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. How to add a copyright tag to an existing image On the description page of the image (the one whose name starts File:), click Edit this page. From the page Wikipedia:File copyright tags, choose the appropriate tag: For work you created yourself, use one of the ones listed under the heading "For image creators". For a work downloaded from the internet, please understand that the vast majority of images from the internet are not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. Exceptions include images from flickr that have an acceptable license, images that are in the public domain because of their age or because they were created by the United States federal government, or images used under a claim of fair use. If you do not know what you are doing, please post a link to the image here and ask BEFORE uploading it. For an image created by someone else who has licensed their image under an acceptable Creative Commons or other free license, or has released their image into the public domain, this permission must be documented. Please see Requesting copyright permission for more information. Type the name of the tag (e.g.; {{Cc-by-4.0}}), not forgetting {{ before and }} after, in the edit box on the image's description page. Remove any existing tag complaining that the image has no tag (for example, {{untagged}}) Hit Publish changes. If you still have questions, go on to "How to ask a question" below. How to ask a question To ask a new question hit the "Click here to start a new discussion" link below. Please sign your question by typing ~~~~ at the end. Check this page for updates, or request to be notified on your talk page. Don't include your email address, for your own privacy. We will respond here and cannot respond by email. Note for those replying to posted 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.
Click here to start a new discussion

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

Advice reqd re appropriate copyright tag

Could someone advise me on the appropriate copyright tag to apply to Image:X1 sub.jpeg? I have email permission from the Copyright holder, in this case the National Maritime Museum, their only condition being that it be labelled "© National Maritime Museum".

Salmanazar 21:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

There's no date for the image? Did they understand that they were okaying commercial and derivative use? Better forward that email to permissions. The correct tag is {{attribution}}. Jkelly 22:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

If they only want to allow use on Wikipedia, however, you can use {{WithPermission}} in conjunction with a fair use tag. --Rory096 22:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Please reproduce the exact text of the e-mail here (as well as forwarding it to permissions at wikimedia dot org). It must explicitly state that it can be used, modified, and sold with no restrictions except for attributions for {{attribution}} to be valid. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Correctly Specifying the Source and Creator of an Image

I've had both Image:Blacktailedgnatcatcher.jpg and Image:California_Gnatcatcher.jpg tagged as having no source information by OrphanBot, even though I've tagged both of those images with {{PD-USGov-Interior-USGS}} and given the source URL. What else do I need to add to the information accompanying these images? --InvisibleK 12:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what exactly OrphanBot looks for when determining if an image has a source, but this time it goofed up. I removed OrphanBot's tags and added the word "Source:" before the source information; hopefully that will take care of it. Angr (t • c) 13:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

It was a bug in OrphanBot, which I've fixed. --Carnildo 19:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Divya_Bharti.jpg

I have provided a source for the image and most likely there is no other original source for this image apart from some fansites or any info on who owns the copyright. I am sure it can still be used on wikipedia though. Could you advise on what should be done? Thanks. (Shakirfan 21:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC))

So, we don't know the source. Unfortunately wikipedia cannot include images where we don't know the source or license of an image. - cohesion 00:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Iekessinger.jpg

The image in question is a digital photo I took of an actual photograph, and then cropped. The photograph of Don Kessinger is a Chicago Cubs team-issued press photo which was taken in the early 1970s and freely distributed to various media outlets for publication (publicity). This is one of many from my personal collection, which I have acquired over the years. My uploading of this image for Wikipedia's benefit is in no way profit-oriented. I thought I had tagged it correctly. Should I retain the tag and/or license I used, but also name the source (Chicago Cubs)...or should I use the "fair use" option? Please let me know what to do. Thanks. BurmaShaver 22:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The problem isn't the license, it's that there's no source information. Just give the information you gave above about where you got the photo from, and you can remove the "no source" tags. Angr (t • c) 00:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Iekessinger.jpg

Thanks for the info. I followed your directions as best I could, and re-named the image Iekessingerd.jpg so that I could re-upload it. Please let me know if it is now acceptable. If it is, I will fix other similar images. BurmaShaver 01:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Image:Iekessingerd.jpg is fine now. You didn't have to re-upload it, though; you could have just updated the info on the original image. Anyway, now that the second upload is correct, I'll go ahead and delete the first one since we don't need two copies of the same picture. Angr (t • c) 09:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Message about copyright tag

The picture in question (Image:JonandAngela.jpg) is mine; it comes from The Belch Dimension Comics #2. I created it and own it. Please refrain from deleting it. Thank you. The_Iconoclast 07:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Leaving this request here won't keep it from getting deleted. You need to replace the tags on the image description page with (1) a statement that the picture is your own work, and (2) a license under which you're willing to release it. For self-made work, some obvious choices are {{PD-self}}, {{GFDL-self}}, {{Cc-by-2.5}}, and {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}}. Angr (t • c) 09:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I have To Add The Copyright Tag To My First Uploaded Image; May You Help Me ?

Hello,

I have to add the tag: "NO Right Reserved" to my first Image: "Kippah"; how may I do it ?

Ty.

Bye.

Giuseppe

--Aerostrato 08:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

You already did, three minutes before leaving this message. You can remove the {{untagged|month=May|day=11|year=2006}} tag now. Angr (t • c) 09:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:RedArmy_kursants1933.jpg

Hi there. I've never uploaded images before so I wasn't sure about copyright status when filling those dialogue fields. However, my verbal description was I believe clear. In addition: this is a private photo never published, I obtained it from the relatives of those potrayed. They were willing to share a memory of their fathers (that later fought World War II and died there). Their only conditions were:

• non-commercial use only
• providing the additional war info of the portaryed on request of readers

Anything else? Cause I won't like my first Wikipicture being deleted.AlexPU 09:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

If they only gave permission for non-commercial use, then Wikipedia can't use it. Images at Wikipedia either have to be free for commercial use (not because Wikipedia itself is commercial but because some mirrors are and some other "downstream" users may be) or else a fair-use claim has to be made for them. On the other hand, if this photo was taken in 1933, it may be public domain anyway, because it's more than 70 years old. You could use the template {{PD-old-70}} in the licensing section and remove the "permission" line from the summary. This does mean, however, that what the family does or does not permit to be done with the photo is irrelevant. Once the image is public domain, there's nothing stopping anyone from adding humorous speech balloons to the picture and selling it on a tee-shirt. Angr (t • c) 09:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, to be exact: I got this and other photos from a 67 y.o. woman collecting and sharing knowledge of her KIA father (one of the officers potrayed) and his artillery unit. She is very far from any legal considerations :). I only promised her to:

• help her cause using Internet by providing the pictures for worldwide usage and supplying additional info on her father on further request of anybody
• not make money from those pictures

There's a 100% guarantee that neither me nor Wikipedia would be legally persecuted for the usage of these photos.

I guess I'll use that 70-years rule for settling the case. Thanks for help, hope for the same in future.AlexPU 11:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

{{PD-old-70}} is, unfortunately, entirely inappropriate for this image. That image is only when the author has been dead for seventy years or more, which seems quite unlikely. If the author is known, you'll have to wait 70 years after his death (which will probably be a few years yet, unless he died soon after the picture was taken); otherwise, you're going to have to wait until 2053, 120 years after the work's creation. So currently, it's being used under a noncommercial license, which is unfortunately not acceptable for Wikipedia. Any chance you could get her to allow commercial use? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 19:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Any chance it's public domain because it was taken in the Soviet Union before 1954? Or does that only apply to works of the Soviet government? Angr (t • c) 20:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Well {{PD-USSR}} is for works published in the Soviet Union before 1973. This image has not been previously published so I think a different set of rules apply, though I'm not 100% sure what they would be in this case (in the US it's life + 70 for unpublished works even if they where created before 1923 for example). --Sherool (talk) 07:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Since it was unpublished, the rules are very simple: 70 years after the death of the author if known, otherwise 120 years after creation. It's unfree. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

What do I do?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M1917rev.gif

This image is a black and white variation of a government picture. The site and a link to the original is on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathbunny (talk • contribs) 06:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The page has no link to any original, it says it's of unknown origin and speculate that it may be from a goverment site (what makes you say that?). Unless you can dig up enough info to tell us who made the original photo (or at least who hold the copyright to it) there is not rely a lot we can do except delete it as having a unverified status. --Sherool (talk) 06:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Oops.

http://tri.army.mil/LC/CS/csi/sahist.htm http://tri.army.mil/LC/cs/csi/m1917rev.jpg

Didn't save the page preview.

I don't know how to tag images —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deathbunny (talk • contribs) 13:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Not every image on a government website was produced by an employee of the federal government in the course of his duties. The image isn't acceptable unless you find evidence of who made the base image.

To retag an image, just edit the image page. You may want to check out Wikipedia:How to edit a page for some basic formatting help, etc. For instance, you should sign your edits to talk pages with four tildes: ~~~~. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

On the site, many pictures have specific copyright information on them. The exceptions include pictures seen in military factfiles and other government sites. Can we assume that, given that it's a government site and that it specifically notes other people's copyright information, what isn't marked is government copyright? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deathbunny (talk • contribs) 05:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm afraid we can't assume that. If it doesn't give info on who took the picture, it has to be assumed copyrighted. (And by the way, you can use four tildes to sign your name and the date: ~~~~.) —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Medical imagery

Photos I took, of x-rays of myself. Technically, since the original x-ray was done by someone else (of course), who holds what copyright? ~ Booyabazooka 00:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm uncertain how much creativity is involved in X-raying. Is it just sticking someone in a roughly appropriate position and then pushing a button? If so, X-rays are probably not subject to copyright. If it has to be adjusted, fidgeted with, whatever, then it would likely be eligible, and the copyright holder is whoever actually took the X-ray (or whoever was employing the person to take the X-ray). —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

This is really interesting, since the x-ray is also the actual result of a medical test, it would be regulated by a whole lot of other laws as well. This is one of those times when I think to get a good answer you might need an actual lawyer ;) Speaking from a healthcare point of view though I think most healthcare workers would think the image was yours, whether that's legally true or not. - cohesion 07:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

how to tag an image

I don't know how to tag an image. Could u help me please? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrishomingtang (talk • contribs) 01:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

To tag an image when you upload it, select the appropriate tag from the dropdown box. To retag an already-uploaded image, simply edit the image page as you would any other: click "edit this page" and change the contents appropriately. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

And just one little "gotcha" to watch out for. It does not, repeat does not work to re-upload the image and picking the correct license from the drop down box to fix an already uploaded image. When you overwrite an existing image the description of the old image stays as is, whatever you type in the description box when you upload a new version is just shown (in trunkated form) in the upload log, it does not get used. So the only way to fix the tagging of an already uploaded image so to go to it's page and click the edit button. I often see people franticly uploading 5-6 versions of the same image trying to get the tagging right when all they need to do is edit the page. --Sherool (talk) 12:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Fluffy999

Hi, on a number of occasions I have pointed out to User:Fluffy999 about uploading possibly copyrighted images. A relative newby, he has uploaded a number of images which are clearly copyrighted/scans from books and usually tags them with a NoRightsReserved tag. To his credit, however, he usually cites the source (if it's from the internet, but not if it's from a book).

