Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard/Archive 12

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

Dutch Ministry of Defence

Hello OTRS staff,

Can someone help me further with OTRS ticket 2010081110012531, the files are from the Dutch Ministry of Defence site and I would like to know if I can help to solve/close this ticket.

Best regards,

Huhbakker (talk) 09:35, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Een paar dagen geleden ontvingen wij bericht dat alle tekst, afbeeldingen en videos van het Ministerie van Defensie zijn vrijgegeven onder {CC0}. Men stelt het wel op prijs als bron genoemd te worden. Dit staat in ticket 2010120610018876. Jcb (talk) 11:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably this means that we would not require ticket references on these images, though perhaps a standard template might help avoid any confusion for new images from the Ministerie van Defensie? --Fæ (talk) 12:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply, the source (Ministerie of Defensie) is also listed as "bad source" on [1], a template can avoid a lot of confusion (I think). BR Huhbakker (talk) 14:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea: Template:Mindef. - Jcb (talk) 14:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS emailed 2.5 months ago, with permission and question - no answer

So I uploaded these:

in september, and sent an email to OTRS. Along with a copy of the e-mail in which the team's english rep asked me to do so. I asked if that was sufficient in the e-mail, and never received a reply. The team has a history of giving OTRS permission for images on wikipedia, so this isn't a strange or unusual request. Today I notice that a bot has gone through and marked them for deletion since no one has bothered to address the email I originally sent.--Crossmr 06:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find it by searching for each file's name individually. It may have gotten lost in the avalanche of spam we get, or something else may have happened. I'd suggest sending the email again. The commons queues are unusually low right now (backlogged about one day), so we should be able to get to it quickly.--Chaser (talk) 07:00, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The subject didn't have the file name in it since it was for 4 images. I gave it the subject "permission for 4 images". I've resent it with the same subject now.--Crossmr (talk) 07:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find anything with that subject from up to four months ago. I did find the recent email. Check your inbox.--Chaser (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bright_College_Years.oga

I just received notice that permission had not been received for this file. I forwarded an email thread from the licenser a few months ago, but it was as a raw attachment, so it's possible the formatting was bad. I've reforwarded that thread just now to permissions-commons as a simple inline copy. If the email headers etc. are needed, please let me know, and I can resend those. If anything is still missing, please let me know. I can get back in touch with the licenser if need be. Thanks for your help. Oconnor663 (talk) 08:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Riquepqd's uploads

Riquepqd (talk · contribs) has uploaded several images for which it is claimed that permission was sent on December 13 (e.g. the stated rationale is "Já enviada por e-mail em 13/12/2010 (Permission of the author already sent by email to [email protected] on 13/12/2010)." or "Já enviada por e-mail em 13/12/2010." Is it possible to confirm that permissions have been forwarded from the uploader? BrokenSphere (Talk) 23:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A native Portuguese collegue found out the permissions were not specific enough (no license was mentioned). Emails will be answered with instructions. Jcb (talk) 00:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permission sent but not recognised

OTRS permission for File:Glider bungee launch.JPG was sent by someone with an e-mail address ending blueyonder.co.uk. This has not been received/recognised because a notice was put on my talk page. Permission was sent again today. If this has not been recognised again, please contact me before deleting so we can trace source of problem. Jmcc150 (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We did not receive that email. Jcb (talk) 23:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Would that be ticket# 2010121410021758? Asav (talk) 05:57, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's that ticket. It came from another email address. I don't know why I didn't get it when I searched for the filename. Jcb (talk) 12:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:MIT Herr 2734 F W-2.jpg

Sent email re: permission authorization for the above mentioned file. 12/15/2010, 3:50 PM email from [email protected]

We received that email. Further conversation over email please, you received a first reaction. Jcb (talk) 23:03, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Priyanka at 'Haal Mureedan Da Kehna' Kirtan album launch.jpg

Does this image have OTRS permission? I don't see a ticket no and the source explicitly claims that they don't own copyrights and are only "archiving" the images. SpacemanSpiff (talk) 09:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No ticket appears to be relevant. I have marked for deletion on that basis. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 10:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permission sent but not recorded

OTRS permissions for File:Sahrawi&camel.jpg,File:Aminetou Mandela.jpg,File:Haidarpamphlet.jpg,File:Haidar&oldfriend.jpg,File:Haidarwithoutoldfriend.jpg sent by me, but the OTRS team cant find any record that such an email has been received.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 11:43, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As these appear under an appropriate license on Flickr, an OTRS ticket is not required anyway. I have removed the warnings accordingly. Please add another note on this noticeboard if you continue having problems. Thanks. --Fæ (talk) 11:58, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old OTRS

Here is a weird old one. Can someone find information for de:Datei:Plan Henneberg.jpg? There is an OTRS tag on that file. If it says that de:User:Archaeomax is Heiner Schwarzberg, then that would mean we can save File:Burg Schneidlingen - Südansicht.jpg (also from Archaeomax/Heiner Schwarzberg). Thank you. Wknight94 talk 03:27, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing on OTRS ticket 2007021510019614 to indicate this, further unless an email were to clearly release such information about the identity of a user or the user's own account were to make such a declaration then this would have to stay confidential. I note that Archaeomax has a contact email on their account so I suggest contacting them directly for a clarification or to send in a specific release for the other image. --Fæ (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permission for File:AccuPen.jpg User Name jackguerin

I am responding to the following request for permission. ...

The permission is provided in the attached email chain. I am a marketing consultant. My client is Automated Ophthalmics which is the major distributor for this product. The photo is the property of Accutome which is the manufacturer. Jeremy Cohen represents Accutome and he has granted the permission. ...

  • I have trimmed the above post by Jackguerin (talk · contribs) as inappropriate for the noticeboard, refer to diff. As per the instructions on the image page, you need to forward your evidence by email to "permissions-commons-at-wikimedia.org" rather than posting here as there is no way of verifying that this text is from the correct email addresses. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 22:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Authorship for File:1930s HU STUDENTS.jpg

Hey there. Would someone be able to check ticket #2009061610042701 to see if it has more specific authorship data listed for File:1930s HU STUDENTS.jpg than just "Hamline University"? Muchos gracias. Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 07:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket 2009061610042701
  • The email was credibly from "Hamline University Media Relations" though I shall not pass on the specific name given inline with OTRS confidentiality. There was no further authorship information. The ticket stated "Hamline University grants Wikipedia and Wikimedia the right to use the following under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0" and listed the following 3 images:
  1. File:1930s_HU_STUDENTS.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  2. File:ARCH10224.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  3. File:Hamline_Logo.gif (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
--Fæ (talk) 10:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 18:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

request update on turtle crossing picture permission

Request update on permission approval for this photo:

The volunteer said the original permission was ambiguous, but granter made anohther more explicit email "I approve release under CCSA", after volunteer asked for clarification. I sent the new email to OTRS. HAve not heard an update and want to know if we are OK, now?

