please use proper licensing templates, not freeform text!). And this still needs categories. - Jmabel ! talk 16:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Homepage of Old Website[edit]

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia and this is my first time on Creative Commons. I am currently editing a stub article called CARad.com. I wanted to add a photo of the original homepage, just wanted to double check if its ok to add this to the article. I am also in the prosses of messaging eBay, (Parent Company of CARad.com) for permission to use this image, but I will keep it in drafts for now until further notice.

Thank You -123WasTaken 123WasTaken (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@123WasTaken, hello and welcome to the wonderful world of trying to understand what can be uploaded to Commons and Wikipedia.
You can't upload such a screenshot on Commons, no "non-free" stuff is accepted here. However, WP does accept non-free stuff in some very limited circumstances, and a screenshot of a defunct (?) website in an article about that website would, I think, be acceptable.
Go here [3], pick "Upload a non-free file", then "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." then... Well, I'm not sure. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thank you for your help 123WasTaken (talk) 11:34, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Creatures[edit]

Please note, the original creatures are not Sousie and The Banchees! The original Creatures were formed in Montreal, Quebec, Canada back in 1964 and are prevelant in todays original music by M. Serber on Soundcloud.I suggest you make these corrections to clarify. 2607:FEA8:A25:4700:646D:1678:56E7:8068 14:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • What, if anything, does this have to do with Wikimedia Commons (the site you are writing on)? - Jmabel ! talk 16:27, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is the equivalent of WP:Teahouse in commons?[edit]

See above query. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Grandmaster Huon: No equivalent. This and the Village pump are as close as it gets. - Jmabel ! talk 22:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Helena Wanda Błażusiak-Pawlik.jpg[edit]

I enter information that I created the original content myself. Could you check if everything is ok? Because I do not want the picture to be deleted. Zuzap (talk) 05:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added a new topic heading here. Based on edits at User talk:Zuzap I assume this question is about that file. Anon126 (✉ ⚒) 06:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zuzap: it seems completely implausible that you created this work yourself. It is pretty clearly some sort of official document. - Jmabel ! talk 19:25, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How can I do recent files and copyright patrol on commons?[edit]

See above. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

possibly,I deleted your report.(I wrote the next report under here,after you would wrote.)If that is true,I would be sorry and apologize,sure. Assa146 (talk) 08:06, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Afaict, nothing here was deleted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Grandmaster Huon: You probably want to read Commons:Patrol. --bjh21 (talk) 14:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

削除された画像について[edit]

ライセンスの記録を間違って登録・アップロードしたので何回か削除されてしまいました。削除履歴のある画像としてアップロードしにくくなってしまいました。 本来は個人撮影による、commonsの規定に基づいてクリアな著作権の生じない形式でのライセンス取得が可能な画像です。どうか再アップロードできる方法の提案をお願いします。 Assa146 (talk) 07:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Attributions2[edit]

Attributions I have created a Powerpoint presentation, using a poem I wrote, with images found on Wikimedia Commons. It will be very awkward to credit each image as it appears since it will disturb the flow of the video. Will it be acceptable if I put all attributions at the end, numbering them in order of appearance? Justin1809 (talk) 12:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Funnily enough another user just asked the same thing, see Commons:Help_desk#Attributions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for replying!I challenge it,again. Assa146 (talk) 00:11, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

pictures[edit]