The most recent example is Image:Hume-trimble-NOBEL-PEACE-PRIZE.jpg. Fluffy999 gives the url but there it clearly states that the image in question is "((c) Micheline Pelletier/CORBIS SYGMA" [1]

I would be grateful if someone could discuss the seriousness of uploading copyrighted images with Fluffy999, as I don't think he fully understands what is allowed on Wikipedia and what is not. I would address the user in question directly but recent experience has shown that Fluffy999 does not take very well to any constructive comments from me and, on the advice of an administrator, User:Jtdirl, I no longer communicate with him directly.--Damac 10:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Fluffy999 has been busy uploading images taken directly from the BBC website. I've listed these on Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 May 24/Images but have not tagged them, as this will only provoke personalised attacks on me by the user in question. I'd appreciate it if someone dealt with the problem and explained to Fluffy999 why copyright laws do not allow users to upload any images they feel like from the Internet.--Damac 09:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello, if an image is in violation its fine to remove it or if the tag is more likely to be fair use- please advise. A lack of images doesnt detract from the quality of my submissions. My real problem is not some malicious intent to infringe copyright but that there are so many rules and regulations that its almost impossible to make out what I should and shouldnt upload and how it should be tagged. Since I am new and learning the ropes I will make mistakes although I sometimes will be wrongly accused eg. yesterday an admin deleted a GFDL labeled image I made saying it was a photocopy. When I pointed out it was made in MSPaint there wasnt a problem- incorrectly tagged.

To Damac's credit he hasn't tagged these images although has been previously advised by one admin, Jtdirl, to cease & desist from tracking my movements around the wiki, User_talk:Damac#Fluffy. Yet he persists., so more senior intervention looks to be required. Fluffy999 09:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The previous user is blatently misrepresenting what User:Jtdirl advised me to do, as anyone with a modicum of functional literacy would understand if they read his actual comment at User_talk:Damac#Fluffy.--Damac 10:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Not the place to go into it, although worth pointing out to people here as they may just take your post at face value. Its fine if you deliberately ignore admin Jtdirl's advice to cease & desist- advice is not binding it seems. Hannes78 10:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC) (sockpuppet for Fluffy so he can avoid stalking)

How do wikipedia determine pictures' origins anyway? They can delete whatever pictures they think it's not copyrighted or they can't delete them until someone tell them it's not copyrighted. It is difficult for new people to post pictures. Chris 01:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

When you upload a picture you have to supply the source from where you got the picture. That way someone else can double-check that the license is correct. Saying "I found it on Google Images" is not an adequate source though, you have to say where the picture originally came from. Angr (t • c) 07:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Why isn't tag automatically added?

If I load an image and choose the correct copyright status, why is the appropriate copyright tag not automatically added? JMcC 11:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

It is (if by choosing copyright status you refeer to the drop down list on the upload form), unless you are uploading something on top of something that already exist. The stuff you put in the upload form is only actualy used when you upload something for the first time (bit of a gotcha there). If you uploaded the image once and forgot to tag it and then try to upload it again (with the same name) with the correct tag it won't actualy work, all it does is create a new version of the image file itself, the decription page is not changed in any way. In those cases what you need to do is go to the image page and click the edit button and add the tag manualy (you can find them listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags). --Sherool (talk) 12:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, it was a re-load. I found the tags and chose a plausible one. JMcC 15:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

You seem to be uploading a lot of images that were taken by other people and saying they have waived all their rights, that's not especially common, and we might need to verify that. Do you have any evidence of this? Also keep in mind we are not really looking for "plausible" license tags as much as correct ones. - cohesion 08:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

How do I "add a tag" to a picture I uploaded. And what is a tag? The web address of the picture? RoryS89 18:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)RoryS89

Hi. You seem to be uploading images that you like that you have found on various websites. Please don't do that. See Wikipedia:Image use policy for information on what kind of media is suitable for uploading to Wikipedia. Jkelly 18:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jeg er quisling og navnet ragnvald blix.GIF

This is a carricature of Vidkun Quisling, first published in 1944 in Göteborgs Handels- och Sjöfartstidning. It widely known, and represents a significant historical value. Anyone knows if it can be published on Wikipedia? -- Heptor _talk 19:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

According to no:Ragnvald Blix the author died in 1958, so under U.S. law it won't enter public domain until 1 January 2029. It could perhaps be considered fair use (using the {{Art}} tag) in a discussion of Blix that referred specifically to this cartoon (rather than just using this cartoon as an example of his work). Angr (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for answering. Too bad the image can not be used in the Quisling article-- Heptor _talk 13:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

preston,poulton and layton station photos

them Image:Layton railway station.jpg and Image:Poulton le Fylde railway station.jpg and Image:Preston railway station.jpg are mine honest. user:jonjoe

That's fine, but you need to tag them properly anyway. You have to decide under what terms you're licensing them. If you want them licensed under the GFDL, add {{GFDL-self}} to the image description page. If you want to be attributed as the author and retain a few other rights, use {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}. If you want to completely release all rights to them, add {{No rights reserved}} or {{PD-self}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators for more discussion. Angr (talk) 20:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:BlackmoorBook.jpg

I own the rights to the image through Dave Arneson, the Creator, who I am the webmaster for. Why the hell was it deleted and what dumb ass did this without e-mailing me? Put it back up with all the images added.

The image was deleted because you did not include a copyright tag for it. When you upload an image, you get a big, colorful message saying that your file will be deleted if you do not provide a copyright tag, and that's what happened. The image has been deleted completely, we can't put it back up. If you still have a copy, you can upload it again, but this time be sure to put a copyright tag on it. See in particular Wikipedia:Image copyright tag#For image creators for tags that are appropriate to put on your own work. Angr (talk) 22:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyright help

I think I have done this right - could someone check to make sure it's OK?

I've copy and pasted an image saying there I don;t want anyone to use it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pub3.jpg

Is it right?

--Steve1509 08:18, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it's not. It says it's used by permission, but "The terms of the permission do not include third party use." Images used at Wikipedia have to be freer than that. If you are the copyright holder of that image, please go to Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and select an acceptable license (e.g. {{No rights reserved}}, {{GFDL-self}}, {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}). As it stands, the image can be deleted at any time under Wikipedia policy. Angr (talk) 09:32, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

How do I attribute copyright for the following?

Winstar Farms gave me an image image:DH head.jpg for use on Funny Cide's page of wikipedia. But I don't know which copyright label to use for this. It's not my copyright, it's Winstar's copyright. I can find no choice to suit. They also sent me a gif of their logo. Perhaps that's how they expected their credit?

--Ki Longfellow 19:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

You will have to ask Winstar Farms to release the image under a suitable license, such as {{GFDL}}, {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}, {{cc-by-2.5}}, or {{no rights reserved}}. Use for Wikipedia only is {{permission}}, and such images will be deleted. Wikipedia content must be hostable by third parties and must be modifiable and sellable. You might be interested in Wikipedia:Boilerplate requests for permission. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Need Help

Hi, I need help documenting the copyright status of this image: Image:Ref of evil.jpg It is the movie poster for an independent film. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Potashnik (talk • contribs) 03:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I've tagged it for you. For future reference, the tag is {{movie poster}}. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Tag

How to put a tag on this picture : Image:Crab pulsar VLT BL.jpg Thanks B. Lempel

I'm not sure we can use it at all. The original here says "© European Southern Observatory" suggesting that unlike NASA, ESO does not put its work into the public domain. If that's the case, we can't use an image derived from it. Can't you find a NASA image illustrating the same thing? Angr (talk) 12:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

How to tag for copyright purposes

Hello this is 1255 20:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC) with the question on how to tag for copyright of Dwight Walton. I think I did it correctly, but I am not too sure. Please somebody help me and verify that I did the right thing. Image:Dwight Walton.jpg. Thank you, --1255 20:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You still need a copyright tag. In this case, I think the best one to use is {{Fairusein|Dwight Walton}} since you've already given a detailed fair use rationale. Be sure to removed the {{untagged}} tag when you add {{fairusein}}. A purely aesthetic comment: I think it would look better if you cropped the frame out so that the edges of the original photograph correspond with the edges of the pic used here. Angr (talk) 21:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Editor uploaded an image with no tag

Hi, an editor named Mrknowitman uploaded a video capture of a movie. It is at Image:Presentation3.jpg. OrphanBot left a message saying that has no copyright tag. What will happen to this image if the editor doesn't provide a tag? I think it is deleted within a week? I'm not sure.

I never delt with images. Thanks for understanding. Cheers --Starionwolf 23:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

If the image is not given a fair use rationale and used in an article, it will be deleted within a week. (If it could be released under a free license, such as the GFDL, then it wouldn't have to be used in an article to be kept, but that's obviously impossible here.) —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 02:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Luque testimonial.jpg

Hi, I saved this image a while ago from a news article on http://www.nufc.co.uk about Albert Luque's contribution in Alan Shearer's testimonial match. As I can no longer find the image on the website I can't provide a specific link to it, but it is a publicity photo of Luque in the testimonial so does this not qualify as fair use? I got tagged for not providing a source, even though I mentioned the website from where I got it. Cheers - Northeasternbeast 11:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Publicity photos. It's actually extremely unlikely to be a publicity photo, which are almost never candid shots like that. More likely it was made by a newspaper or magazine photographer and used by permission on the NUFC website. AFAIK, to qualify as fair use we'd have to track down the original source, not just the source you got it from. Also, to really be fair use, it would have to be difficult or impossible to get a free image of him, which it isn't: just take a camera along next time you go to a game! Angr (talk) 12:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Jiroft location

hi, i can't understand,it is quite confusing,my question is this: how can put an image tage for my image? about licence, this image is depicted by myself, how can give a licence to myself? please give me a clear way to mange this photo.thank you very much —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abdolreza (talk • contribs) 13:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I see that the images you have uploaded are Image:Jiroft location.JPG and Image:Jiroft loction in Iran's map.jpg. Since the second one is identical to the first one, but smaller, you don't need it, right? Since you're the creator of the map, all you have to do is click here, replace {{untagged|month=May|day=28|year=2006}} with {{GFDL-self}}, hit Save page, and you're done! Angr (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Do be aware that by doing this you're agreeing to irrevocably license the image under the GNU Free Documentation License. You may want to review the terms of the license before you agree to it. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 06:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Since he already put the GFDL tag on the smaller copy Image:Jiroft loction in Iran's map.jpg I assumed he understood its conditions and just wanted to do the same thing to larger version. Angr (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

~ A photo of painting that I own--artist deceased

I couldn't find any tags appropriate to this circumstance. How should such an item be tagged?