TCO (talk) 21:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Sorry it took me so long.--Chaser (talk) 22:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sign1.gif / File:I 90 Montana Construction sign.png

I had gotten permission from Jon in the Montana Department of Transportation to upload this image, however I do not see that the ticket has been updated. This may be because the image was originally Sign1.gif, and I named it something new. Can you cross reference to see if the email was sent, if not I can have him resend it. Thanks! --Admrboltz (talk) 04:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • ✓ Done ticket reference added. Note, the email was replied to within an hour of receipt with a request to email back the URL of the uploaded image. --Fæ (talk) 05:29, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cute, ok, I was hoping if he had received a request like that he would have emailed me, but thanks :) --Admrboltz (talk) 23:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MisterX123's video game uploads

MisterX123 (talk · contribs) has uploaded some video game covers (and 1 screenshot) with OTRS pending tags. I seriously doubt though that the big name game publishers would release such material under a free license. Have such emails been sent? BrokenSphere (Talk) 20:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately that's becoming a more common practice - fake OTRS pending tags. I've speedy deleted and they can always be restored if the OTRS arrives. Wknight94 talk 20:57, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fort Duquesne headache!

The files listed below, which you uploaded, have been tagged {{OTRS pending}} for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the OTRS team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the OTRS team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have not sent the permission, please send it to "permissions-commons@wikimedia.org" now. Please quote the file name in your email. If you have, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard, quoting the file name, so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. Please note that this message is being left by an automated bot, whose operator is not an OTRS volunteer, therefore please do not send this information to me, as it will not save your images from deletion. Thanks for your time! Please help translate this message! HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out) 05:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Ottulich, who made the table top model, and who took the picture, sent it to me and said we could use it. He sold the table top model to the Ottawa war museum, and actually sent me 3 pictures with permission to use them. However, you are making it so difficult for him that it has now become a nightmare. Had I known this, I would not have bother phoning him and writing to him. I could have taken the picture myself at the Ottawa war museum 3 weeks ago when I was in Ottawa. It's making me upset, I am finding less free time to deal with this so call free site. The site has collected millions, but we give free time and how many pictures have I given for free. Do what you want, I am so fed up with this. You don't try to help, you only reprimand--Harfang (talk) 15:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry the template notices can be heavy-handed in tone. I have run a search on the OTRS email log and not found any matches (I have tried 'Harfang', 'Ottulich' with no matches and 'Fort Duquesne' only matched an email from 2008). If you have not sent in an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with a copy of a release from Ottulich then this will need to happen before a verifying ticket can be issued. Without this there is no evidence on record that you have the right permission to load this image on behalf of Ray Ottulich and although we can often assume good faith for self-releases, there needs to be something on record when uploading photos from third parties. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 16:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Harfang, the process is fairly straightforward - it's hardly a "nightmare". Commons does not host copyrighted images unless it has the release of the copyright-holder. The photo belongs to Ottulich, and he needs to give us permission to use it - this is not an onerous or unreasonable requirement. I explained the process to you twice, both before and after you uploaded the image in question. I provided you with links to the OTRS instructions, a link to the suggested release text, the permissions email address and explained how you could tag the images OTRS-pending. Later in October, I also warned you that the image could be deleted if Ottulich's release was never sent to OTRS. At the time you said "If he doesn't, I will be in Ottawa in 3 weeks, and I will go take the picture myself". You have been offered considerable assistance, so it is somewhat surprising that you are now expressing surprise and anger at the process, expressing disappointment at having missed the opportunity to take your own photo in Ottawa, and claiming that no one offers you any help. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Harfang, do you have any old emails from Ottulich, where he agrees to freely license the image? The emails can't be ambiguous (such as "I allow Wikipedia to reuse my photos") - Ottulich needs to explicitly agree to publishing his work under a free license - but there is always the chance that you already have something from him. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Skeezix, I do have an e-mail from him. I am not home now, but when I go home, I will send it to you. I did send Ray Ottulich twice the OTRS instructions, and the second time, I filled it out myself, I only needed his signature and for him to send it back to you. What I think is the problem, is yes he gave me permission, but now that he sold the table top model to the Ottawa war museum, he doesn't want to be bothered again. Some people are like, ask me once, but don't ask me again, or don't make it difficult or I lose interest. I said it was a nightware for me because as you are aware of, I did have another picture of Fort Duquesne, actually better than this one I got from him, and you know the hassle I went through in order to get this picture, so as not to lose all the different language wikipedias using it. Now I realize4 the only way is to take it myself and give it for free to wikipedia commons, as I have done with many of my pictures. Sorry if I sounded upset, but besides my work as a sales representative, which is not that easy, I am saddened by the difficulties involved to get one picture. Hope you understand, and I do thank you for the great help that you have been giving me throughout this long and tedious process.--Harfang (talk) 17:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is what he sent me along with 3 pictures of Fort Duquesne?

10 octobre 2010 23:30

Dear Jacques,

Yea sure go ahead and use it, here are some other views attached one shows the hornwork added to the fortification, BTY the actual model that the pictures were taken of is now at the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa.

Ray O

Sadly, that doesn't seem sufficient. He wasn't asked if he agreed to freely license his image, and his reply simply said "go ahead and use it", which in my opinion isn't enough to show that he intended to freely license it. Does anyone have any other thoughts? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, identical thoughts. This is unfortunately not sufficient. Also, you might want to reconsider publishing personal email correspondence if not agreed to by the respective author. Best wishes, —Pill (talk) 00:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the next time I am in Ottawa, I will go take the picture. I bit complicated, but US laws are stringent compared to many parts of the world. Unfortunately for Wikileaks, he will eventually pay the heavy price. Try to find the guys who shot the moonlanding, they eventually all disappeared.--Harfang (talk) 07:55, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permission for File:Silver_Syrian_Pound_1950.png