I am confused. Is Wiki Commons linked to Wikipedia? Because my draft article submitted to Wikimedia has appeared on Wikitia. I now have been asked by Wiki Commons about two illustrations in my draft article for Wikipedia and need to reply. But I do not know how to do so. I own both the pictures asked about and can explain more - but only when I am confident I am explaining to the right place. Wikipedia. Not Wikitia or anywhere else. IonaFyne. IonaFyne (talk) 12:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@IonaFyne Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia are indeed linked, they are both part of the Wikimedia Foundation. Commons is basically where the images are kept. When you upload pictures at Wikipedias Wikipedia:File upload wizard, you are often sent to Commons.
Wikitia otoh is an independent/unconnected whatever. How/why they do what they do I don't know, per their webpage "Some of Wikitia's pages are sourced from Wikipedia.org's Mainspace and Draftspace. Wikitia is not affiliated to Wikimedia Foundation, unless otherwise noted." So it seems they take Wikipedia-stuff and put it on their website, presumably to make a profit somehow.
On your need to reply, if you check User talk:IonaFyne, both templated messages have links to where you reply, in the words "its entry."
Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:35, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@IonaFyne presumably "own work" is wrong on these. Someone actually created those; photographing them might effectively create a derivative work (because of the frame) but you still need to deal with the copyright of the underlying work. I imagine those would still be in copyright. If you are the heir to the artist, then this can be sorted out. Otherwise, you would need to determine who that is and get their permission. - Jmabel ! talk 19:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes thank you to G.G.S. I am learning.
And thank you to Jmabel. I am heir to the artist, so how do I sort this out, please?
Also two photographs were not questioned, only the images of a painting and of a pen and ink sketch. IonaFyne (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@IonaFyne: if you are heir to the artist, please (1) attribute the work correctly (artist's name; if you like you can add "photographed by…"); (2) instead of {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} use {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs}}.
Also:
  • The fact that someone did not challenge a particular photo doesn't mean they won't. Probably these leapt out at someone as obviously not your own work. Yes, you should sort things out correctly on those, too.
  • You need to add (parent) categories to Category:Colin Wyatt.
  • It sounds like you are writing on en-wiki about a subject with which you have a connection. Have you read en:WP:COI? Have you done the required disclosure? (No need to answer me here, but definitely a need to do so.)
Jmabel ! talk 15:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ethiopia–Tigray peace agreement / Pretoria Agreement (2022)[edit]

According to Ethiopia's copyright rules page, regarding official documents:

  • Any official text of a legislative, administrative or of legal nature, as well as official translations thereof, is not protected.[410/2004 Article 5(b)]

And according to South Africa's copyright rules (which is where this agreement was signed and negotiated):

  • Official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts.[98/2002–2013 12(8)]

I was thinking of uploading this agreement (archived PDF) to Commons. This agreement is signed by Ethiopian government and TPLF officials plus the mediators. Is this okay to upload? XTheBedrockX (talk) 19:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Javarobot code[edit]

Is new resources database sample for builder strong security software from attack or breach @Innocentjohn1978 and 22:52, 18 September 2023:

@Innocentjohn1978: Perhaps I'm missing context here, but I don't see how this question is germane to Wikimedia Commons (this site). Could you please clarify? - Jmabel ! talk 23:50, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oldest Toddler - My 'one year' experience as Wikimedian[edit]

I will be completing one year at Wikimedia by 23 Sep 2023.

I am - a retired Professor from Mumbai, India

I did - some edits, consistently, with just one copy right issue and one ‘move’. I was at Wiki Conference 2023 at Hyderabad. Partifcipated at Wiki Love Monuments India 2022 (2023). I faced lot of tech issues; being new at Wiki, it took quiet a while to find answers to my queries. My moderate skills at computer felt inadequate. I felt something very cryptic when I looked at communities; seemed so affectionate, united, benevolent; yet less approachable.

I wanted - to be a part of communities those sharing my niche interest. Tibetan Vajrayana Iconography. With tons of pictures shot at hostile Himalayan monasteries, I needed a community that would provide a purpose and place at Wiki.

I will - continue to search for such community at Tibetan art, culture and religious forums. Improve my skills of assimilating tech documentation, share my projects at relevant groups. I am now working on QR coding of Academic curricula (syllabus) of graduate course programs at Mumbai University; a self- propelled project.

I Thank you, all for inducting me into Wiki, inspiring me to sustain. Regards

(Please delete if irrelevent) Prof Ranga Sai (talk) 05:14, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for this interesting feedback. I am not sure if we have a team or official place where this is more appropriate, but I believe you could find more interested editors in Vajrayana Buddhism (really nice uploads by the way) in the Buddhism project of the English wikipedia. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 05:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Prof Ranga Sai (talk) 07:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Images containing maybe copyrighted bits?[edit]

Sorry for awkward title, wasn't sure how to say it! I would like to upload a photo of a bunch of spray paint cans. They all have the brand's logo and I guess the overall can design is presumably copyrighted too, so I wasn't sure it would be okay to upload because of that. But I see other similar photos that had brands copyrighted designs in them, like the two I've attached below so is this okay?