--Driftwud 16:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC) Thanks, Driftwud

I assume you're referring to Image:Gordienko flamingo.jpg by George Gordienko, who died in 2002, right? AFAIK a photograph of a two-dimensional work of art like a painting is subject to the same copyright restrictions as the painting itself. The painting is still copyrighted and will be until 1 January 2073; I assume the copyright holder is his heir. Unless you can convince his heir to release the painting under the GFDL or a Wikipedia-friendly version of the Creative Commons license, you'll have to make a claim for fair use if you want to include it. The tag is {{Art}}, but it says it has to be used "for critical commentary on the work in question, the artistic genre or technique of the work of art or the school to which the artist belongs". So in order to use the painting in the article on George Grodienko you'd have to discuss this specific painting critically. Angr (talk) 18:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

If he owns the painting, he owns the copyright and can license it as he wishes. --Davidstrauss 05:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not clear on what you're saying. Physical ownership does not equate to ownership of copyright; if I own a picture, I'm no more permitted to copy and license it than if I own a computer program or book. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 17:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

UEFA four and five star stadia list

Regards this pdf file Image:UEFA4and5starstadialist.pdf

I'm unsure how to categorise this document. It's a pdf file which I was emailed by the UEFA media office as a reply to a request for some information. It's available to anyone that contacts UEFA asking for it, however it's not available as a download from their website, hence why I uploaded it here (It's purpose is as a reference in a edit dispute over "UEFA five-star stadia" rather than an image to be used directly in an article).

Thanks for your help. --Red star 15:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... it's definitely copyrighted by UEFA. I'd slap a {{fairuse}} on it with the rationale you gave above, and then once the edit dispute is over, put {{db-owner}} on it to have it deleted again. Keeping it here short term is probably okay, but it's not something that should stick around forever. Angr (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Guysanddolls.jpg

I have been told that i have to add the the source and creator of the image Image:Guysanddolls.jpg How do i do that?

You'll need to do a bit or research to find-out who holds the copyright to the original photograph (usually the photographer or the company they work for), and then edit the image description page to add that information. Unless the copyright holder is the production itself, the theater, or one of their promoters, though, the fair use rationale presented in the {{promophoto}} template will not be applicable. ×Meegs 12:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I know who owns the copyright but where on the image description page do i add it? I could not see that it would let me edit the template to add it in.

The image description page is here, you edit it like any other page. You do not edit the license template though, you pick another one. See in the fair use section of Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. --Sherool (talk) 12:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Information about the source and copyright holder does not go inside the template. Instead, just type all of the information you have in lines above {{promophoto}} on the image description page. Let us know if you have any further questions. ×Meegs 13:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, in order to be fair use at Newington College, the article needs to discuss this presentation of Guys and Dolls specifically. Otherwise it's just decoration. Angr (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

What would be the best tag to use then?

Well, as far as I know, there isn't a tag for a photograph of a live production, the way there is for TV and film screenshots. I suppose you should use {{fairusein}}, but you have to provide a detailed rationale for why it's fair use in Newington College, which as I said above, must include an explicit discussion of this production in order for there to be a valid fair use claim. Angr (talk) 06:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there one that says This image is copyright but wikipedia is allowed to use it? Feedyourfeet 14:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

No. Ironic as it may seem, Wikipedia policy is that Wikipedia doesn't use images by permission. The images either have to be public domain, or under a free license, or defendable under a fair-use claim. This is because Wikipedia has mirrors and other downstream users who have to be able to use the same images we do. If a copyright holder gives permission only to Wikipedia, then those downstream users don't have permission. Angr (talk) 15:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

In a more general sense, we can not use images by permission because our goal is not simply to build the Wikipedia website, but to create a free encyclopedia, useable anywhere, by anyone. In this case, the way to keep this picture would be to approach the copyright holder and ask them to release the image to the public domain or under a free license (such as the GFDL or Creative Commons Attribution). If you are merely looking for decorative images for this article, however, the best thing may be to take some images of the school yourself, and release those under a free license. ×Meegs 15:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

the copyright issue

Image:SUC40035555.JPG regarding this for example. will someone please tell me how to get that copyright tag? because I have taken this photo.. myself... please do not make it so complicated.. because what you are doing is keeping people away from wikipedia.. people will eventually lose all their interest anyone out there hear me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aynali (talk • contribs)

Sorry that you found things too complicated. See Wikipedia:Image use policy for some more information. I've edited the description page to indicate that you intended to release the photograph under the GFDL. Please don't stop contributing original content! Jkelly 06:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

US-GOV-PD and Washington, D.C.

Msclguru asks: "how do I tag things that were created by the government of the District of Columbia?".

I looked at Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags for possible tags. It is known that US States hold copyrights to the material they produce (no PD), as the work of the Federal Government goes generally to Public Domain. But Washington D.C. is a federal district and "Congress has the sole authority over this federal district and thus the municipal government" (from District_of_Columbia), so tagging the work created by the government of the District of Columbia as {{PD-USGov}} is correct? FYI I did multiple searches thorough google and it seems nowhere in Wikipedia has this been discussed. If applicable, please add something to the PD-USGov talk page about this also. feydey 19:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't find any decision either, I added the question to image copyright tags to start a discussion. cohesion 21:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I took the picture

I took some pictures and uploaded them but in "my talk," I keep getting messages saying I need to source and stuff- waht do i do? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MUBOTE (talk • contribs) 2006 June 3 16:20.

You've already gone back and explicitly stated that you are the photographer, so I have removed the {{no source}} templates. It would also be a good idea to identify the subjects of the photographs on the image description pages, and to add the images to articles. ×Meegs 16:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Peter ward.jpg

I initially got an orphanbot warning for this image saying sourse etc wasn't there. It was. I've now modified the wording and copied and pasted a rationale from a photo of another English footballer's page with similar use. Could someone who knows about these things check that it's OK now?

A further question, if a picture comes from a website that says all of its images are public domain, can we take that as read or do we have to check? I'm talking specifically about this site:

http://footballfocus.xsmnet.com/ which has the disclaimer "All material on this website is from the public domain"Fork me 17:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Peter ward.jpg looks fine now. As for that website saying all material is in the public domain, I frankly don't believe them. The photos look like a combination of promotional photos and journalistic photos, none of which would be in public domain. Angr (talk) 18:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyrighted images with no fair use rationale

Hi, me again. I found some copywrighted images where the editor claims that it is for fair use. What should I do? I want to add a tag that asks for fair use rationale, but I can't find any. Any suggestions on what I should do? I gave him a chance to add a reason. I think he downloaded the copyrighted photos from a non-official website. Disney owns the characters in the images.

Thanks and bye

Here are the images in question:

• Image:Kopa01.jpg
• Image:Tlk6na2.jpg

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Starionwolf (talk • contribs)

If they are recent, tag them with {{nrd}}. If they aren't, tag them with {{fairusedisputed}}, and put "No rationale!" on the Talk page, or take them to WP:IFD. Jkelly 02:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the explaination. I wonder why I didn't see those tags in the list of templates. Weird. Bye. --Starionwolf 03:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

GayFest picture

Hi. I've been notified that the picture Image:GayFest2006.jpg needs a fair use rationale. I am having trouble deciding what rationale to give it. The image is used only on one article, GayFest, and is used to give a graphical representation of the events described in the article. Does this qualify under fair use? I haven't been able to find a free image of the GayFest, even though I am contacting ACCEPT, the organisers of the event, for such an image. Thanks, Ronline | Today, solidarity and hope 03:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

If it's an annual event, someone can take a free-license picture or two next year, and there's no need to stick a non-free image in the article. --Carnildo 04:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Ask the photographer here to reconsider their licensing. Jkelly 04:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Jkelly - that's the wrong GayFest :) It's in Spain somewhere. I can't find any Flickr photos of it, though I'm expecting someone may upload one in a few days. Carnildo - I asked contributors in Bucharest to take a photo, but it was at really short notice and no-one's taken any. I am however going to contact GayOne and ACCEPT, two LGBT organisations who have stated that they will upload photos on their websites. I'm presuming that they'll be OK with licensing at least one or two of the photos under Creative Commons. Ronline | Today, solidarity and hope 08:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there any problem with (Image:Bb794me-1-.jpg)?

I've received a message informing me about tags in images. Could you remove the picture Image:Ron badboy-1-.jpg and any updated versions of it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thorius Maximus (talk • contribs) 12:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bb794me-1-.jpg does not state what TV show it came from and is not used in any articles. A source must be added, and for any fair-use rationale to be acceptable, it must be used in an article. If these criteria are not met, the image will be deleted. The same goes for Image:Ron badboy-1-.jpg.

If you ever want an image you uploaded to be deleted, just add the text {{db-author}} to its description page (click "edit this page" at the top as for any normal page). This will add the template Template:Db-author, which puts up a notice asking for it to be deleted by an administrator. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 20:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

License by eMail

How does one get consent by eMail from an elderly lady (not very computer literate) who is willing to allow a picture of her famous mother used by WP:en? The eMail would have to be ~very~ easy to understand as to her choices. The image in question is a low-resolution (small) portrait and free use would seem to be the reasonable option here. ABenis 13:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

If she's not very computer literate, I'd say don't intimidate her by insisting on e-mail. Go to Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission and use that as a guide to write an easy-to-understand paper letter. Ask her to send a copy of her answer to

   Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
   200 2nd Ave. South #358
   St. Petersburg, FL 33701-4313
   USA

Or just have her answer you by snail mail and then scan a copy of her answer and you e-mail it to permissions at wikimedia dot org. Angr (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure she's the owner of the copyright? Unless she created the image herself, it would be unlikely. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 20:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, she might know when the photograph was taken, and if it's old enough, it might be in the public domain. Gerry Ashton 20:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Possibly wrong license

Image:Charlesfenerty.jpg has been tagged with GDFL-self, but it appears the image is old enough that there is no possible way the creator and uploader are the same person. I'm not familiar enough with media stuff on WP to tackle this issue. Any help would be appreciated. --D-Rock (commune with D-Rock) 06:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I've switched the tag to {{PD-old}}. Angr (talk) 08:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

deleting

how can i delete a picture? i cant find no deleting button nowhere? and i accidentally clicked on the permanent link button. what does that do? i really need help :( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Universitygotlame (talk • contribs) 07:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Only administrators can delete a picture, but you can request deletion of it by putting {{db|XXX}} on it, replacing "XXX" with the reason you want it deleted. If you're the uploader of the image and no one else has edited it but you, you can just write {{db-owner}}. Eventually an admin will come along and delete it. Don't worry about the permanent link button. That just provides you with a link to a specific version of a page (because Wikipedia articles change constantly, sometimes someone wants to link to a specific version). It doesn't hurt or change anything. Angr (talk) 08:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Two tagged by OrphanBot

I have had the last two images I uploaded flagged by OrphanBot as not citing sources, even though I tagged them as I always do and they were never marked before. The images are Image:Hughbennett.jpg and Image:R4u.jpg. For the first, I tagged it with {{PD-USGov}} and it was flagged. For the second, I tagged it with {{windows-software-screenshot}} and it was flagged. Anyone know why? Aguerriero (talk) 17:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Those are license/copyright tags, but they aren't source information. Don't just say "This image was obtained from the Web site of the United States Department of Agriculture" and "This image was obtained from the manufacturer's Web site"; provide the URLs.