Have you received an e-mail with a permission for this file? I haven't uploaded it yet, I prefer not to upload before I get a ticket No. If you haven't received one does it suffice if I forward you my e-mail conversation with the copyright owner? Regards, -- Orionist ★ talk 16:26, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly cannot see any matches for "Syrian" that seem relevant. Please email, attach your correspondence and the associated release statement from the copyright holder. --Fæ (talk) 16:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've just sent the e-mail. Can you please check it out and give a ticket number? I appreciate it. Regards, -- Orionist ★ talk 17:09, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orionist, we have received your email (ticket# is 2010122310015481). Note that emails are worked on in (more or less) chronological order, so it might take some time until a volunteer will deal with it. If you do not want to upload the image before, it would be nice if you could attach it to a follow-up email to your original one (just make sure to mention [Ticket#2010122310015481] in the subject line), so that we have some idea of what you're talking about :) Normally, however, users upload their images beforehand and add an {{OTRS pending}} tag to indicate that they've sent an email and that the file thus shouldn't be deleted. Cheers, —Pill (talk) 00:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! This is actually the first time I use the OTRS system so I didn't know the exact work flow. A receipt acknowledgement is sufficient for me to upload, which I've just did at the same file name I gave earlier: File:Silver Syrian Pound 1950.png. I hope I used the correct template, though. Thanks for your time and happy holidays! -- Orionist ★ talk 15:55, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orionist, I think the template you used is fine, though as far as I remember this one is usually used by OTRS volunteers. But nervermind. Happy holidays to you as well! —Pill (talk) 18:17, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mohammad-Reza Rahimi.jpg

Could somebody with OTRS account please verify that the image File:Mohammad-Reza Rahimi.jpg has indeed been verified through the OTRS system as the file description page states? The reason I am asking is that this image is being re-added to an en-wiki article by a prolific sockpupetter with a history of copyright violations, and I'd like to make sure that this particular image is legit. Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 17:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, same for File:Seyyed Shamseddin Hosseini.JPG, whose file description page mentions the same OTRS ticket as File:Mohammad-Reza Rahimi.jpg. Nsk92 (talk) 17:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Elsie

please check if you got this mail : http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/User_talk:Prosfilaes#Permissions thanks, 09:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • No sign of any match to "Elsie" less than 100 days old on OTRS. --Fæ (talk) 11:10, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tamer Hassan crop.jpg

Im about to discover a sockpuppet zoo by User:Turco85 uploading one or two images per account. The OTRS ticket of this image is likely wrong. Did the permission come from the WENN (en:World Entertainment News Network)? --Martin H. (talk) 18:20, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader claims to be the creator of the image. From that it is evident that the email came from this user as well, and this is almost certainly the case. —Pill (talk) 01:25, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I dont have access to the WENN database, but according to the "other versions" added when the permission was requested the image was visible at http://www.absolutely.net/event/Premiere_of_Cass_at_London/cass_premiere_168_wenn5169280.html. Note the WENN and the 5169280 in the link. At that website http://www.allmegastar.com/c/TamerHassan1_event.html a link to that page, wenn5169280 is described with Lia Toby/WENN. See also http://www.liatoby.co.uk/links.html. The image is visible in Tineye with the (C)WENN watermark and visible at http://www.contactmusic.com/photos.nsf/main/tamer_hassan_5169280 (with the 5169280 again). --Martin H. (talk) 01:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Better delete the image for the time being (insufficient statement of permission, c.f. #2010102910004494), the ticket would certainly not have been handled the same way if this contradiction had been known. I'll get back to the sender and ask for confirmation from a verifiable email address. Are you around on IRC at times? Cheers & happy holidays (a bit late, admittedly), —Pill (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. With however the author name wrong and the uploader beeing a 100% sockpuppet (not 99 but 100%) of someone who tries other copyvios with other sock accounts I dont believe the permission will be valid. If something happens you can use my talk, COM:UNDEL or the file talkpage. Thanks however for the second view. --Martin H. (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:King's Square by D7 Band Album Cover.jpg

Can someone check picture File:King's Square by D7 Band Album Cover.jpg--Motopark (talk) 03:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket is awaiting email confirmation to clarify the release statement given. --Fæ (talk) 09:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images by Illegal Operation

Can someone please verify if this user has send a permissions email for these files and if he/she is in fact the copyright holder. Most of these images are taken from several technology blogs so I dont think the uploader is the copyright holder and the last one is the Microsoft Office 2010 logo so the uploader is definitely not the copyright holder (thought the image could still stay in commons since it only consists of simple geometric shapes):

I ran fulltext searches for 1) Focus.jpg, 2) Trophy.jpg, 3) Illegal Operation, 4) Dell Venue, 5) engadget, 6) Samsung Focus -- none did return anything useful, unfortunately. —Pill (talk) 09:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bahram vi.jpg

The OTRS tag seems to be broken. Could you please check it? Thanks. --Leyo 22:08, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket specified is ticket:2007022010005941. Could someone with some knowledge of Frech have a quick look into it to make sure it was all right? Thanks, —Pill (talk) 22:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ticket:2009091310008417

According to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joseph Stalin.jpg this ticket cover the derivative file File:Joseph Stalin.jpg. Is it coveres the origin File:Joseph Stalin Colour.jpg? If it so it's better to add the OTRS ticket to the origin. Geagea (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket refers to File:Joseph Stalin.jpg. Are you sure that this is a derivative of Joseph Stalin Colour? According to the description pages it should be the other way around. —Pill (talk) 09:10, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right. Good colour work. My mistake. Thanks. Geagea (talk) 04:28, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images by User:Jimwhat

Can someone please verify if this user has send a permissions email for these files and if he/she is in fact the copyright holder.

One photo is from engadget.com and the other from mobiclue.com, both sites say their content is copyrighted I doubt the uploader is the copyrights holder, I believe he just uploaded them using the OTRS pending template. If no ticket is found can these be speedy deleted as copyvios? --Chris Ssk (talk) 10:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted - the queue is not empty but it is a matter of a day or so not a month or so behind and there is nothing relating to those images. Thanks for the info. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:NexusS.jpg

I doubt the uploader is the copyrights holder and if a ticket for this image exists. The Uploader lists "My Documents" as source and "Google (I think)" as author. The image seem to be this from samsung's Nexus S page I believe the uploader just uploaded them using the OTRS pending template. If this is the case can it be speedy deleted as copyvios? Thanks --Chris Ssk (talk) 18:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My searches for the image name and the uploader both returned nothing. Could someone please delete the file? Thank you Chris for the pointer, —Pill (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 17:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Paltz railroad station photos

I've uploaded four scans of an old former railroad station, taken from the collection at the Elting Memorial Library in New Paltz, New York. When I forwarded the email containing confirmation from the library, I only listed the first image. The full list of images is:

If the email is not adequate, please contact the Haviland-Heidgerd Historical Collection for further confirmation.
--Gyrobo (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message, I have added a note to the ticket (#2010123010016233) pointing to the images listed. —Pill (talk) 21:09, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've sent an email to the head librarian of the Haviland-Heidgerd collection asking for an unambiguous, explicit statement releasing the images under a compatible free license.
--Gyrobo (talk) 16:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads by SirgermanI