Thank you, and sorry if it's a silly question, copyright is a serious issue to I want to be extra sure before I upload the photo! -- NotCharizard 🗨 06:10, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Notcharizard: images with product logos and graphics certainly can be copyright violations and often are, see COM:PACKAGING. I believe the black spray can is OK and qualifies for exception 2, as the logo is simple text logo. The energy drink cans might be a copyvio. Other existing similar images do mean much as you may very well find copyvio images which have not been checked. MKFI (talk) 06:45, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Public Graffiti[edit]

MaY I upload my pictures of public graffiti art? Freesch (talk) 07:43, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Freesch I think that will depend on the Commons:Freedom of panorama situation where you are. You may want to check some examples at [4]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
More at COM:GRAFFITI. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:14, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

tabaquismo Kate Moss[edit]

Quiero enviar GRATIS una Pitillera Programable a Kate Moss para ayudarla a superar su problema de tabaquismo. No dispongo de su direccion. Tengo una fotografias que aqui no se como anexarlas. 45.155.62.219 09:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No sé si esto es una broma, pero creo que vas a tener mas éxito si se los envias a su agencia. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 13:11, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding a logo to the infobox for an organization[edit]

Hi, please explain how to insert a logo that I have permission to use on an organization's infobox. Thank you. BrilliantCherryBlossom (talk) 17:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BrilliantCherryBlossom: When you say "that I have permission to use," do you mean that it is public domain (e.g. below the threshold of originality), free-licensed, or just that someone said, "You can use this"?
When you say "an organization's infobox" do you mean a {{Wikidata Infobox}} on Commons, or do you mean an Infobox in an article on Wikipedia (and, if the latter, are you asking about Wikipedia in a particular language)?
Jmabel ! talk 18:45, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BrilliantCherryBlossom Does that [5] help? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:34, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upload image[edit]

Need to delete an image and replace it with another IamtheMoonGhost (talk) 05:40, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@IamtheMoonGhost I have replied to you in your talk page. Please have a look! Haoreima (talk) 09:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like to add my company's logo but it does not allow me.[edit]

How can I add the company's logo to the Wikipedia page? As it mentioned that I cannot proceed with logos due to copyright issue. MultitrendIndo1 (talk) 10:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MultitrendIndo1: Hi, and welcome. We would need permission from an authorized representative of the company via VRT. See also en:WP:COI.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MultitrendIndo1 We/you probably could upload your logo on Commons, see "Licensing" at for example File:Livingston International 2023 logo.jpg. However, your more basic problem is that you probably can't write an acceptable Wikipedia article about your company, more at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An administrator deleted my photo based on false assumptions[edit]

Hello Wiki friends,

My name is Amin. Yesterday I received a message from a Wiki administrator, claiming that I had uploaded a photo to Wikipedia “primarily for the purpose of insulting, demeaning, or defaming a person..”.. The administrator deleted the photo without giving me a opportunity to discuss it.

‘’’The administrator deleted the photo based on assumptions that were incorrect. I had uploaded that photo with the full permission of my friend, and it was intended to inform, and not to insult or defame anyone. My friend who was in the picture and I both had a laugh about it.’’’ By now you must be curious about the photo. As it has been deleted by the administrator, you can still see a screenshot here, on a tweet that happened to go a bit viral, and my reply-tweet here.

I feel the administrator was wrong to delete the photo without any discussion. I would like to restore it. What would be my next step to do that? I welcome any help.

And if the administrator was right to delete it, I could accept that too. But I’d like to understand his arguments better. Because right now I feel they’re based on false assumptions and accusations. Small things like this slowly suck the fun out of reading and editing Wikipedia.

