Jump to content

Talk:John Goodricke: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Astrochemist (talk | contribs)
Left comments and questions
Line 17: Line 17:


Two citations in the article provide evidence that the Goodricke portrait was presented to the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) in 1912. Can an acceptable citation be found to show that the RAS still has it, in London or elsewhere? The page for the Science Photo Library (linked from this article) does not explicitly state the portrait's location. If one wanted to view the portrait, where could it be found? Can a reference be located and added to this article? - [[User:Astrochemist|Astrochemist]] ([[User talk:Astrochemist|talk]]) 02:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Two citations in the article provide evidence that the Goodricke portrait was presented to the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) in 1912. Can an acceptable citation be found to show that the RAS still has it, in London or elsewhere? The page for the Science Photo Library (linked from this article) does not explicitly state the portrait's location. If one wanted to view the portrait, where could it be found? Can a reference be located and added to this article? - [[User:Astrochemist|Astrochemist]] ([[User talk:Astrochemist|talk]]) 02:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
:Might I suggest that you look at the copy of Sky & Telescope you scanned the image from. There it is clearly stated that the portrait is "now in the possession of the Royal Astronomical Society, with whose permission it is reproduced here". I can assure you from personal knowledge that the portrait is still there. The original transparency from which the reproduction in S&T was made would have been created by the RAS, which retains and asserts rights over its use, the only difference since 1978 being that RAS images are now licensed through Science Photo Library rather than the library which supplied it to Sky & Telescope. We have no objection to low-res versions being used for educational purposes, but the same source details as on the original caption should have been included in the licence, hence my addition of the name Royal Astronomical Society to the credit line. [[User:RoyalAstronomicalSociety|RoyalAstronomicalSociety]] ([[User talk:RoyalAstronomicalSociety|talk]]) 11:51, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:51, 12 May 2009


Image of Goodricke

I have removed the image of John Goodricke, which was scanned by the uploader from a copyright publication (Sky & Telescope). The image as uploaded is not in the public domain. Rights are held by the Royal Astronomical Society. Licenses for reproduction should be addressed to them or their agents, Science Photo Library. RoyalAstronomicalSociety (talk) 10:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In light of this action, I added the image back to the article. See my talk page for my own comments. - Astrochemist (talk) 03:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the "original source" is the artist. I'm not sure that it is Wikipedia practice to include a portrait's owner in an infobox, but sometimes an artist's name is given there. - Astrochemist (talk) 01:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it now?

Two citations in the article provide evidence that the Goodricke portrait was presented to the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) in 1912. Can an acceptable citation be found to show that the RAS still has it, in London or elsewhere? The page for the Science Photo Library (linked from this article) does not explicitly state the portrait's location. If one wanted to view the portrait, where could it be found? Can a reference be located and added to this article? - Astrochemist (talk) 02:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest that you look at the copy of Sky & Telescope you scanned the image from. There it is clearly stated that the portrait is "now in the possession of the Royal Astronomical Society, with whose permission it is reproduced here". I can assure you from personal knowledge that the portrait is still there. The original transparency from which the reproduction in S&T was made would have been created by the RAS, which retains and asserts rights over its use, the only difference since 1978 being that RAS images are now licensed through Science Photo Library rather than the library which supplied it to Sky & Telescope. We have no objection to low-res versions being used for educational purposes, but the same source details as on the original caption should have been included in the licence, hence my addition of the name Royal Astronomical Society to the credit line. RoyalAstronomicalSociety (talk) 11:51, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]