Since joining us in February, this user has given us nothing but copyright violations. With their latest uploads, they are claiming to have sent in information to OTRS confirming that they are the author and copyright holder of File:838693-117750 91284 silver sable super super-1-.gif (the filename indicates it was taken from here) and File:Jim cummings photo.jpg. This seems unlikely, since Silver Sable is a Marvel Comics character created by Tom DeFalco, Ron Frenz and Josef Rubinstein and the photograph is a Getty Images photo. Could someone check if there is any merit whatsoever to the OTRS tag or if it's just another instance of abuse? —LX (talk, contribs) 14:07, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the queue - given the history I've deleted/blocked. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:14, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict:) Fulltext searches for "cummings," "Sirgerman," "838693," "silver sable" and "52139810" all returned nothing of relevance. Thus, I would say it's rather unlikely that we have something about the files in OTRS. Best wishes for the new year, —Pill (talk) 14:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading on behalf of another user

Just noticed that I have uploaded in the past a fair number of images on behalf of another WP user:

Do I need to ask the user to send OTRS email for these or can someone solve the situation by checking with User:Notafly ? Shyamal (talk) 05:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shyamal, it would be best if you asked him to send us an email containing 1) a list of all images concerned and 2) agreement to cc-by-2.5 (or another license). Thanks & best wishes for the new year, —Pill (talk) 14:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ticket #2010123010010819

Would someone check if the above ticket covers File:Dr. David Darom 2008.jpg. --  Docu  at 13:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does not. Best wishes, —Pill (talk) 14:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Larsen twins

Is Commons:Authorization to use material from http://www.larsen-twins.dk valid, and is there an associated OTRS ticket? Kelly (talk) 04:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the Commons files that link to this permission and here are the ones at en Wikipedia. Kelly (talk) 04:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We were forwarded ticket:2007041610014864 which is perfectly identical to the email on Commons:Authorization to use material from http://www.larsen-twins.dk. I am quite unhappy with this release to say the least, though, as it contains neither an explicit agreement to the license nor explicit confirmation that they even own sufficient rights. And this was exactly what we told the sender of this email back in 2007 (unfortunately, we didn't get a response to that). There's way too many question marks about this ticket (and even more given the fact that the sender of the ticket is not identical to the person asking for permission [perhaps he/she just copy&pasted from the wiki page linked above?] and that there is, uhm, ticket:2009080310032947 which adds further doubt in this matter). In short, I personally think the images should be deleted (how many are affected?) unless we can get a more precise statement of permission. —Pill (talk) 11:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've sent today a new request for authorisation under the "CC.attribution 3.0 - unported" license to the Larsen brothers in Denmark. JoJan (talk) 16:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aimoneyetap.jpg

When I translated the article "Eyetap" in the year 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eyetap&oldid=46578004), I also moved the picture at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aimoneyetap.jpg from the English Wikipedia to the Commons. Back then, we didn't have OTRS. Today I received a notice that the picture in question has been marked for deletion because an OTRS is missing. I feel that deleting this picture is a bit heavy, especially given that the summary of the image contains almost all copyright intentions of the uploaded that were required back in the days when OTRS did not exist, yet. Shouldn't it instead be marked as OTRS missing or so?

Either way, can someone please help get this picture http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aimoneyetap.jpg and also http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Musical_applications_of_eyetap.jpg into OTRS? I believe the images are valuable for wikipedia as it enriches the article through visual explanation. If user http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Glogger cannot be reached through wikipedia, his email address appears to be [email protected] (Steve Mann, who is also depicted in the second picture) according to public records. If this fails, [email protected] appears to be a good alternative email address.

I would very much appreciate if someone could help get this back on track and prevent these good pictures from deletion. Thanks! ---volty 16:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

  • As a suggestion, you can email him directly and ask his permission for use, then forward his response to us via OTRS, or have him email OTRS directly. Do either of these solutions work for you? Warmly, NonvocalScream (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, this sounds good, I contacted the author and asked for an OTRS response. For a more general issue, i am firing up a new discussion thread. Thanks again! ---volty 03:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Jean Carlos Bx's uploads

Jean Carlos Bx (talk · contribs) has uploaded several media of the band Cielito Drive from their Facebook and flickr pages with pending OTRS tags. Can someone verify if OTRS emails have been sent concerning these uploads? BrokenSphere (Talk) 22:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anything in our system. —Pill (talk) 00:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Content that predates OTRS but has proper legacy license tagging

Hi folks, given a recent situation, I wondered what the recommendation is for files that were uploaded to the wikimedia commons and meet the following criteria:

  • uploaded prior to OTRS being in place (in or before the year 2006)
  • does not meet speedy deletion criteria
  • has a proper file description that meets the guidelines that were in place before OTRS (or when the file was originally uploaded), e.g.
  • author/creator name
  • a wikimedia-commons compatible license type
  • a valid Source

In such situations, I feel that filing a deletion request with the sole reason "No OTRS permissions" is against the wider goals of the Wikimedia Commons, given that the file has met all requirements that were in place back then.

Instead, I would find it much more useful to contact the author listed in the file description to ask to provide consent via OTRS. However, even a strongly enforced 15-day response time frame appears very harsh for such files that are most likely not a copyright violation (but simply predate OTRS).

I haven't been very active in the commons lately, specifically since the OTRS introduction (but not because of it *g*), so this is the best place for me to put my thoughts. Please feel free to move this to a more suitable place and/or post the location of it here. Thanks and kind regards, ---volty 04:05, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Consensus is that these don't require an OTRS tag. If one can be obtained, it's obviously a good thing to add. --  Docu  at 12:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thanks Docu. Is this documented anywhere you can point me to real quick so i can add it to the deletion request of a specific file (to indicate that the deletion request was filed incorrectly)? Cheers, ---volty 12:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
You can link my comment above ;)
Anyways, this discusses it. --  Docu  at 12:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks :-) ---volty 12:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Gomalia elma

Can someone check the ticket for these files?

Please add OTRS and Information template. -- Common Good (talk) 19:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the OTRS templates, it should be fine now. —Pill (talk) 23:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Licenza immagini FranzJosef

Sono stato avvisato che alcune immagini da me caricate saranno cancellate se non fornirò la prova che effettivamente sono opera mia. Purtroppo non conosco l'inglese e ho capito solo questo. Non so come fornire le prove richieste. Né che altro fare. Ringrazio chi vorrà darmi una risposta. --FranzJosef (talk) 23:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FranzJosef su Wikipedia it [6]
All these images were self-licensed images of embroidery. Since OTRS is not necessary for someone relicensing their own images, I just removed the tags. I'll explain more at his commons user talk.--Chaser (talk) 01:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lauragrammyok5.jpg