Thanks, Amin (talk) 15:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wutsje: You’re involved here. This seems like a misunderstanding. Perhaps you can explain. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Amin: You may appeal the deletion of File:A man using a urinal.jpg by posting at COM:UDR. @Wutsje: Most men stand at urinals, given the need and opportunity.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for chiming in. I have appealed the deletion as you suggested here. Amin (talk) 17:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I’d  Support restoration, it looks like the subject is in on the joke, but I could start a DR if Wutsje thinks it would need one. Abzeronow (talk) 16:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. Indeed the subject is in on the joke. It would not be proper for me to upload it otherwise. Amin (talk) 17:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The description of the file I deleted was: ‘’A child molestor using a urinal’’, which speaks for itself. What I shouldn’t have missed though, is that this so called joke was not added by the uploader. I have therefore restored the file. My apologies. Wutsje 17:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe you should not have allowed the ‘’A child molestor using a urinal’’ part to stay public if you wanted to undelete the image Trade (talk) 21:32, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Resolved
I think that this question was replied to adequately based on the supplied information. If you have anything to add or a follow-up question please feel free to replace this box with your comment. This section will be archived after two days. Abzeronow (talk) 18:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Needless to say, I never wrote that description. I see now from the edit history that, after that tweet went viral, a few people made edits to it. It seems it was a miscommunication. Thank you for reinstating the photo! Amin (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Free Use Pictures?[edit]

If a picture of a government official is on a government website would that picture be considered "free use"? If so, what would the process be for including it in an article. Thanks - new editor here. The Uptight Man (talk) 16:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It would depend on which government. U.S. federal government works are public domain, but state government works would generally not be. Foreign government works are usually copyrighted, but some of them have free licenses. Abzeronow (talk) 16:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can't assume it, you have to check the individual cases. For example, this particular image [6] is ok, compare clear statement above image with Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses. This image [7] otoh is not, check copyright info on website. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are press kits okay?[edit]

I'm writing up a draft for a Wikipedia page for the spaceflight simulation game Flight of Nova. I would like to include in-game screenshots on the Wikipedia page as a visual aid for readers. There are six screenshots on the website under a section labeled "press kit." Is it okay to use them? Are press kits covered automatically under a creative commons regulation? If I can't use them, then what can I do to get game screenshots onto the page without breaking any rules or laws? Pie GGuy (talk) 18:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Pie GGuy: Which website exactly? See also en:WP:F and COM:NETCOPYRIGHT.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
https://www.flight-of-nova.com Pie GGuy (talk) 19:31, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pie GGuy: Thanks, but which part of "© 2023 Flight Of Nova" did you not understand?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry. I missed that when I first skimmed it. Sorry if I come off as an idiot, this is my first time dealing with copyright law and stuff. So I guess I'm just SOL? Pie GGuy (talk) 14:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow, that is really obvious now that it's pointed out. I guess I'm just so used to glossing over copyright stuff cause I've never had to mind it before that it didn't even register when I saw it. Pie GGuy (talk) 15:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Short answer, no, press kits are not automatically Creative Commons. For it to have a CC license, the license has to be explicitly stated. If you intend on using it for a Wikipedia article, I suggest reading Wikipedia's policies on non-free files w:Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria, and if it meets the policy, upload it locally to Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload Abzeronow (talk) 18:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Figure tag[edit]

Hello, I need to add a tag to a figure I wish to use in an article I'm working on. The figure is a photo of a 1776-dated officer commission for a Revolutionary War soldier that has been in an archive for 100+ years. The archive has just given me permission to use it "as you wish." There are no copyrights involved, and it has never been published. Which tag should I use? Many thanks.Tfhentz (talk) 00:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tfhentz: {{PD-US-expired}} should be fine. - Jmabel ! talk 01:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HS2 Press Gallery[edit]

Hello, been working on some articles for infrastructure on HS2. I want to add some images to them but I'm not sure what the process is to get the correct licensing etc on them - I've emailed them and they say it's fine so long as I give credit to them. How should I proceed? MajorScafellPike (talk) 13:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MajorScafellPike The copyright holder has to willingly release their image under one of the "ok" licenses at Commons:Licensing#Well-known_licenses, which they may not be willing to do, since it means "donating it to the world", pretty much. They can do so by marking images as licensed as such on their website (example:[8], see below image, left side), and then you can upload it, or have a representative register and upload it on Commons themselves, or use COM:VRT.
You could also try to find someone local willing to take new pics for you (assuming that's legally possible), perhaps ask in places like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Kingdom or COM:R. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See, this is what I was thinking, they're happy for me to use it but they don't want to release it to Commons themselves it seems - I'm guessing this is because it's normally for the press who use different ways of notating copyright.
I can try asking around but I doubt many folks on the WikiProject are HS2 employees :D MajorScafellPike (talk) 14:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When you say "they're happy for me to use it but they don't want to release it to Commons themselves", do you mean just that they don't want to get involved with Commons, or that they are willing to give you permission, but don't want to release them to the world?
If it's the former, they could send an email as in COM:VRT (they'd still have to do something, but just send an email). But if it's the latter (as I suspect), then you're out of luck. ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Figure in expanded view.[edit]