I'm sorry but I must not have stated my question clearly. I realize now that I was not putting in enough information; however, my point and question is that if I have been doing it this way all along, why are they suddenly being flagged? If the few dozen images I have uploaded, I have almost always just put a template in and left it at that (for example, for album articles, I upload the album cover and use the template for album art, and leave it). Aguerriero (talk) 20:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe automated flagging for lack of source has only begun recently. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 22:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

copyrighted images

Are screenshots from TV shows copyrighted, I'm currently trying to clean up the Batman: TAS episode list and was wondering about including the title cards from the episodes. THX much.{{--Dylax 20:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC) |Dylax}}

Only those created after 1923 in the United States, or ones in which the creator hasn't been dead for seventy years yet. Other than that, they're not copyrighted. Jkelly 20:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Images published (not created) between 1923 and 1977 (inclusive) in the United States are still under copyright if they were registered and otherwise obeyed the formalities of US copyright, and the author has not been dead for 70 years. Images published within that range outside the US are almost all still copyrighted, unless the author has been dead for at least 70 years. Images published since 1978 (inclusive) are all copyrighted.

All Batman-related images are likely to still be under copyright. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 07:17, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, mine was a poor summary. Jkelly 20:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

image tag

Do you have an image tag that states when the copywrite owner gives a wikipedia editor permission to use an image? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Indin (talk • contribs) 01:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes; it's {{Copyrighted}}. However, using that tag will get the image deleted, because Wikipedia policy is not to use copyrighted images by permission. Wikipedia content has to be free for other people to use too, and permission extends only to Wikipedia, not to the other people who want to use Wikipedia content. Either the image has to be completely free (public domain, GFDL, a Creative Commons license permitting commercial/derivative use) or else it has to be useable under a fair-use claim (in which case we don't need permission). Angr (talk) 07:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:EnergyStarLogo.gif

Apparently it's trademarked, but the trademark is owned by the EPA. Is it {{PD-USGov-EPA}} or {{logo}}? Can they enforce that trademark? --Rory096 05:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Pending comment from someone with expertise, stick with {{logo}}, which is sufficient in either case. While trademark law gives them some control over the logo (and, incidentally, the phrase "energy star"), our claim for fair use in the Energy Star article is as strong as any. There's some info on U.S. trademark law at Wikipedia:Logos. ×Meegs 09:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

It's {{PD-USGov-EPA}}, plus {{trademark}}. There are no issues with using it however we want, provided we don't use it in a way that could potentially suggest that we're affiliated with the EPA. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 03:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Confused about sourceing an image

How exactly do I go about sourceing an image? I know what the source is but I'm not sure how to actually tag the information properly. Help? Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DeathRattle101 (talk • contribs) .

Just put it on the image description page. --Rory096 06:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Dang, edit conflict, anyway here is my slightly longer reply: The source is just the information that tell us where the image came from, there is not particular tagging involved, just type in the info as plain text, and in the case of images found on the internet include full URL's to the image and preferably also the page it was found on, and if the image is free licensed also link to the terms of use or license information on the site that proves that the image can be used under a free license. For the copyright status you need to add an apropriate tag though, you can find them listed on Wikipedia:Image copyright tags, if an image is licensed under the GFDL license you add for example {{GFDL}} and so on (unless you are uploading a new image (if the image already exist you need to edit the image page, not upload it agani to change the info), in wich case you use the dropdown list to pick the license tag instead and just type the source info in the textarea. --Sherool (talk) 06:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Black Hill (Peak District)

Image:P6090104_Black_Hill_Holme_Moss.JPG – I have uploaded this photo of an OS Map to aid in a discussion on boundaries in the Kirklees Article. which I have noted when I uploaded the image. Could someone please take a look and advise the correct tag to use as per the info I uploaded. Richard Harvey 08:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know what OS means. Before we can advise you on the correct tag to use, we need to know who published the map, and who, if anyone, owns the copyright. Please add this information to the image description page. If, however, you only intend to use the image for the discussion on Talk:Kirklees, perhaps you do not mind if it is deleted in a few days. ×Meegs 08:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

(continued at User talk:Meegs#OS) ×Meegs 08:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Altering copyright messages

Two questions:

Firstly, because I'm not sure exactly which tag suits me best, I've written out a copyright message in full on my photos instead (eg Image:Kyle of Lochalsh SBR 2006-03-22.jpg. Is this acceptable?

Secondly, it seems that anyone can change my copyright notice without notice, and therefore justify breaching my copyright before I can revert it. Surely this cannot be right?

--Tivedshambo 22:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's not acceptable because the restrictions you put on its usage are too stringent. Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia; material here must be able to be reused freely, even commercially. If you're not willing to release your photographs under the GFDL or under an appropriate Creative Commons License (requiring attribution and share-alike are acceptable; refusing commercial and derivative usage is not acceptable), or both (dual licensing is possible), then I'm afraid Wikipedia can't use it.

To your second point, be sure to keep the images on your watchlist so you can see if any edits (such as changing the copyright notice) are made to them. If anyone invalidly changes your copyright statement, it can be immediately reverted as vandalism, and is of course not binding. Angr (talk) 23:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Accepted, but I still don't fully understand the GFDL licence. What are Invariant Sections, Front-Cover Texts and Back-Cover Texts? --Tivedshambo 08:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

They don't seem to be particularly relevant to images. From reading GNU Free Documentation License it appears that some versions of the GFDL allow the original author to declare some portions of the text "invariant", meaning those portions may not be changed by future editors. Front-cover and back-cover texts are the text to be written on the front and back covers of books, which are also treated separately. You can read the whole text at Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License. Angr (talk) 12:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I have updated the copyright on my images with the GFDL tag, but with the additional statement stating that explicit permission must be requested for commercial use. If this is still unacceptable, please delete all my images from the server and I will replace them with low-resolution alternatives. Sorry, but I cannot accept other people making money out of my photographs when I have provided them for nothing.--Tivedshambo 16:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

If you have added your images to any articles, they have probably already been picked up by commercial reusers (like About.com) and other legitimate or illegitimate forks and mirrors. You can provide me with a list of images needing deletion and I will do it. You should note, however, that if you are similarly uncomfortable with your written contributions being reused commercially, this cannot be resolved so simply. Jkelly 17:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify what Jkelly says, any commercial reusers that have started using your images will eventually drop them when they update their mirror. Alternatively, a list of reusers is available at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks#GFDL compliance, and a much list of some more major and up-to-date ones is here. You could ask any of them to take down your images, and they'll probably comply sooner or later. On the other hand, the probability of any given mirror having adopted your images by now is inversely proportional to the time it will take them to drop them, so it may not be worth the effort. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 00:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Simple scientology logo

Image:Scientology new style logo.png is a very simple logo. Is this image subject to copyright? If it is protected, can it be used in templates? I've been working under the "safe" assumption that that its protected by copyright, like any {{logo}}, and I already removed it from Template:Scientology, which is used in talk pages (where it serves only as a decoration). But its also used in Template:ScientologySeries which is used in many articles. So, I would like some more knowledgeable people to decide what's appropriate here. Personally, I think the image is just an unnecessary decoration outside of a few articles. --Rob 07:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It's definitely a copyrighted logo and definitely can't be used in templates. I'm taking it out of Template:Scientology-stub and Template:ScientologySeries now. Angr (talk) 07:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Show me where it says a copyrighted logo "definitely" can't be used in templates. The logo is obviously not an "unnecessary decoration", because its purpose is to identify the subject in a pictographic way (which is, in fact, the purpose of any logo), which is why we have a Star of David and an image of a Menorah on Template:Jew, for instance. wikipediatrix 13:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Fair use criteria, point 9: "Fair use images should only be used in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are often enough not covered under the fair use doctrine. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages." Angr (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

For more information about why this is the case see fair use. As a quick summary though, fair use applies when you are discussing the copyrighted work, to allow for freedom of speech. For example, if we were discussing the logo we could display it. We shouldn't use the logo though in a way other than as a subject for commentary. But to your example, the Star of David is not a copyrighted logo, so there are not as many concerns. - cohesion 15:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Isn't this all assming inappropriate use of the template? If the template is only used within scientology articles then there's absolutely no legal difference between writing [[Image:Scientology_new_style_logo.png]] and {{ScientologySeries}} If used within the proper articles it would still be fair use. There's absolutely no question (to my mind). - Glen Stollery 17:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Fair use criteria is not the same thing as fair use. We don't use unfree content in Template space. Jkelly 19:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

"Exceptions can be made with consensus" - where would one seek such a thing? Thanks in advance - Glen Stollery 19:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The full quote is, "Exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis if there is a broad consensus that doing so is necessary to the goal of creating a free encyclopedia (like the templates used as part of the Main Page)." You'll have a hard time convincing anyone that including the Scientology logo on the navigation template is necessary to the goal of creating a free encyclopedia. Angr (talk) 19:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I didn't mean to imply fair use and our policy were the same or indistinguishable, just as background info. Our policy is just a general rule that helps make things clear, one could certainly still use a copyrighted image in an article in a way that didn't constitute fair use. I think using the image as a navigational element would not constitute fair use even in an article about scientology, the article would need to be about the particular image. Just my opinion though. - cohesion 00:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, the only exceptions made have been for the templates that are used to construct the main page, and for derivatives of the Wikipedia and Wikimedia logos used by a few Wikipedia-related projects. --Carnildo 06:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Question about the point of this rule

Copying from WP:HD, they said to come here. There seems to be a rather strange standard on what is acceptable in fair use images. Namely, cover art (to CDs, games, DVD cases), is often being tagged as "sourceless", to be deleted, even if the image includes the licencing tag, a fair use rationale, and the source of the art (From cover of whatever, copyright whoever). What seems to be missing, according to the this, is a random and meaningless 3rd party source - such as some link online where the image can be found. Many DVD covers have on them now the source being a link to the image on amazon.com. This seems rather absurd to me. The media's publisher is the source of the image, and amazon is just one of hundreds of stores that show the exact same image on the product. Why does listing them as the source make it ok, while stating who really made the image isn't good enough? -Goldom (t) (Review) 15:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

It's good to be redundant about this sort of thing. In addition to the fair-use tag for cover art, also say something like "Source: Cover of XYZ CD by Britney Timberlake" or whatever. If you scanned it yourself, say so. If you got it from a website like Amazon or whatever, say that too. Angr (talk) 15:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You don't need a third-party source, necessarily. We just want to know whether you scanned it yourself, got it off Amazon, whatever. In the case of {{logo}}, it's a bit redundant, yeah, so it would seem silly to insist on a source being given explicitly. Who's tagging them as unsourced? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I saw any for {logo}, it was for {dvdcover} (or whatever the tag is) and {gamecover} (again making up tag I can't remember it). I saw some game box covers being marked is why I posted this, but previously was wondering due to a featured list candidate being opposed because its fair use pictures of DVD boxes were not sourced - even though they claimed the source was the dvd box, as would make sense. -Goldom (t) (Review) 19:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Stating the source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ME_as_a_south_park_dude.JPG The site http://www.sp-studio.de/ is where I "got" this picture. Basically, you can choose from a whole bunch of things and make your own character. The guys said to not say that we drew it, and to cite him. He said that we could use them as avatars and other things of that nature, which is precisely what I am trying to do. Please help me source it correctly. Thanks. --ObiBinks 02:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Giving the source is easy enough, just say "Compiled at http://www.sp-studio.de/". The hard part is the licensing. The full statement of how you can use the images is:

   It's okay to print the pictures for personal use, if you want to make a t-shirt, birthday card or desktop wallpaper. But DON'T SELL
THEM!
   If you show pictures on the internet (homepages, blogs, myspace-accounts, message boards), please ALWAYS give me credit! That's all
I'm asking for, just add a little note, that the pictures were created on my website.
   If you want to use the pictures for bigger projects (like movies) please write me a mail about it. 