Please check the validity of the OTRS ticket, looks somewhat suspect to me. --Denniss (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me; I can't find the name of the photographer, though. Could someone more proficient in Italian please have a look as well? Wishes, —Pill (talk) 00:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the ticket does not cover the information from http://www.gettyimages.de/detail/92851535/AFP the image should be deleted. The uploader on it.wp it:Speciale:Contributi/Nerocreativo seems pretty much a SPA, he started editing 6 July 2010, around that time we also had Special:Undelete/File:Lauragrammy.jpg. Two options: (1) An agency is trying to place images they dont have the copyright on (note the username of the deleted file here) or (2) a fan is posting copyvios at any price with simulating official functions. Im sorry to asume the bad second option. --Martin H. (talk) 13:39, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Martin, I find it rather hard to respond to this as the site you mention indeed states very clearly that the image may not be used. Disclosing the information we were given through the email correspondence in confidence would thus add details to a known(!) legal contradiction (this is quite rarely the case). Given the site and our experience, it might be better to delete the file (though there would normally be very good reasons to accept the permission), but I will try to check back with some fellow volunteers and then get back to you here again. I hope you are fine with this unsatisfying response for the time being. Best wishes, —Pill (talk) 01:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC) (And by the way, what is an SPA?)[reply]
I have no insight in the OTRS ticket. I found something that you maybe not know, you have information that I dont have (the ticket) and that you can not tell me, so I give you my information to you, of course im fine if you take my information and look what it means. If the author information for example is contradictory we should delete it better. Possibly you can request information from the email sender? - I dont know much about OTRS. A SPA is a en:WP:SPA, here a SPA to place non-free images to that article. I say SPA because of the uplaoders it.wp talkpage, his edits and because a normal editor will not take such technical measures to upload an image, this image is for example terribly upscaled from an ~700-800px 'original' thumbnail. --Martin H. (talk) 02:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:St. Dimitrius Varosh.jpg

File talk:St. Dimitrius Varosh.jpg has a note from Подпоручикъ (talk · contribs) saying the OTRS team missed tagging that file. Any idea? I will ask Подпоручикъ for any other information. Wknight94 talk 23:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, ticket:2010021110051321 could have something to do with it. Someone speaking Bulgarian? —Pill (talk) 01:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portret Ks. Tadeusza Kawali.jpg

Can someone take a look at File:Portret Ks. Tadeusza Kawali.jpg and see if the OTRS ticket for that one could also apply to the other uploads by the same user? All have been marked as no-permission for many months and ready to be deleted. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 01:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Polish speaker needed (ticket:2010102910004029). —Pill (talk) 10:44, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
its only for Portret Ks. Tadeusza Kawali.jpg but if Zbigniew Kresowaty is Drawer7 than it might be okay. Kresowaty wrote; "... na mojej stronie autorskiej:

http://www.kresowaty.com.pl <http://www.kresowaty.com.pl/> ". But I'm not sure if Drawer7 is Kresowaty. In the ticket Kresowaty wrote his nick is Krezbi ...Sicherlich Post 10:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Commons OTRS members list sorted by language and activity level

Would such a list be useful? Worthwhile? See further elaboration here. The idea, in brief, is to have a bot create a list of Commons OTRS members with language information from their userpages and activity level from their contribs. Regular updates depend on local bot approval. Comments welcome.--Chaser (talk) 04:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basically a good idea. Activity can only be measured in regard to "commons - edits" of course, not the OTRS-side (number of replies or such). --Guandalug
Right. That's what the bot does. Rick has it set at 30 edits in the last two months on enwiki, but I assume we could ask for different values here, e.g., three edits in last ten days, or whatever.--Chaser (talk) 15:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea, something like Commons:List of administrators by language. A useful list in itself, although manually updated. --Captain-tucker (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a good and useful Idea. One remark, the bot on the Commons:List of administrators by language does sort on motherlanguage only. I suggest to add the language level 4 (like en-4) too. -- Neozoon (talk) 20:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll defer to Rick on whether that's possible. Could we just word-search the language codes, though?--Chaser (talk) 07:09, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipage08

User:Wikipage08 uploaded a lot of images with OTRS permission. Is there a permission and is it valid? Some files are tagged. Please check and then remove the template if appropriate. Thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • After sampling two images at random, the tickets do appear to exist and Wikipage08 appears to have been following the advice they were given in 2007/2008. --Fæ (talk) 16:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Something wrong with these OTRS permissions?

File:Expo031.jpg File:Expo032.jpg

One photo, one permission, two different authors. Was the permission provided by Valéria Gonçalvez? --Polarlys (talk) 00:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I checked this and both appear to be copyvio. I will care about it. Jcb (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. You are doing a great job, I often read your name when it comes to OTRS related stuff. Please check other OTRS tickets by this user as well, if you have time to do so. Thank you again. --Polarlys (talk) 17:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ticket #2010090510001865

I am trying to determine if and how I can use this image from the Wikimedia Commons— http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ekta_Parishad_meeting,_Chhattisgarh,_India,_November_2005.jpg —for a commercial website. If someone could please offer the proper interpretation of the licensing requirements specified on that webpage, it would be greatly appreciated. I've read the instructions here—http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:REUSE—but I don't understand them.


Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.137.206 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC BY SA) license. You can reuse it for any purpose following COM:REUSE#CC-BY-SA. The license stipulates that you must attribute the work to the author, you must mention the license terms or a link to them (a link to the deed, see my link above), and you must make your version available under CC-BY-SA (share alike). --Martin H. (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check request

Could I get a check on ticket #2940575 for en:File:Tollemache-for-our-times.png before I move it over to Commons? Did the permission come from the website owner? Kelly (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It did, though it seems impossible that this file enjoys copyright protection anyway (w:Threshold of originality). —Pill (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very old German OTRS for File:Uwe Krupp4.jpg

Can someone check on a very old ticket for File:Uwe Krupp4.jpg? On de.wp, it was tagged with an OTRS number in 2006 (or at least I assume it's an OTRS number). 2006052910006625. Can someone please verify and then tag the version here accordingly? The ticket number was not transwiki'ed here. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 01:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Verified, tagged. Not the best permission (nowadays, we would challenge the text and ask again) but it had been accepted back then, and I see no reason not to do so again. --Guandalug 07:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Milagres Hampankatta.jpg

Hi, i would appreciate it if some one could speedily issue a ticket for this image. The author sent his permission two days ago, but a ticket has not been issued so far. I would normally wait, but i have nominated one of the articles in which this image appears for Featured Article status and it is imperative that a ticket be issued for this image ASAP. Joyson Noel Holla at me 06:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2007111910004338 inherited from en.wp

Can someone please verify ticket 2007111910004338? It was attached to several en.wp images and then transferred here, but the tagger was the original uploader and I can't tell if s/he was really an OTRS person. Some were originally uploaded with fair use rationale. Files I've found so far:

  1. File:Jonah Goldberg.jpg
  2. File:Reza Aslan.jpg
  3. File:Bruce Feiler.jpg
  4. File:Joshua Cohen.jpg
  5. File:John Horgan Journalist.jpg
  6. File:Francis Fukuyama BH.jpg
  7. File:David Frum.jpg
  8. File:David Corn.jpg
  9. File:DanielDrezner.jpg
  10. w:File:BernardAvishaiScreenshot.jpg
  11. w:File:SeanMCarroll.jpg
  12. w:File:MarkTrodden.jpg

Thank you. Wknight94 talk 13:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket contains a general permission of the contents of Bloggingheads.tv under GFDL. Uploader was instructed bij the OTRS volunteer to paste the PermissionOTRS-template. Jcb (talk) 14:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images N1 and N2 awaiting tickets

Hello, could anybody please look into these two images?