In the article Adamson Tannehill, the second figure ("Continental Army commission for Third Lt. Adamson Tannehill of...") will not enlarge when it is in expanded view. Instead, when one clicks on the figure, it downloads the image file to my desktop instead of enlarging it. Can you determine how to stop the download process and enable the reader to enlarge the figure? Many thanks! Tfhentz (talk) 14:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tfhentz: I'm guessing you mean Adamson Tannehill (on the English-language Wikipedia).
That's because it's a TIFF. Normal behavior for a TIFF: most browsers don't have built-in support for viewing them. - Jmabel ! talk 17:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tfhentz, I see that you've replaced the image with a JPG format. It is important to note that the change in format involves the loss of information. As you can see, the JPG file size is 163KiB and the TIFF was 991KiB. TIFF is a lossless file format, while JPG is a lossy format that favors compact filesize over fidelity to the original pixels. While JPGs can produce great results for normal photographs and other images where this doesn't matter, I highly recommend that you choose PNG instead. PNG is a lossless, modern format that still manages to do some compression. Since this is a historical document, I would imagine that people could be interested in getting up close and zooming in. After all, that's what brought you here in the first place. And you know, file size isn't a real concern on Commons. Elizium23 (talk) 07:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After suggesting one paragraph, tried to edit but was blocked.[edit]

As I descrived up on the title, I have been blocked by ST47. Because of Plantilla: colocationwebhsot. Which I not understand. Now I will try to find a linear guide for learning how to do things here. Siculena (talk) 15:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You also claimed this on enwiki. You're not blocked anywhere. I can't even find in a log that you were blocked in the past. Perhaps your underlying IP origin is blocked, so en:Wikipedia:IP block exemption would shed some light on the situation. Elizium23 (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In any case, the fact that you can write this here means you are not blocked on this website (Wikimedia Commons). - Jmabel ! talk 17:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
en:User:ST47 is only a sysop at enwiki, so that's the only place this block could've occurred. ST47 hands out 3-year blocks to IP ranges found to be colocation webhosts. The template which was seen by @Siculena would be en:Template:Colocationwebhost, which unfortunately does not have a Spanish or Catalan translation, but here's Google:
Us recomanem que proveu d'utilitzar una altra connexió per editar. Per exemple, si utilitzeu un servidor intermediari o una VPN per connectar-vos a Internet, desactiveu-lo quan editeu la Viquipèdia. Si editeu amb una connexió mòbil, proveu d'utilitzar una connexió Wi-Fi i viceversa. Si teniu un compte de Viquipèdia, inicieu sessió. Si no teniu cap altra manera d'editar la Viquipèdia, haureu de sol·licitar una exempció de bloc d'IP. Elizium23 (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photos[edit]

If a person is part of a poltical party, are we not allowed to use their photos thats on the offical government website? MagicMagicKing (talk) 01:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @MagicMagicKing: Most governments in most countries reserve copyright just like most other people and organizations do. Being part of a political party is irrelevant; the same would apply for pictures of a civil servant, a building, etc. Also, even governments like the U.S. federal government that place all work by their employees in the public domain may have things on their websites that were originally produced by someone else, and those materials don't lose their copyright by being on a U.S. federal government web site. So, in general: no, typically we are not allowed to use such photos. - Jmabel ! talk 02:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thay makes sense. Does that mean all photos on Wikipedia are uploaded via the original copy right holder? Even historical or poltical ones? MagicMagicKing (talk) 05:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @MagicMagicKing It depends. For example, some photos are public domain (which mostly means old), or clearly marked with a Commons-ok license, like [9], and you can upload those on Commons, provided you do it right. English Wikipedia also has a rule that says basically that if an article subject is dead, and no "free" alternative is available, then you can add a "non-free" leadimage to that article. These however, are uploaded on Wikipedia itself, not Commons, and again, you have to do it right. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:17, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I think a read once of a parliament or similar who took photos specifically with the purpose that these photos should be made available for WP/Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Help_desk&oldid=803518859"