If this statement were to be translated into a Creative Commons License, I think it would be CC-BY-NC, that is, attribution is required, and commercial use is prohibited. Problem is, Wikipedia policy is not to use images that can't be reused commercially. As such, I'm pretty sure you can't use that image here, not even just on your own user page. Sorry! Angr (talk) 06:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

How do you REM something out

How do you REM something out?

You type <!-- before and --> after. Angr (talk) 06:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Image

I uploaded a personal picture and have no idea what I need to do to tag it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tommydpreston (talk • contribs) .

I assume the picture in question is Image:TOMMY.gif, right? Normally photographs are the intellectual property of the photographer or the photographer's employer. I'm not sure, but I believe that if you paid the photographer to take that picture of you, then you can be considered his "employer" at the time and therefore you are the copyright holder of the image and can release it into the public domain, or under the GFDL, or under a Wikipedia-acceptable Creative Commons License. Just go to Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and pick one. However, if the photographer was paid by someone else (such as your school or university), then the copyright belongs to them, not to you. Angr (talk) 06:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that the text on the image pages should reflect the source and license of the image, and any usage requirements. It should only include metadata about the image, not information about the subject of the image. For information about the subject of the image usually you should use article space. In this case though, the content may not be a candidate for inclusion, although I am not sure what the consensus is on student government positions. Some useful policies to look over include the policy on articles about yourself, and the policy on original research. - cohesion 17:01, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

If he paid the photographer, the photographer would be a contractor, not an employee. See 17 USC § 101, "work made for hire". Tommy, please ask the photographer if he would be willing to release the image under a license such as the GFDL. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Richie Sambora photo

Image:Richiesambora.jpg <<< I'm unsure as to which of the catagories covers the copyright photos area. 06:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Before the correct copyright tag can be determined, we need to know the source. Who's the photographer? Has the photographed been published, and if so, where? Angr (talk) 06:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

promotional copyright

I've been trying to upload a photo and put a promotional copyright tag on it, but there is no such option in the pop-up menu of Licensing. How do I add the promotional tag then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perseusmandillo (talk • contribs)

Go to the image description page, click edit this page, and add it. Angr (talk) 10:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The template that you've ask for is {{promotional}}; it and many other tags are described at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. Make sure to also list the image's source and copyright holder so that others can verify that it was indeed released for publicity purposes. ×Meegs 10:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

which tag to use???

Hi everyone, I would appreciate any help or advices. I recently uploaded some pictures of cigarettes, which were downloaded from Cigarettespedia. The pictures were a bit modified so that they suit the topic. As far as the Cigarettespedia states that all texts are available under the terms of GNU Free Documentation License and don't put any restrictions on downloading their photos, there was no breach of copyright. The images are widely known, as they represent famous cigarettes brands. Please advise which tag should I use, so that I don't break any rules within Wikipedia? Thanks Craftni 12:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

If the images are released under the GFDL at Cigarettespedia, then just tag them {{GFDL}}. But it would be good to give more specific source information, such as who uploaded it to Cigarettespedia (author information is required under GFDL) and the exact URL of the image description page there. One worrisome point is that the statement at the bottom says "All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License" (emphasis added), so it's possible the images are not necessarily GFDL. It's confusing. Angr (talk) 12:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Recently uploaded pics

I have just uploaded some pics, for ID purposes for two TV shows. I just wanted to know if the info provided is enough to stop them being deleted, if not what else needs to be added. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, only joined a few days ago.

Images can be found here:

Image:TheGirlfromTomorrow.jpg

Image:TomorrowsEnd.jpg

NeilEvans 15:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

They could use a little more source information. Where did you get these screenshots from? From your own DVD? From a website? That sort of thing. Angr (talk) 15:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

What tag to use for an ad in a magazine?

The image is for the article Browncoat and it's an ad that the fans paid for to appear in Variety magazine. Here's the image: Image:Fireflyvarietyad.jpg - plange 14:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I have retagged it and added it back to the article, it would be fair use because it is the subject of the discussion at the article, but it doesn't really fall into any of our already defined categories. :) - cohesion 17:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

thanks Cohesion! - plange 20:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

i cant find the copyright tag help

i cant find the copyright tag for Image:Armedpdogs.jpg --Dinodan14 16:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

That would be {{imagevio}}. Jkelly 16:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

None of the licenses seem to apply

How do I figure out which license applies to this image?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nshewry_chopping306.jpg

The one you have selected seems ok, unless after reading it it isn't accurate. (if it was published after 1923). - cohesion 04:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

uploading images

If I have a scan of a personal photograph that was given to me personally by the subject of the article, what would be the appropriate copyright tag? Sh76us 23:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

How did the photographer license the image? Jkelly 23:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The subject of the photograph doesn't own rights to it; the photographer does. It's unfree. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 19:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

image tag help

I uploaded two images of dictionaries from Chinese Wikipedia articles into the corresponding English articles, but I apparently made a mistake with the image tags. thumb|right|2004 10th edition Xinhua zidian thumb|right|1996 Zhonghua Shuju edition Erya Could someone help this clueless newbie? Keahapana 23:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I tagged the 2004 one with {{bookcover}}. We should probably get rid of the other one. We could use a public domain cover from an old printing in our article, and we don't know who the photographer is. Jkelly 23:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

screenshoot

I took a screenshoot of a WikiMedia site (Image:Lyriki_SS.jpg), uploaded it, and received a message asking to specify it's creator and source. How do I do it? --PedroFonini 09:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Click "edit this page" at the top of the image desciption page, and add a section with that information. Will you be using this image in an article? It may fall under our fair use guidelines, so you will need to use it in an article for it to be retained on wikipedia. - cohesion 18:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I did it, but when I click "edit this page", the only thing appears is "{{no info|month=June|day=18|year=2006}}" --PedroFonini 18:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Correct, that's a template for the existing tag. You want to replace it with the text {{web-screenshot}}. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 19:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Unsure of copyright status

I have uploaded the above image, however I am unsure of what copyright status to give it. The image is a picture of myself aged 10-years-old, and was taken in 1996 for use in various local newspapers and the Local Council newsletter. I am unsure of who would own the copyright of the image.

--Pendo 18:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Who took the photograph? A newspaper photographer? The newspaper would probably own the copyright in that case. User:Angr 18:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Holiday photograph

What copyright tag should I give to a photograph I took myself on holiday? --Dontheguy

• If you're the photographer, you can decide what license you want to give it. Take a look at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators and see what you like. Many people like to double-license photographs under the GFDL and Creative Commons BY-SA-2.5. To do that, click edit this page on your image, remove any tags complaining about the absence of a copyright tag, and replace them with {{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5}}. Doing this allows maximum flexibility for future users while retaining as many rights for yourself as photographer as possible with a freely licensed photograph. On the other hand, if you don't care about being attributed as the photographer, and you don't care what people do with your image in the future, then use {{PD-self}}. With that tag, you irrevocably release all rights to the picture. This tag is more often selected by amateur photographers who are uploading snapshots rather than more artistic photographs. User:Angr 20:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• A few more points: it looks like you've uploaded two copies of the exact same image. Wikipedia only needs one copy of an image, so once you've put the correct copyright tag on one, please put {{db-owner}} on the other one; that will tag it for speedy deletion. An admin will then delete it within a few hours. Also, please don't indiscriminately upload your holiday photos! (I know you haven't done that, I'm just saying in case you were planning to.) Please only upload photos that can actually be used in Wikipedia articles, and please also add them to those articles! In principle, there's nothing wrong with freely licensed photos kicking around unused on Wikipedia, but it's not very helpful, as people aren't likely to find them. User:Angr 20:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:FOTWpic

Template:FOTWpic has been listed on TfD, and I think some more input on the validity of the copyright claims is needed. Please see here. Thanks, da Pete (ばか) 08:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Image question

I got an image from a google search, and am not sure about the image tag to add, the image is part of a small website, here is the link to the actual site http://creed.rockmetal.art.pl/, and here is the link to the pic, http://creed.rockmetal.art.pl/grafika/mont1.jpg

i am not sure what to do for an image tag, no copyright info is given on the website

my image is below

thank you

--Bluedemocrat 11:56, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The presumption is that all images are copyrighted unless there's good reason to believe they aren't. This is true even when there's no copyright notice. The only way it can be used is under a "fair-use" claim (see Wikipedia:Fair use for more). Is this an album cover? If so, the tag to use is {{Albumcover}}, but it can only be used in articles explicitly discussing the album cover itself. User:Angr 12:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use image

I'm finding that tags that are listed are then not listed in the drop-down so I cannot pick it and so have to use the "do not know copywright" and so have to go through this each time. The image is Image:IMD-1151.jpg and it's for Alejandro Agresti and I gave it a promotional tag but that choice was not listed in the drop-down. What am I to do? -plange 13:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm unsure about what you are asking exactly, but I think there may be two parts to your question. First, when you go back and give it the {{promotional}} tag, you can remove any other tags that may be there inappropriately. The drop down menu only fills in the template for you as a shortcut, it's not a permanent attribute of the upload. Also, you don't have to choose anything from the drop down menu at all, there are a lot of tags that are highly specific listed in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags which are not listed in the dropdown menu, those are only commonly used ones. So, in your case you would probably not select anything at upload, then edit the page after uploading.

As to why the promotional tag isn't in the drop down menu in the first place, that tag is misused at a very high rate, and actually should not be a very common tag. When it is in the drop down menu it is used a lot though, which causes more work for people cleaning up image tags. It's a trade-off, usability vs. correct tagging. And it's a problem I think most people will agree, we haven't completely solved. - cohesion 18:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

So when I edit the page, what would I put under licensing? -plange 19:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I think the promotional tag is probably ok, or {{promophoto}}. We do always prefer to have freely licensed images when available, and there may be one of him available. If so that would be better. -cohesion 16:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Fanart okay?

Is it okay for me to use fanart I drew myself in this article that I'm writing?

File:Quintaglio.jpg

I'm writing articles for Robert J. Sawyer's Quintaglio Ascension Trilogy, a series of SciFi novels... the picture is accurate down to the letter of descriptions given in the books, and I'm okay with letting it be in the public domain so it can be used on Wikipedia...

-K00bine

So long as it's not a tracing or otherwise a duplication of a copyrighted drawing, it should be okay. If you would like to retain some authorship rights to it, I'd recommend double-licensing it under the GFDL and the Creative Commons License BY-SA-2.5 (which requires you to be attributed as author and that any future use be licensed the same way). To release into the public domain, add the tag {{PD-self}}; to double-license it under GFDL and CC, add {{self2|GFDL|cc-by-sa-2.5}}. User:Angr 19:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Basing it on a specific creative character or race is potentially sufficient to make it an unfree derivative work. However, it seems to pretty much just be a T-Rex wearing a sash or something, so it's probably fine. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 00:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a depiction of a Quintaglio, a fictional species presented in the books.