  1. File:Prabhupada's_arrival_in_San_Francisco_1967.jpg
  2. File:Bhaktivedanta Swami with Jagannath in Golden Gate Park, February 1967.jpg

I forwarded the author's permission to Commons on January 10 and then again on January 12, however the tickets are still not issued. The article they are being used in is ready for GAN pending only permissions for these two files. Many thanks. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 08:39, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your e-mail was waiting in the queue to be answered by an OTRS agent. There is really no need to triple send an e-mail, this wouldn't help getting your answer sooner. Your ticket was actually first in the queue and I am going to deal with it in a couple of minutes. odder (talk) 10:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Odder. I resent the email on January 12 because one of the files had to be slightly renamed in transit from en.wiki to Commons. So I did not want to take chances and asked the author to resend his permission for the modified name. Sorry for the multiple emails. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 10:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket No 2007010810012314

Hi, could any OTRS member please add sufficient licensing information to File:Arno_Esch.jpg? The file was licensed on de.wikipedia.org the following way: "public domain, created before 1951". This is obviously wrong. On request we received an OTRS ticket. The file was uploaded from http://www.gegen-diktatur.de/beispiel.php?beisp_id=202&tafel_id=19&thema=1#. A trust runs this website. They state: All copyright: by their respective owners. When it comes to this picture, the copyright owner is referred to as "Verein ehemaliger Rostocker Studenten", a society that was founded years after the subject’s death and is some kind of society for alumni of an university in (Eastern) Germany that deals especially with victims of the post-war era. Due to the political cirumstances the activity of this society was limited to Western Germany for several decades. Let me conclude a few things: a) The author is an unnamed photographer from the late 1940s. b) "Verein ehemaliger Rostocker Studenten" uses this photo for historical publications and this is ok. c) They are not the copyright owner and have no right to release this image under a free license. --Polarlys (talk) 00:07, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The permission comes from Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand and does not name an author. Jcb (talk) 00:59, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They state that they do not own the copyright. --Polarlys (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check request

Could someone check the permission on en:File:ScottWalker.jpg prior to transwiki? It appears that neither of the images in the history matches the image given at the source in the OTRS template. Kelly (talk) 16:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket is of no help, and the image is clearly watermarked with a copyright notice. IMO, it should be tagged as {{speedy}}. Asav (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Flagged for deletion at en. Kelly (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another pre-transwiki check

Is the ticket on en:File:Uniform artica.jpg valid, and if so, what license was agreed to? Kelly (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

en:File:Uniform Design Phenix.jpg comes from the same source and ticket was added by uploader; there may be others. I guess I should ask the exact nature of the permission if there is one. Kelly (talk) 20:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Same as above. The file is watermarked as copyrighted. There is an email, alledgedly from the author, but not from an identifiable address. Furthermore the author's name is misspelled in the email address (howart, not Howard). In my opinion another {{speedy}}. Asav (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Flagged for deletion. Kelly (talk) 01:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confused history

en:File:Mehera.jpg has two versions in history and I can't tell which one (or both?) was agreed to in the OTRS ticket. The other images from this source were all uploaded by User:Sharnak who is now inactive. The person who uploaded the other version User:David Plum is also inactive. Kelly (talk) 20:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The request was made on 03/05/2007 and permission was confirmed on 03/20/2007, looking at the history this would mean that the current image is the one intended to be released so there is no action needed. --Fæ (talk) 05:59, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure? The permission is from March 2007 and the file is uploaded in December 2007. If I'm not wrong the permission mention en:File:Mehera3.jpg. Please check again. --MGA73 (talk) 19:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The file has been moved to Commons and the original history deleted, so you would need a Wikipedia admin to check the history for a second opinion. Note, the OTRS ticket has the scope defined as "to use the images of Meher Baba's close disciples from WinCoates.com" rather than just one image, so this may resolve any perceived issue even though that website is no longer available. Would anyone here be able to give a second opinion? Thanks. --Fæ (talk) 08:01, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an admin on enwiki and have seen history. The scope you mentioned could cover just more than one photo and in that case everything should be fine. --MGA73 (talk) 17:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Files by User:Vysota1079

User:Vysota1079 uploaded some files and sent in a permission. He told me that he never heard from our OTRS staff. Could you please have a look? Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 14:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket 2010112410028789 has been answered, can not find other tickets. -- Neozoon (talk) 23:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Author request

Who is the author of en:File:Seymour Knox III, II, and IV.jpg? Kelly (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Express consent for both these images was given by Chuck LaChiusa who was the webmaster of the original websites. --Fæ (talk) 06:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does LaChiusa own the copyright on the photos? Kelly (talk) 22:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the judgement of the original OTRS volunteer, yes. If you have a reason to think otherwise, please add an explanation here and I'll highlight it for attention of the original volunteer. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 08:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:ChanelIman.jpg

Can I get someone to do a check on the OTRS queue and process the ticket I emailed in on this image? I'm anxious to get it processed ASAP as the image is from a most unusual source - Getty Images. Tabercil (talk) 00:09, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Fæ (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket 2006013010000528

Request a check on this ticket - a little confused on the details of images from this source. They were uploaded by User:Apcbg - some, like File:Aheloy.jpg, attribute the photos to Lyubomir Ivanov but use a GFDL-self license, while others like File:Telerig.jpg, have this OTRS ticket (added by the uploader, not a volunteer) which merely assert a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license from Lyubomir Ivanov. Is the uploader the copyright holder? If not, what photos were agreed to and on which license? Kelly (talk) 22:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The ticket covers all photos from http://apc.mfa.government.bg and Dr. Lyubomir Ivanov is Chairman of Antarctic Place-names Commission of Bulgaria, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria. The photos were released on a free license (but the particular license not specified, this was 2006) so long as the photos were suitably attributed to the source website/organization and to the photographer if named. Consequently I would suggest a cc-by-sa is a suitable license due to the attribution requirement but can understand why other licenses exist as they might have been popular in 2006. We can safely AGF and so long as attribution appears sensible I see nothing incorrect, only potential tidying up.
BTW, File:Aheloy.jpg is a personal photograph Ivanov has uploaded himself and so OTRS verification is not required as there is nothing about it that would cause concern. --Fæ (talk) 18:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Viren Rasquinha.jpg

Has the permission for this image been received? If so, then please issue an OTRS ticket. Joyson Noel Holla at me 15:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done. I find no matches to "Rasquinha" in OTRS. --Fæ (talk) 15:18, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, please go ahead and delete this image. Joyson Noel Holla at me 16:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done photo deleted as requested --Neozoon (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pictureskosovo.free.fr

I post it here, so i just need help now. The owner of those pictures, Jean, send a letter to OTRS with default permission (slightly changed, so it can be used for whole site) and i would ask from you to find it. I uploaded one of the photos File:Banjska_front_view.jpg, so we can use it as the first stop with permission tagging.

