Wikipedia:Media copyright questions
Media copyright questions | ||
---|---|---|
Welcome to the Media Copyright Questions page, a place for help with image copyrights, tagging, non-free content, and related questions. For all other questions please see Wikipedia:Questions.
If a question clearly does not belong on this page, reply to it using the template {{mcq-wrong}} and, if possible, leave a note on the poster's talk page. For copyright issues relevant to Commons where questions arising cannot be answered locally, questions may be directed to Commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright.
| ||
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge) |
---|
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
PD-old-assumed? edit
File:Edouard Pinaud, Ed. Pinaud.jpg looks more like an advertisement incorporating a colorized/sepia public domain image of Édouard Pinaud who died in 1868. The source cited is "France, Digital Crown Holdings Limited" and there's also a link to www
File:Scars Upon My Heart advertisement.jpg edit
Given that File:Scars Upon My Heart advertisement.jpg is nothing but factual information expressed as simple text, which is usually not considered eligible for copyright protection, it seems that this advertisement doesn't need to be treated as non-free. Since it's from the UK, though, it might not be something acceptable to move to Commons per c:COM:UK, but it should be OK to relicense as {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} for local use on Wikipedia. Any reason why this should remain non-free? If it does need to remain non-free, then I don't think it's use meet WP:FREER and WP:NFC#CS. Finally, regardless of the file's copyright status, there might be an issue with MOS:TEXTASIMAGES since it essentially is an image of what's written in Scars Upon My Heart#Adaptations. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Warranty on old knife sleeve edit
I have an old Quikut knife with the blade still in its cardboard sleeve, which has a lifetime warranty printed on it. I recall my family bought it in the 1970s.
I took a picture of the knife blade next to the sleeve. The warranty verbiage is similar to this, although my version says in big capital letters that the warranty is valid "EVEN IF THE DAMAGE IS YOUR FAULT". I'd like to add my photo to the Ginsu article, which discusses the Quikut brand extensively.
Would this be a non-free image? Is this warranty text copyrighted? If so, the low resolution required would wash out the text, so it may not be worth uploading. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
{{PD-text}}
, also{{Useful-object-US}}
, also de minimis. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 19:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)- Thank you. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Added File:Quikut warranty.jpg. I appreciate the advice. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Bot keeps reverting changes edit
The bot JJMC89 bot keeps reverting changes. How do I disable the bot on a wiki page? It seems to ignore reverts of its changes. Ergzay (talk) 11:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Ergzay Examples please? If you're specifically talking about image removals, the bot is normally pretty good and the main reason it removes images is that they are non-free images lacking a rationale for the article they had been added to. Nthep (talk) 19:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Ergzay. Are you asking about the bots edits to the article "List of tallest statues"? If you are, then the bot seems to be doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing. The bot explained why it removed File:Ushiku.jpg from the article in the edit summary it left. Did you see the edit summary and click on the link included in it? Non-free content is bascially required to have two things for it to be OK to use in a Wikipedia article: (1) a non-free copyright license and (2) a separate specific non-free use rationale for each use. Although a single copyright license is usually sufficient in most cases regardless of how many times a non-free files is being used, a seperate non-free use rationale is required to be added to the file's page for each of its different uses because not all uses of a file may be considered compliant with Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. You added the Ushiku image to the list article about statues, but you didn't add a corresponding non-free use rationale for that particular use to the file's page; so, the bot did what it's been tasked to do and removed the file. If you want to stop the bot from removing the file, you or someone else will need to add the required rationale for that use to the file's page. However, adding a rationale is WP:JUSTONE of the criteria that need to be satisfied for a non-free use to be valid; so, adding the rationale doesn't automatically mean the file's non-free use will still not be challenged or removed. Finally, your edit here isn't really accurate in terms of Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. Generally, in cases like this, non-free images aren't considered OK to illustrate individual entries in list articles or in tables for the reasons given in WP:NFLISTS, WP:NFTABLES and item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI. Since an image of the statue can be seen in Ushiku Daibutsu, adding the same file to the list article is considered to not really be needed per non-free content use criterion #3 (WP:NFC#Meeting the minimal usage criterion) and the free alternative of linking to the statue's article is considered sufficient per non-free content use criterion #1 (WP:FREER). Of course, none of that has to do with why the bot removed the file since the bot is unable to make such assessments, but it's generally what's considered to be the consensus regarding this type of non-free use. You can disagree with this assessment, add the missing rationale to the file's page and then re-add the file to the article if feel is somehow different and should be separately discussed. Doing so, as mentioned above, will stop the bot, but I don't think you'll be able to establish a consensus for this file's use in that particular article at WP:FFD and stop file from eventually be removed again by a Wikipedia administrator. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
edit
No. Even the image has a rationale for the page used, it still removes. I also got this userbox's emblem removed without asking me. I've read the revision summary that the bot left and it said removed NFCC violations. At that time I was so confused that I thought the bot is attempting to thwart my contributions away like a trash. It skips the rationale and removes without notice, like this userbox. Kys5g talk! 03:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- You still have not stated exactly what image and what article this happened at. Its hard to answer your question when you don't provide any details. -- Whpq (talk) 04:03, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Now enough? Kys5g talk! 04:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I misread and confused you with the original editor posting the question. In your case, the usage fails WP:NFCC#9. Nonfree content is allowed only in articles. A template or userbox is not an article. -- Whpq (talk) 04:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Kys5g. There's some guidance on this at WP:UBX#Caution about image use and WP:UP#Non-free files. You might also want to look at WP:UOWN as to why neither permission nor a warning needs to be given for clear violations of Wikipedia policy in the user namespace. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Now enough? Kys5g talk! 04:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Sample of a 92 second song edit
I am working on creating a sample for my draft of User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/Go New York Go. The original 1994 version of the song is 92 seconds. I imagine that I am limited to less than the usual 30 seconds for a sample but I am not sure what the sampling limits are for such a short song.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Also, can an article have both a link to the youtube video of the song and a 15 or 16 second sample.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- If less than 30 seconds can capture the essence of a song, that's all you need. You can link to YouTube if the video isn't a copyright violation (that is, it's an "official" video for which the entity who posted the video owns the copyright). Copyvio youtube links are deleted on sight. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
File:Bat Khan.JPG and others edit
Hello. Can an admin check if the files deleted through Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 April 25#File:Bat Khan.JPG are eligible for undeletion courtesy of the reformed Mongolian FoP (see c:COM:FOP Mongolia). The eligible works are statues, structures, and architecture that are meant to be permanently-located in public places. Due to some ambiguity, Commons consensus treat public indoors as "unsure/unknown" as of the moment. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
R.S. Yeoman edit
I've looked for years for a free image of Yeoman for the article, but I havent been able to find any, so I added a nonfree image. After reading through the policy I believe this is an appropriate use. Coingeek (talk) 17:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
File:RSYeoman.jpeg Coingeek (talk) 17:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- You need to add a non-free usage rationale to the file description at File:RSYeoman.jpeg, and it should be cropped to show only the subject of the article. -- Whpq (talk) 17:34, 26 May 2024 (UTC)