Deleting an image

how do I delete an image I have uploaded? --Ozmercy 10:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• Put {{db-owner}} on it, and an admin will come along within a few hours and delete it for you. User:Angr 11:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

source information

How do I provide source information on my Train Trak Entertainment picutre Image:Traintrak Entertainment 5.jpg? It keeps getting removed.

On the image description page, click edit this page and say where you got the image from. Did you make it yourself? Then say "Own work". Did you lift it from a webpage? Then give the URL. You also need to provide a copyright license, such as {{logo}} if this is a company's logo. User:Angr 20:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Foggy and sparky.jpeg

I found this picture at this website http://members.shaw.ca/fuhrmanr/digipics/zoodec03/index2.html Which tag do I use?

{{imagevio}} Jkelly 21:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Screenshots

How do you tag hi-res screenshots from copyrighted games? I believe that such a screenshot, if used to illustrate the material in question, constitutes fair use.

Screenshots from games are tagged with {{game-screenshot}} however hi-res screenshots should not be uploaded. Keep the image size low, not much bigger than what you need to use inline in the article. If you want to show some detail zoom and crop the image rather than uploading a full sized hi-res copy. --Sherool (talk) 22:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

advice re: image allowed for educational or non-profit use

Image:Planetx.jpg is an image I was hoping to use for the Solar system article, and the authors give explicit permission for it to be used for educational or non-profit purposes, but I can't find a tag that explains that. Thanks Serendipodous 23:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

That would be {{Db-unfree}} {{Db-noncom}}. Jkelly 23:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm somewhat flummoxed; I thought Wikipedia was a non-profit, educational organisation. Serendipodous 23:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

We are both, indeed. But we're also trying to be as freely-licensed and reusable as possible, and we want to be able to contribute to projects that may invovle commercial aspects, like print editions and the "One Laptop per Child" project. We allowed "non-commercial only" use for a while, but it became clear that it was undermining our reusability. Do check out commons:Category:Solar system and its subcategories for freely-licensed images. Any image created by NASA is also free (but not everything at their website was created by them). Hope that helps. Jkelly 23:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyright

Hi,

I have permission from the Fairfield University Marketing VP to use these images. I indicated the images web addresses. What else do I need to do to satisfy the Copyright requirement. I apologize for my confusion and ignorance here.

File:Fairfield Dolan Aerial.jpg

File:Bellermine panoramic.jpg

Thanks,

Scott --Scottrstanley 13:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, counterintuitive as it may sound, we can't use copyrighted images "by permission". Because this is an open content encyclopedia, images have to be free to be re-used by others, including for commercial purposes. If you are near Fairfield University yourself, it would be much better if you went and took pictures yourself and uploaded them under a free license, rather than lifting images from the university's website. The correct tag to put on images used by permission is {{Copyrighted}}. User:Angr 15:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Non US public domain

Is there a copyright tag for non US public domain images? For example this image Image:Bursa Anadolu Gymnasium.jpg is in the public domain and not copyrighted or licensed. What would be the proper way to tag it? DeliDumrul 15:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The source provided for that image isn't working for me right now. What's the evidence that all rights have been released to this photo? The absence of a copyright notice doesn't prove anything, by the way; all images are to be considered copyrighted unless there is a specific reason to believe otherwise. User:Angr 15:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I fixed the source link. The copyright at the bottom of the main page in the source is the copyright for the web page design, not for the contents. Other than that, the site is a Turkish Government web site. DeliDumrul 15:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Why do we think that this image is in the public domain? There's nothing at all that suggests that at the source. Jkelly 18:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Because it was taken by the government and released in a government website. It's not common in Turkey to use license tags, especially in the government. Other than this particular picture, is there any tag for non-US PD? Anyways, that's what I know about it and I think it's not copyrighted, unless you know otherwise.. DeliDumrul 18:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

You can see a list of templates at Wikipedia:Image license tags. We don't have specific templates for the works of most governments, because most governments do not release their work into the public domain. Jkelly 18:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions? DeliDumrul 18:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Tags

I just uploaded 3 images at "WQAD" and I got a message saying that I need image tags and stuff, can you tell me exactly what I need Please

Thank you :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WxTWCwx (talk • contribs) .

The correct tag for them is {{logo}}, which has been added to all except File:!!!!!!.jpg, which was deleted by User:Kimchi.sg. The remainder will be deleted unless they're added to an appropriate article. Logos are typically copyrighted, and unless we have a rationale to use them under the fair use doctrine, hosting them is illegal. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 01:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Wowturkey.com images

Just to keep people informed about hundreds of images from wowturkey, that were being uploaded under misleading licenses.

First, the true license, as translated by User:Paddu

This photo is copyrighted by http://www.wowturkey.com/ (or their sister site http://www.worldturkey.com/) The licencing info. (for www.wowturkey.com photos ) is at this page in their website with an English translation at User talk:A.Garnet#wowturkey.com images that states: "Please use our photographs as you like!" "If you really have to delete the tiny logo of our site from the photographs, then please mention our site as the source at the site that you are using our logo. This is unfortunately a legal must." "The copying and usage of the photographs on the site without permition from the photograph owners is a crime according to Idea and Art Works Law number 5846." "For a commercial purposed use, permission must be taken, you can take permission by sending a private message to our member. You can be sure that both permission and an original of the photograph will be given." (The licencing info. for www.worldturkey.com photos at this page states: "Note: Deleting the link on the photos, using the photos on a commercial basis or writing your own link on the photos is forbidden." "You may only use these photos if you have a non-profit website or if this website is for giving information about Turkey on a non-profit basis." ) Hence these photos are currently applicable to be tagged as {{noncommercial}}{{permission}}.

I've asked User:Cool Cat, who speaks turkish, as afavor, to review the license, and he indeed confirmed that the images are not public domain and are non commercial/with permission only, which agrees with Paddu's translation. As we all know, such images are not suitable for wikipedia per Jimbo's ruling and so they have to be speedied.

Now, Paddu, when tagging images with the text found at User:Paddu/wowturkey.com photo says that they will ask wowturkey for release. Now, this is doing things backwards, as first the images have to be released and then posted. Thus I'm removing and deleting the images (specially since now images can be undeleted, so should wowturkey ever release their pictures under a free license (allowing commercial use without requesting permission), they can be easily restored.

And now, the point that rought me here. There are many images that were being tagged with fake licenses. Instead of "noncommercial", they were tagged as "all rights released", "public domain", "creative commons", etc. Most of those were done by User:System Halted, User:Metb82 and User:-Inanna- (the latter being an indef banned user by Arbcom). Here is a small sample of fake tags (I put the wrong names at first before realizing they were several users):

• [2] [3] [4]
• [5] [6] [7]

Bottom line. Wowturkey says "images can be freely used" but also says "permission must be requested for commercial use", that's not the same as public domain, not gfdl, not creative commons and definitely not uncopyrighted. I've removed a hundred of them yesterday, but there are many many more there that need to be removed, fix the fake tags if applies, and process them. -- Drini 23:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The reason a lot of these were tagged as "attribution" and "cc-by-*" is two-fold:

1. The site mentions that they have to be attributed if their watermark is taken off, and people who didn't know non-commercial-only images were banned, took this to mean {{attribution}} or {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}}.
2. An earlier version of WP:ICT wrongly specified that {{attribution}} is deprecated and one should use {{cc-by-2.0}} instead, and a few admins passed this on to the folks uploading wowturkey.com images, e.g. [8], [9].

--Paddu 13:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Which Copywrite???

I have uploaded some pictures and plan to do some more on the same subject, but i can not find a tag sutible for my pic which is royalty free, taken in france and "owned" by a french company.

Could you help me???

Chris5897

Looking through your upload log, I found three images: Image:Plan1608.jpg, Image:Plan1692.jpg, and Image:Fort barraux.jpg. If the first two are drawings from the 17th century, as their names suggest, the tag is {{PD-old}}. The last one is more problematic: it appears to be a modern photograph of a scale model. As such, its copyright lies with the photographer, and Wikipedia can't use it unless you can make a good fair use claim for it. User:Angr 07:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

AllAroundBarnstar

Image:AllAroundBarnstar.PNG Not sure what this falls under. Made it myself from the pic of a regular barnstar. --WillMak050389 02:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

What's the license of the pic you modified? User:Angr 07:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Presumably Image:Barnstar.png. Will, choose an image copyright tag from Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators. Since the work you based yours on was released from copyright, you can pick any one you like from the selection there. (In point of fact, you agreed to license it under the GFDL when you uploaded it, but you may want to pick another license as well.) —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 01:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

How do I know what the appropriate tag is?

How do I know what the appropriate tag for a picture is, and how do I know what the copyright status is for a picture on a website. The one's I use are typically government seals, e.g., http://www.oft.osd.mil/images/banner_pentaseal_static_030506.jpg at www.oft.osd.mil.

--WilsonjrWikipedia 03:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

If they're works of the United States Federal Government (which includes the U.S. Military), the tag is {{PD-USGov}}. User:Angr 07:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Help is needed to provide copyright before deletion

Please help with my images which I have placed online. The three imagines in concern are: (1) SaidVassallo coat of Arms is own by myself ; (2) Louis-Charles d'Orleans Pictures were taken by my own Camera ; (3) Gonzi, were linked from the web site in which it was taken from. I looked at trying to wikipedia them, with failure, Please help. --Charles Said-Vassallo 18:15, 26 June 2006 (EST)

1) Who actually drew the Said-Vassallo coat of arms? Did the author base it on a preexisting work, and if so, who drew that? Where were the relevant works made, and when? 2) Please link to the pictures in question. 3) Please link to the pictures in question. In general, doing nothing more than link to an image's source is not enough to make it usable. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 02:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I see that by 3) you meant Image:Melanie Miceli Demajo.gif. As I said, linking to the source is not enough to make it usable. It will be deleted.

About Image:Image003.jpg: you do not know who created the picture? If you do not know, it must be deleted, unless it is very old. There is no difference whether you own the subject of the picture or not; copyright is owned by the one who made the picture. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 02:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

-- Thanks for your reply, in regards to what you have stated, the following are answers to those questions posed. All understood apart from Image:Image003.jpg: which is a Tomb in St John Co-Catheral in Valletta Malta, which I took the photographs in 2000. The tomb is part of the Catheral or own by the Roman Catholic Church, I assume in which your referring to. Charles Said-Vassallo 18:45, 27 June 2006 (EST)

Image:Image003.jpg is okay, then. You want to allow everyone to use it for anything? The current license says you don't care if people use it without asking, without saying you used it, for money, etc.

Also, are you the same person as User:Bullfighter@rep4.com? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

U.S. government agency logo

What's the appropriate tag for Image:Armed Forces Entertainment logo.jpg? Is it PD, or does it have to be used under fair use. The source web site says that the material is in the public domain. But the "SM" indicates, to me, it's protected. I used {{logo}}, which seems most likely, but I wanted to verify this is appropriate. --Rob 08:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

"SM" indicates that the image is a service mark, which is irrelevant to copyright—copyright, trademark, and patent are pretty much unrelated legally. However, it's likely that the DOD hired an outside contractor to make the logo, so unless that can be ruled out, we can't assume it's a work of the US government and should use it under fair use. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 02:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking more closely just now, I see it was probably made by this private company. I guesse that means its not public domain, and is copyrighted. So, who owns the copyright? The government agency or the private contractor? I realize either way, its not public domain, but I would like to understand the situation (and state who the copyright owner is, in the image description). Thanks.--Rob 02:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It could be either, depending on contractual terms. By default, it would be the contractor. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Source simply claims image is not copyrighted

Here is the image:

And here is the source page:

http://gbgm-umc.org/UMW/corinthians/peirene.stm

...What do you recommend?

