Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by 256Drg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by 256Drg (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All files appear taken from websites where there is no indication of a free license compatible with Commons. One is from a government Twitter account, but government works in India aren't automatically given a free license/public domain.

— Rhododendrites talk |  12:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. Please be aware that the uploader of these images is currently under investigation and that the third of the images above is under scrutiny there too. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 04:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a case of ganging up against me because I challenged his point of view. Please go through all the details of situation before taking any action. Thanks! 256Drg (talk) 15:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't now what your point of view is. The case on English Wikipedia isn't particularly relevant to what happens on Commons. The concern here is that all uploads to Commons must have a documented free license. The burden is on the uploader to provide that evidence. When I looked at the first of these files and followed the link to the source, I couldn't find the license. If you can point to this evidence, this deletion request will be closed without action. Simple as that. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  15:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay. Got it. I contacted photographer earlier and he said he did not upload any licence on web yet. Is it okay if I tell him to upload images on GitHub with proper licencing? Thanks! 256Drg (talk) 15:40, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • As long as the license is clearly documented by the copyright owner, yes, that's fine. Github is unusual, but any website is fine (Flickr is common because they make licensing easy). Alternatively, you could use COM:OTRS (have the owner send an email releasing the image). — Rhododendrites talk |  16:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict)Hello, Rhododendrites. I appreciate that what happens in ANI is not binding on Commons, and vice-versa, but concerns have been raised at the ANI about possible COPYVIO because the third image above appears to have been uploaded from Twitter, an unreliable source in any event, and in breach of NFCC. 256Drg is likely to be indef blocked soon under the terms of WP:NOTHERE, so it may be useful for you to know that he will not then be able to provide the required evidence – I'll let you know if and when the block is imposed. Obviously, as you say, if one or more of the images is shown to be PD or suitably licensed, they will not be deleted and that will be fine. Given the flagrant disregard for site policies and conventions that this editor has demonstrated, however, I will be surprised if any of these images are acceptable. Anyway, we shall see what happens. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was mainly a reply to 256Drg's comment above. Just clarifying I'm not part of (and this nomination is not part of) whatever is going on there. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Rhododendrites I have added metadata to the images with Flickr links in structured data section of metadata under copyright licence subsection (full work available at URL). Please let me know if that is sufficient or you need anything else. Thanks! ---256Drg (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • What you have done here (and the other files), is called "Flickr Washing" or "license laundering". You do not own the copyrights to all of these, but you have asserted that you own them. Only the owner of the copyright can determine the license. It is up to you to show Commons where the owner has released it with a free license. I mentioned Flickr because it's an easy way for the owner to publish a license, but it must come from a credible account. Given the Flickrwashing, at this point we would probably need permissions to go through COM:OTRS or to come through an official channel rather than a new Flickr account. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting to note that you told me to go ahead with uploading images on Flicker when I told you that I will contact owner and tell him to upload. And now accusing me of Flickerwashing.
"Just clarifying I'm not part of (and this nomination is not part of) whatever is going on there." Nice line!
::I think now I have nothing more to say! The argument is proved here as well. :-) ---256Drg (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
told me to go ahead with uploading images on Flicker I did not. You said Is it okay if I tell him to upload images on GitHub with proper licencing. I said github is unusual, but Flickr makes it easier. In neither case is it you uploading images to Flickr. You need the copyright owner to release it with a free license, then point us to evidence thereof. Alternatively, have the copyright owner go through COM:OTRS. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will not be able to provide license for the image. You can delete them. ---256Drg (talk) 01:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, Rhododendrites. 256Drg has been indef blocked so I would immediately delete anything he has uploaded because he has violated just about policy and guideline in the book. He has also uploaded File:Dr. mohan rao Bhagwat1.jpg and File:Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi performing Bhoomi Pujan at ‘Shree Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir’, in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh on August 05, 2020.jpg. I expect you will find these are unlicensed too. Thanks and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@No Great Shaker: two different accounts uploaded those. Are you saying they're socks? Regardless, both of those files look legit to me. It does happen from time to time that people get blocked on Wikipedia and wind up being productive on Commons. We'll see, I guess. — Rhododendrites talk |  12:43, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, right. It was just a comment by him that I may have misinterpreted. He might just have meant he was loading them into an article, not onto the site. Perhaps no problem, then. Thanks again. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per comments. --Materialscientist (talk) 11:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_256Drg&oldid=568302212"