Mail name : permissions‏
From : pictures kosovo (pictureskosovo@free.fr)
Sent : Monday, January 17, 2011 9:48:09 AM

I hope that this will help to find it. I am waiting for that in order to start uploading other needed photos. For more, i can ask him, so just ask! :) --WhiteWriter speaks 09:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ticket:2011011710003835 besides in the answer the agent asked for a specific file of Commons, is ok to use the permission since it points to all files of pictureskosovo.free.fr --Màñü飆¹5 talk 09:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Matthew Scurfield (ca. 1975).jpg

The description page mentions a permission E-mail. But I can't see the OTRS ticket tag. Is there a possibility to find an OTRS ticket number for this picture? Teofilo (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the appropriate ticket - Kind regards, Taketa (talk) 16:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Teofilo (talk) 16:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Getty material with open OTRS

Hi colleagues, the following Getty Images-credited (!) images File:619751551229201014417PM.jpg and File:Aishwarya Rai at Pusan International Film Festival.jpg (crop of the first one), uploaded by Hotguy 001 (talk · contribs), had first contact with OTRS ("email received") at December 30, but thereafter nothing seems to have happened. As these images are from an agency that is well known for suing anybody using their images without paying for, IMHO it is not acceptable to leave such a case open for so long. Please make a final asessment of the alleged permission. --Túrelio (talk) 14:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader is not able to provide permission. These images should be deleted. Tagged for speedy.--Chaser (talk) 15:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2008091810002899 and File:MarcMinkowski.jpg

Can someone please check ticket:2008091810002899 and File:MarcMinkowski.jpg? This ticket # has a bad history - File:DomingoJ1.jpg had this ticket # and was subsequently deleted by an OTRS admin, and a derivative, File:Placido-Domingo.jpg, had to be deleted per a DMCA takedown notice. I have no idea why File:MarcMinkowski.jpg has the same ticket # but the uploader added it him/herself so I am very suspicious. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 23:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I don't know what the OTRS side of this looks like, but there's not good optics doing some Googling on this image. It can be found here where it says at the bottom: "Photo of Marc Minkowsky © Philippe Gonthier, courtesy naïve"... Tabercil (talk) 00:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, that ticket does not cover the image.--Chaser (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Right - flushing the image as a copyvio. Tabercil (talk) 00:48, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is this new user just copied the tag from one of the others (since deleted) - just wanted to make sure... Thanks. Wknight94 talk 02:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copying a permissions template from en:wp

en:File:Tatu in gaudi arena.jpg is available here as File:Gaudi arena.jpg, but the description page here says nothing about OTRS. Could someone please place the proper OTRS template on this image and perform any other necessary fixes? Once the description page here is fixed, the en:wp image will be eligible for speedy deletion; if you're not an en:wp admin, just inform me, and I'll delete it. Nyttend (talk) 02:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done (you could have done this yourself too ;)) and please delete the en: file. --Màñü飆¹5 talk 17:54, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eurofighter_Typhoon_AUT.jpg

Can you please verify image File:Eurofighter_Typhoon_AUT.jpg? I think the image has the wrong license in flickr. The user who uploaded it to commons using the flickr bot has many disputes to other images on his discussion page. The user who uploaded the images to flickr does not seem to care about licenses, if you look at the different pictures which are obviously not taken by himself. In this case the original photographer is even named in the description and I don't think he has asked for permission. Thanks -- Bullpup (talk) 22:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Raised for deletion discussion on the basis of appearing elsewhere on Flickr and being taken by a third party rather than the Flickr stream owner. --Fæ (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sent (forwarded) email to OTRS (in German) with information from the original photographer. -- Bullpup (talk) 19:47, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket 2010072610009616

Under this ticket several dozen images from several decades were uploaded without any real source except a city’s name. Might anyone please check the ticket? I wonder if the ticket is copyright owner to these images from most likely a lot of different photographers and painters. --Polarlys (talk) 17:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


✓ Done I checked the ticket. There is a permission for 63 photos in this ticket. We do not need a permission of hte photographer, if we can get a permission of the owner of the rights. In the permission it is stated, that the issuer is "Inhaber des vollumfänglichen Nutzungsrechts ". We trust on that statement and can fall back on the person and his statement in case of anyone else claiming the rights on the pictures.

Do you have any specific photo that we need to discuss where you have evidence that the issuer does not have the rights to publish the photo? We can discuss that. --Neozoon (talk) 23:39, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you. --Polarlys (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sarauntitled.jpg and File:SPaxton2.jpg

Have you received emails for File:Sarauntitled.jpg and File:SPaxton2.jpg? I am trying to help the user that uploaded them and I do not know weather the sent the emails or not. MorganKevinJ(talk) 19:40, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest whoever processes this ticket take a close look at it as I strongly suspect they are both copyvios. File:Sarauntitled.jpg, which is her attending the Dr Rey’s Shapewear Launch, can be found elsewhere online such as here, here and here. The other image is from her attending the Us Weekly's 25 Most Stylish New Yorkers Event in 2009. Tabercil (talk) 22:45, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From an IRC discussion with an OTRS member I was told that ticket:2011011510009815 mentions File:Sarauntitled.jpg but it does not appear to be credible. Should I mark them for speedy? MorganKevinJ(talk) 01:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:R-136199-1217937948Solid.jpeg and File:A-19521-1180609313.jpeg

Is it genuine OTRS-tickets (No ticket number indicated)?--Ankara (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've found no reference to these images in our archives and have removed the templates from the pages. Best regards, Taketa (talk) 17:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CC-AR-Presidency

Hello,

Could you help me find the following information:

  • The exact date when Secretaría de Medios' Andrea Caldararo wrote the E-mail : is it 26 April 2007 as shown by ticket number 20070426xxxxx ?
    • OTRS ticket 2007042610015988
    • The first request to presidencia.gov.ar was on 04/26/2007 but replies from Caldararo are dated 06/19/2007 and a follow-up on 07/12/2007. --Fæ (talk) 10:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The name of the Wikimedia volunteer who was in touch with Andrea Caldaro.
    • Pathoschild was originally involved, but this was some years ago so you may wish to check their interest in any further follow-up. --Fæ (talk) 10:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need a volunteer with access to OTRS to negociate the best renewal terms, or the best termination terms for that agreement. See Commons talk:Licensing#Template:CC-AR-Presidency. Teofilo (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am going to copy these data in the talk at Commons talk:Licensing#Template:CC-AR-Presidency. Teofilo (talk) 11:14, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo Portaal Openbaar vervoer 3.jpg and 2010082810004419

Just checking on File:Logo Portaal Openbaar vervoer 3.jpg which is due for deletion. There is a note about ticket 2010082810004419. Is there any update there? Wknight94 talk 03:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No activity since 24-09-2010. We lack a list of authors for the seperate images which apparently come from either Wikimedia or are author's own work. Taketa (talk) 06:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted that file while clearing a backlog at 8:21 (UTC), not having seen the above discussion. odder (talk) 15:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I was going to do the same anyway. Wknight94 talk 16:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duck_in_China.jpg

Please check the permission I had sent to OTRS for File:Duck_in_China.jpg. Has it been received? Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 16:44, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The queue on OTRS is often a few days long. I have verified and added a ticket for this image though you may want to consider making Flickr images CC-BY-SA compliant on Flickr (even if only for a week or two after Commons upload) and they then get checked automatically. There is some useful guidance on Commons:Flickr files. --Fæ (talk) 17:19, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pais Prabhu.JPG

The image fails PD-India, as it was published here. This means that it will enter the public domain about sixty years from 2010. The OTRS permission was sent by the site's owner, Walter J. Pais, granting permission to use it under the "Creative Commons Attribution 3.0" license. Since i have nominated one of the articles on which it appears for FA status, it would greatly help if someone would issue the ticket ASAP. Joyson Noel Holla at me 06:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done On the basis that the email was received from the address specified on the source website. This is not a validation of your interpretation of PD-India. --Fæ (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What??? I don't understand what you mean. I am not the author or public interpreter of PD-India. Joyson Noel Holla at me 09:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your question opened with the assumption that the photograph failed {{PD-India}}. A copy of the photograph was on mangaloreanrecipes.com, however that does not necessarily mean that the copyright now belongs to the owner of the website. As the photograph is shown as taken in 1929 with author as "unknown", then this would be a rationale for accepting that the photograph became public domain in 1989 (60 years from it being taken). Unless it can be demonstrated that the photograph was published before 1989, this would be the default position (for an anonymous photographer). Hence my statement that I was not validating any such assumption about the image failing PD-India by checking the OTRS ticket. --Fæ (talk) 11:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, i concur that normally the photo would be in the public domain. However, PD-India states that anonymous images enter the public domain 60 years after it was first published. In this case, the image was published in 2010, which means that it is no longer free, and that the site owner's permission is necessary for it to be used in Wikipedia. Joyson Noel Holla at me 10:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sneha Actress.JPG

Can you please describe the permission for this ticket #2007101310010147 whether it comes from a domain [email protected] or not, otherwise there is something wrong with the OTRS recognition system...its transferred to commons by Kiran Gopi and tagged by him--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 17:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does not come from @behindthewoods.com but the site indicated in the permission-field, when originally transferred to Commons. If the file is on a kollywoodtoday.com site it's good. --Henrik (heb: Talk · Contributions · E-mail)
So how its been tagged as an OTRS cleared one......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 09:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You'll have to ask User:Kiran Gopi of that, as it was he/she who inserted the OTRS-tag (changelog). --Henrik (heb: Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 18:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I transferred the file from ta wiki and it had a an OTRS template. When I checked the ticket didn't find any issue for source mentioned as KOLLYWOODTODAY.com. --Kiran Gopi (talk) 04:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hope the original uploader is connected with the mentioned site and need to investigate OTRS tag, if the image is illegally copied from other websites......Captain......Tälk tö me.. 04:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The OTRS email came from kollywoodtoday.com domain and seems to be genuine. --Sreejith K (talk) 05:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The pic's from a film called "Madhumasam" which was produced by Suresh Productions (per IMDB). Did that OTRS email make mention of how kollywoodtoday came to be able to release it to Commons?? Tabercil (talk) 06:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The OTRS email just states that all the images from Kollywoodtoday.com is under Creative Commons Attribution and Wikipedia Commons can use images from their website. If the image is a screenshot from a movie, obviously the site does not have permissions to release it under their own license unless they have an agreement with the producer (which I doubt) --Sreejith K (talk) 06:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shenzhen.JPG

Please check my e-mail in OTRS for File:Shenzhen.JPG I have just sent. Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 6:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Hoangquan hientrang, please have look at our FAQ ("I sent in an email up to 14 days ago and still haven't got a reply"). Best wishes, —Pill (talk) 19:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Permission checking request against File:Perelman, Grigori (1966).jpg

I would like to ask for ticket checking to see if the permission for File:Robion Kirby.jpeg is also suitable for this one. Requested on irc, likely info-en access needed. Thanks. Chanueting (talk) 06:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it applies as well. The photographer gives us a carte blanche permission to use all his portraits of mathematicians on the site under GFDL. (Ticket no. 2008042410024381) Asav (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mubarak Tripping On Tech Generation Media.png

Please verify if this OTRS ticket is valid. --Denniss (talk) 01:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • All cartoons created by him, all cartoons published by him or all cartoons published by him at a specific source, e.g. latuff2.deviantart.com? --Martin H. (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:S-Jaume-Llierca.jpg

Hello,

Could someone please check the ticket and say if everything is OK apart from the missing OTRS template ? Teofilo (talk) 12:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The use of "{{self|GFDL" looks a bit strange because uploader and painter have different names. Teofilo (talk) 12:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket appears to be in Dutch. Some one capable of reading Dutch would be preferred for this :) --Henrik (heb: Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 18:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I dropped Jcb a note.--Chaser (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the self and removed the date. Everything else seems OK. -- Best regards from the Netherlands, Taketa (talk) 20:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Should not Template:OTRS be used ? Teofilo (talk) 02:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done - Taketa (talk) 11:51, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Teofilo (talk) 02:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Molfetta - Chiesa di San Pietro.JPG

Please verify the license. -- Common Good (talk) 20:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I find no ticket numbered ticket:2007061810004126 and no matches for "Chiesa di San Pietro" that appear to apply. I shall put it up for deletion discussion rather than speedy as this might be a typo or some other issue I'm unaware of. --Fæ (talk) 20:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ticket was in info-it queue, just moved to permission. Actually it's not so accurate but it's not a fake. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, I have proposed speedy keep on the deletion. --Fæ (talk) 22:39, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team/Noticeboard/Archive_12&oldid=576667894"