That isn't the original source page, because that page gives http://apollo.classics.unc.edu/ as the source. You have to see whether the original source (which isn't working for me right now) says all rights have been released. Remember that the absence of a copyright notice does not mean the image isn't copyrighted. You have to assume everything is copyrighted unless there's a very good reason to believe it isn't (work of the U.S. Government, author dead more than 70 years, published before 1923, etc.). User:Angr 18:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

File:Bluedog32.png

Image:Bluedog32.png contains errors and has been updated with the correct Image:Bluedog32.jpg. I am unsure what to tag the .png version with since I cannot find a tag that will state it needs to be deleted because of errors within the image. So, I just removed the copyright status. How do I get the .png file deleted?

I've deleted it for you. Next time it happens, just add {{db-i2}} to the page. That tags it for speedy deletion on the grounds of being a missing or corrupt image. User:Angr 21:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

thanks Redd Dragon 21:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyright help

the image Image:redrocks.jpg is from colorado.com and the site has given me permission to use it on wikipedia granted that it not be used for profit, which is described on the image description page, please check it out and apply the proper tag as I can't get it to work...thanks! All the information to help you select a tag should be there.

--Ebbybuddy 00:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Although the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates the Wikipedia website, is a nonprofit organization, the goal of our project is to create a free content encyclopedia, useable for any purposes, including commercial ones. Unfortunately, the email permission that you posted on the image's description page is quite clear that for-profit use is not acceptable. Given that the article Red Rocks Park already has a free image, this photo is not a good candidate for fair use, and I'm afraid it will have to be deleted. ×Meegs 02:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Scarcult.jpg

I tried to edit accordingly to our suggestion the tags on Image:Scarcult.jpg, sourcing better their nature of screencaptures from the given episodes, took via recording (RAW, when it was listed on www.animenfo.com as avible) and capture, and deleting the originals to not have copyrighted material. I believe it applies for fair use, and tagged accordingly If the license is no more appliable due to the sussequent licensing of DVD in EU and USA, I'll excuse, and I'll remove the screencap searching for alternatives. I hope to have not been cause of troubles. DrTofu83 09:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed the unsourced image, and put on its place a fully sourced one. I'm waiting for removal of the "unsourced" tag --DrTofu83 07:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Once you provide the source, you can (and should) remove the "unsourced" tag yourself. User:Angr 09:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Images copyright

For all images I uploaded I got consent by original author. How am I to prove this one to you?

Images are:

• Image:Manastir 01.jpg
• Image:Manastir 02.jpg
• Image:Manastir 03.jpg
• Image:Manastir 04.jpg

--borisha 16:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

What exactly was the permission? If the original author agreed to release the images under the GFDL, then please forward a copy of your request and the author's response to permissions@wikimedia.org. If the original author gave you permission to use the images on Wikipedia, but did not allow the images to be freely used by anyone else for any purpose, then Wikipedia can't use the images and they will have to be deleted. User:Angr 19:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

No appropriate image tag

For Image:hifives.jpeg, there doesn't seem to be an appropriate tag. The image is a press photo from the band's record label. I provided a link to the image, but the only tag that was close was maybe "album cover". Perhaps there should be a "press release" tag added?--googuse 02:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

{{promotional}} —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 23:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Fenway

How do I add on the copyright information for image Image:Fenway1.jpg???

It seems to have been added already. User:Angr 12:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Should I remove this Tag

I uploaded an image for which i forgot to give source, Later when asked to give the source i gave so. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:StarOne.jpg But what should do with that tag which says no source

Once you've added the source you can remove the "no source" tag. User:Angr 14:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Coat of arms question

Hi. OrphanBot has left a note on Image:University of Hertfordshire achievement of arms.png saying that coats of arms don't fall under the fair use policy. Why is this not okay but, say, Image:BBC_Coatofarms.JPG is? The Wednesday Island 22:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot just said that there's no fair use tag, not that the claim was invalid. {{coa}} makes no fair-use claims. In any case, I've added the appropriate tag. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 23:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Some picture copyright problems

I uploaded 6 images for various articles. [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]

Picture locations: Fing-Longer.JPG: [16] Tinomartinez.JPG:[17] Whatifmachine.JPG:[18] Smelloscope.JPG: [19] Probulator.JPG: [20]

Okay, I uploaded these pictures after searching for them on Yahoo.com Image Search. I have all the URL's of the locations of these pictures, but I'm not sure what I should exactly do with the copyright information. I know that Lancerlogo.JPG is a schoolboard logo, so that's fine (I think...?), but I'm not sure what I should do with the rest. Also, I'd appreciate it if someone messaged me on my 'Talk' just in case I forget to come back here and take a look at a response.

Thanks!

Nishkid64 00:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say the Futurama pictures are important to actually understanding what these devices are, and so are almost certainly fair use. I've tagged them appropriately. The image of Martinez, though, I'm more skeptical about, since it's quite possibly a stock image that's licensed to projects like encyclopedias (well, more likely news sources, but same principles), and we're doubtless cutting into its market, so I'd suggest you {{db-author}} that and try finding a {{promotional}}. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 23:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

U.S. gov materials?

I'm currently expanding the stub on Forbes State Forest, Pennsylvania. I have downloaded 2 images to my drive from the U.S. DCNR website. I'd like to upload these to commons and add them to the article but I'm clueless about the copyright issues that might be involved. Would it be acceptable to upload these images? If so, how should they be tagged? Thanks for your help. --Doc Tropics 17:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

• Note: I've uploaded the image and added it to the article but something is definitely not right. This is the first time I've uploaded an image that I didn't create myself. --Doc Tropics 20:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

The DCNR is not a part of the United States federal government; it's part of a state government. Its images are copyrighted and may not be used on Wikipedia except if you can make a case for fair use, which you can't. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 23:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying; I'll take it down. --Doc Tropics ^{Message in a bottle} 01:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Australian medals

On Image:AO image1.jpg and other images on Australian Honours System, the uploader said that the images are "Australian Gvernment open source image". However, the Australian Government's copyright notice [21] looks like a by-nd-nc licence. So what is the correct tag? Thanks WP 06:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The Australian government does not release its works into the public domain. The images must either be used under fair use or deleted. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Vogue cover of Lisa Fonssagrives

I would appreciate some other input on: Image:LisaFVogue.jpg. I have added the rationale, it is a low resolution image, it and the relationship between the magazine, the model and supermodels is discussed in the articles. This seems to me to be fair use. What am I missing? Thanks Doc 06:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The degree of relevance required by Wikipedia policy appears to be unclear at the present time, or at least disputed. There are many who would agree with each of you. Hopefully soon Wikimedia's newly-appointed general counsel will help clear this whole business up. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Print press kits

In terms of verifiability, how can we verify if images come from press kits? e.g. Image:Tony Forsythe.jpg? This could be a still released for commercial gain, for example (as sold in art shops, etc.), rather than media reproduction. The JPS^{talk to me} 09:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

In general, claims that something is promotional should be ignored unless evidence is provided. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

images from CCTV and Surveillance are Public Domain?

I noticed Image:Carlie Brucia.jpg, which I tagged as {{fair use in}}, was re-tagged with {{PD-CCTV}}, which states:

This image is considered to be in the Public Domain in most jurisdictions, as images from CCTV and Surveillance cameras do not display creative authorship.

Is that correct? I am doubtful of this tag in general, but IANL, so would like some opinions. --Rob 16:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Good question. A priori it seems reasonable, but it would be better to get evidence to that effect before relying upon it. See also Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 July 4#Template:PD-CCTV. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Question about use of a video game instruction manual image

I recieved a note on my talk page about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mbplayers.jpg which I uploaded for the article Luigi. It's an image of the character who is the subject of the article, scanned from the Mario Bros instruction manual. I've since added more information to it, including fair-use rationale as a character image. Have I done this correctly? Also, I'm operating on the assumption that illustrations from game manuals are fair-usable as they are packaged as a part of the game, but I want to be certain. Is this an okay use? Thanks in advance. -- Lee Bailey^(talk) 17:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Since you've added the source, I've removed {{no source}}. You might want to mention who scanned it as well, but that's really not necessary since scanning doesn't add copyright. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks -- I didn't want to remove the no source template myself unless I knew that I'd fixed the issue. I'm not 100% certain of the origin of the scan, as it has been on my hard drive for rather a while. I do in fact have the instruction manual in question, so I can verify that's what it's a scan of. If it's required to know who scanned this, I'll just rescan the thing myself (although I'd feel a little silly) but if doesn't make any difference, I'll leave it as is. -- Lee Bailey^(talk) 21:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't make a difference. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

About Image: Dulcebeat.jpg

I got this message "Thanks for uploading Image:Dulcebeat.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images." But I really don't understand what to do. Could someone please help me?

--Hearts of Clear Lake 23:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I fixed the {{Albumcover}} tag you had. (You wrote {{[[Albumcover]]}} instead of simply {{Albumcover}}.) Now, as the tag says, you need to add the source (did you scan it yourself directly from the album? Did you take the image from a website?) and a fair use rationale. See Help:Image page for more information. User:Angr 07:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, so I'm new to this, and...

I made a picture with pixels from something that doesn't belong to me. On Castform's Wikipedia Page, I posted the picture, Castform.JPG, so that people visiting will be able to see the various forms of the Pokemon. So how would I license tag the image? -mynameisnotskittles

It looks like Apostrophe took care of it for you. Happy editing :) --Doc Tropics ^{Message in a bottle} 01:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

How can I fix my issues?

Ok, OrphanBot is constantly hounding me about the two pictures I put into the Heroes Day Parade article (Image:911Sticker.jpg and Image:PFP03_1.jpg). No matter what I change, I always seem to get it wrong. The thing is, those are my pictures. I took them with my own camera. How can I get OrphanBot off my back?

--BlaculaDave

They look okay now, but it would help if you were more explicit that the uploader is also the photographer, especially since your username is not particularly close to your real name. User:Angr 06:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I added the information. howcheng {chat} 18:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Free image replacement of Stephen Harper

I tried to replace the main bio pic of Stephen Harper from Image:Harpers.jpg (official PM photo tagged {{Canada-politician-photo}} which is non-free) to Image:Stephen Harper head.jpg ({{Copyrighted free use}} in Commons). Obviously the free Commons image is lower quality, but it, IMO, still serves the role the main bio pic, which is simply to show what somebody looks like. I've been reverted, and now I would like an outside opinion. --Rob 16:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, you should not have been reverted. There are simply a lot of people who either do not know about, or do not agree with, our policy of preferring freely-licensed content. I'll leave a note at Talk:Stephen Harper. Jkelly 16:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[22]

Robin Hood 1212 17:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

What's the question here? howcheng {chat} 18:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe they want to know how to tag Image:PAgovernorates.gif. Unfortunately, I don't see any indication on the source site that the map is not restrictively copyrighted. There doesn't seem to be a case for its fair use in its article either, so it will likely have to be deleted. ×Meegs 09:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Lack of copyright? It's there!

I got a message: "This is an automated notice by OrphanBot" about the copyright status of Image:Z18oa-storyzelda.gif or the lack of it. Accoring to him, that is. Because I put the copyright with the image, so I don't really understand the problem. Hyrule 07:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Orphan bot isn't a him, it's an it. It's a bot that checks to see if images have copyright tags, which are all in the form of templates. Simply saying "Copyright by Nintendo of Japan, taken from their official website" isn't actually good enough; you need to provide the URL from which you got the image, and an appropriate copyright tag. Since this image is most likely not released under a free license, you need to use one of the "fair-use" tags, and you will also need to provide a detailed fair use rationale explaining why this image is indispensable in the article where it's being used. User:Angr 08:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Maywati.jpg

I have taken this photograph myself. Now the question how do I prove this or that any of the photgraph taken bby me are mine and not someone elses? Is there any proof that I am amolakh and not some one. Of late Wikipedia has turned into a the kingdom of a few who do as they please is there any place I can take this up or is wikipedia also an microsoft now —The preceding unsigned comment was added by —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amolakh (talk • contribs) 2006 July 9 09:04.

This image was deleted in May because you gave no indication that you were the photographer. We are very cautious and delete images of unknown origin in order to avoid violating the copyrights of others. Since the image has been deleted, you will need to upload it again. This time, please indicate that you are the photo's creator in the summary field and choose an appropriate license from the drop-down menu. For your other photos, such as Image:Chini Ka Roza.jpg , you chose "PD (self made)", releasing the images to the public domain; thank you for these contributions. ×Meegs 09:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Lester B. Pearson photo, free or fair?

Wikipedia has the fair use image Lesterbpearson.PNG tagged as {{Canadian-politician-photo}}

Commons has the free image Pearsonofficialphotoportrait.jpg tagged as {{Copyrighted free use}}

The two images seem to be from the same original, only differing minor things like size, format, and brightness/shade. The Commons image is is based on what I think is the original from here as a jpg image.

Both attribute the same source (Libraries and Archives Canada) but cite different terms. I beleive (hope) Commons is correct, and Wikipedia is wrong. But I would like opinions on which is the appropriate license. --Rob 10:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The original source you gave states "Restrictions on use/reproduction: Nil", which certainly sounds like {{No rights reserved}} to me. User:Angr 10:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Why do we have a photograph in PNG format? In any case, Library and Archives Canada is very clear about the licensing of its Canadian images (although it marks many things as PD which are not created by Canadians and therefore not PD outside of Canada). The Commons tag is correct. Jkelly 16:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Miamidolphins_saban.jpg + Fair Use Question

I just uploaded Miamidolphins_saban.jpg under the same fair usage as used for Dick_vermeil.jpg in the Dick Vermeil article. I believe the Saban image qualifies under the same usage as the Vermeil image. After I uploaded it, I got a message on my talk page saying that I had not included a "fair use rationale" even though I had. I edited the image to place the actual words "Fair Use Rationale:" before my usage sentence. I removed the warning that the bot placed on the image page as well.

My question is will the bot still delete my image at the end of the one-week period? I changed the fair use rationale but I'm not sure if it went through the system? Can an admin make sure that the image is okay and won't get auto-deleted? Gonk 23:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Miamidolphins saban.jpg isn't currently tagged for deletion, but see Wikipedia:Image description page for what a "fair use rationale" should look like. It's not a good image to claim "fair use" on; it is possible for a freely-licensed image to replace it. Jkelly 23:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flatfoot56wallpaper.PNG

I copied this picture from their official website here under the multimedia section. It states it is copyright 2005 but I was unsure what copyright temlate it would fit under here. --WillMak050389 03:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I have set the copyright as a promotional image, but I am still somewhat unsure if this is correct. Please inform me if it should be changed or if this is the correct tag. --WillMak050389 14:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

SELF designation tags

SELF designation tags inherently indicate the source of the upload as being the uploader. If you require specific identification then please include a copyright information template on the upload page and specify that a SELF designation tag also requires specific identification of the uploader as the source if the uploader as source can no longer be assumed.

 {{Information
 |Description=
 |Source=
 |Date=
 |Author=
 |Permission=
 |other_versions=
 }}

...IMHO (Talk) 17:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Are all whitehouse.gov images PD?

For example, this one has no authorship or license information that I can find. But we're claiming that it is PD at this crop of it. Anybody know? Jkelly 20:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Not for sure, but I suspect that any non-PD images at whitehouse.gov (or any other Federal Government website) would be clearly marked as such. I didn't go burrowing around whitehouse.gov to find a copyright statement, but I know at other government websites you can find statements to the effect that everything is public domain unless marked otherwise. User:Angr 20:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I suggest that if you can't find a copyright notice, you send an e-mail asking about it. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 03:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

how do i Set the source?

How do i Type in the Source to an image and select the correct Tag?

I might be able to help. Can you give me a link to the image? --WillMak050389 00:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Check the history and browse to logs. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

To indicate the source, just type where you found it on the image description page. Selecting a correct tag is much more complicated; assuming you didn't get the author's permission, given the images' dates, you'll have to consider all of the fair use criteria and explain why you think your image's use fits them. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

About map of Scandinavia

I've got it from wiki-travel, under scandinavia. And use it in Scandinavia

So it has copyrights --Comanche cph 12:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what Wikitravel's image policies are, but to judge by http://wikitravel.org/en/Image:ScandinaviaColour3.png it seems that Wikitravel content in general is licensed as CC-BY-SA 1.0. It was uploaded there by a certain Jelse, who also has an account at Swedish Wikipedia, but he doesn't seem to be active at either Wikitravel or Wikipedia anymore. It seems like it ought to be easy enough to find or create a similar map of Scandinavia whose licensing we're sure of, though. User:Angr 13:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Copy right information

Hi,

I copied this file from the following link:

http://www.keral.com/celebrities/onv/album.htm The webpage shows the following info regarding copyright. Copyright © 2000 Guildsoft India Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved

Can you please advise me as to what copyright tag would suit this one??— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jin1jil (talk • contribs)

Looks like {{imagevio}}. Jkelly 16:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Box arts

Since User:Carnildo is using a bot to tag {{nosource}} at MANY images, many video game covers were removed. What is needed besides a link to the game page and {{gamecover}}? igordebraga ≠ 13:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Examples, please? According to the bot's log, it has never tagged a {{gamecover}} image as {{nosource}}. --Carnildo 19:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Carnildo, it wasn't yourself. But examples include: Image:F-zero-gx.jpg[23] and Image:Super Smash Bros Melee Players Ch.jpg [24]. What do we need? igordebraga ≠ 14:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

A statement like "Cover of <insert game here>, copyright by <insert copyright holder here>". Enough information to figure out the source without having to see the image. --Carnildo 19:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

But such sourcing is noncritical, and covers shouldn't be deleted just because nobody bothered to add it. Yes? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 21:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Every cover should be sourced as Carnildo suggests (digitization credit not required), but deletion {{nsd}} is not the place to jump when it is missing. In most cases, it is just as easy to find and add the information than it is to process the image for deletion. ×Meegs 22:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Unreleased album cover Image:Camille (front alt).jpg

Hi. I love your site. It's FANTASTIC! I am having trouble uploading the picture of the unreleased album Camille by Prince (musician). The picture was sent to me by a friend who got it from someone else and we have no idea who the original source is from. This is a very rare find as most fans have never even seen it before but have only heard about it. The back of the album (also attempted to be uploaded by me) has the album catalog number on it. Other than this info I have no other details about the source of the picture. What can I do to get these 2 pix posted? Thanks.

--Solrpony 13:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Unpublished works receive tremendous protection under U.S. copyright law. As such, we have a policy barring their inclusion under the fair use exception (see criterion #4). Thanks for trying to contribute, but unfortunately it's not going to work-out in this case. ×Meegs 14:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

What tag to use when I donate my own pics?

Every so often I upload a pic, either for an article, or in the most recent case, to my user page and get a notice about using the proper tag, apparently because I didn't. But usually they're either my own pictures, taken by me, or by my late father; and I usually put "PD:self-made, donate to public domain/release all rights" in the tag drawbar; looks like this didn't work on this submission for some reason but even when it has I still get this kind of notice. What am I doing wrong? And is this the appropriate tag to use for self-donated images? In this case it was taken by a professional photographer, but I own the copyright/negative (it's an actor's headshot I didn't use).Skookum1 23:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that you're looking for {{PD-self}}. Jkelly 23:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it acceptable to use pictures in Wikipedia in my own website?

Is it acceptable to use pictures in Wikipedia in my own website? Acknowledging the source, of course!

Yes, unless they're being used here under a "fair-use" claim. For the free licensed images, make sure to follow the conditions under which the image is licensed. The conditions of the GFDL are somewhat complicated but definitely include the fact that your re-use has to list all the authors who have contributed to it (in the case of an image this is unlikely to be anyone but the original author) and has to be licensed under the GFDL (you can't claim copyright on it), and you have to include the entire text of the GFDL to accompany any material licensed under it. CC-BY requires attribution of the author, and CC-BY-SA additionally requires that your re-use also has to be licensed under CC-BY-SA. Anything in the public domain can be re-used at will, though acknowledging the source is polite (especially if it's an image made by a Wikipedian, as opposed to something in the public domain for being a work of the U.S. government, or being old). User:Angr 14:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Can we use Encarta.au pictures??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ahmad_shah_massoud.jpg

http://au.encarta.msn.com/media_941505923_761569370_-1_1/Ahmad_Shah_Masud.html

I want to use this picture.

But I am not sure if I can.

Can someone please help?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tajik-afghan (talk • contribs) 2006 July 14 20:44 UTC.

Thanks.

Corbis is a stock photography company; licensing images is how they make their money. Unfortunately, since using the image may affect their business, we can not make a reasonable fair use claim. ×Meegs 20:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Back to the Future.jpg

Is this screenshot in fair use in Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd articles? I think it collides with for identification and critical commentary on the film and its contents part of the rationale? Or am I missing something? Thank you. --Branislav Jovanovic 13:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

copyrights

Someone posted that I hadn't put the proper copyright info for this photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PL-amphitheater.jpg

Well, for the life of me, I can't figure out your goofy meta language to make it happen. I've been trying for the last 10 minutes to copy and paste the text for the GFDL rights, or whatever the .... they are, but they won't take.

So if you don't want my photo, then delete it, or put the copyright in for me. But I can't figure out your complicated tags.

I have tagged the image correctly. User:Angr 14:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Adding Tag

Hello, Iam new to this place. I had uploaded the File:MindTree logo.PNG . The image was given to me from MindTree with the authority to use it. How do I put a tag on this and what tag must I put in? thanks, Vinod

Sorry, Wikipedia can't use images by permission. User:Angr 14:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)