Jump to content

User talk:Majora

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ainxo (talk | contribs) at 12:25, 27 March 2017. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hi, Majora! I just saw your message about Judgment logo, and that you declined to upload it because I didn't respond to you. For family reasons I was swamped for the last couple of weeks and couldn't even open wikipedia, sorry about that. As for your doubts about the logo being fan-made or something, it is totally official: you can find it easily in the game's press kit http://presskit.judgmentgame.com/ or in the official trailers (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFiSHC_UaXCgceVZkathgFg). I hope it's still possible to have it uploaded :)

Thanks in advance for your time, and sorry again for my delayed answer. Ainxo (talk) 12:25, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blitzen Trapper image replacement?

Hello!

I recently noticed you removed a photo I'd included in the Blitzen Trapper entry, due to questions about it being unreplacable with other media. Would an acceptable replacement be a photo I personally took at a concert? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevbot217 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kevbot217: If you personally took the photo, then yes, you are the copyright holder and can release that under whatever license you want. Please note that in order to be acceptable here you must allow the image to be used and modified by anyone, at any time, and for any purpose (including commercial use). Please see c:Special:UploadWizard for the upload wizard over at Commons where all free use images are supposed to be uploaded. On a different note, I honestly thought this was a bot account. Our policy on usernames forbids the use of the word "bot" in usernames unless it is an actual bot account as it is misleading. Please change your username by filling out the form here: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. If you have questions on this please let me know. --Majora (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Logo added to Wikipedia is incorrect

Thanks for uploading my organisation's logo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Institute_of_Environmental_Science_and_Research_logo.png#file Unfortunately though, you cropped the file I sent from a square 'chip' to a rectangle shape. The rectangle is not our logo and we don't want it represented that way. Could you please use the source file that I sent which is a square? Thanks very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KatherineESR (talk • contribs) 01:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KatherineESR: My mistake. I assumed that the extra black space was not actually part of the logo. My apologies. All fixed. --Majora (talk) 01:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Majora, sorry, but I think you may have just stretched the rectangle to make a square because now the logo is very distorted. Let me know if you need me to re-send the original source file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KatherineESR (talk • contribs) 01:51, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KatherineESR: The distortion happens when an image is replaced via the reupload option. Reload the page. It should fix it. I used the exact link that was provided in the original request. It is exactly 300x300 pixels in size. A square. --Majora (talk) 01:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, thanks! Yes, I just had to close and reopen the browser and now it's showing correctly. Thanks again for your help and speedy response! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KatherineESR (talk • contribs) 02:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/768819365/768820620

Hi Majora. Would you be interested in running for adminship? I'll nominate you. Reviewed your contributions, and they look great; you're clearly knowledgeable in the file namespace, and we could use the help. Let me know. Best, FASTILY 02:04, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Fastily. It truly means a lot to me to know that there are people who believe that I would make a good admin. Unfortunately, I must decline your offer. I decided a long time ago that adminship is not something I wanted to aim for or work towards. I am extremely grateful to those that have taken on that extra responsibility. It is just not something I want. Thank you again for the offer. It is sincerely appreciated. --Majora (talk) 03:51, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I understand. Thanks for considering! :) -FASTILY 06:06, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Rubrik logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rubrik logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:09, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with. --Majora (talk) 21:17, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's going on?

You've deleted all my edits??? Jmd640 (talk) 03:44, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmd640: That is correct and I have marked most of your images that you have uploaded for deletion. First of all, you cannot under any circumstances take images you find on the Internet and just upload them here without any regard to their copyright. You committed copyright infringement and if you continue to do so your editing privileges will be revoked. Second, Wikipedia requires sources. Period. If you don't know how to cite you can learn about it here: WP:REFB. The material that you added was completely unsourced and therefore unacceptable. If you want help learning how to edit Wikipedia I invite you to go on over to the Teahouse or to ask questions at the Help Desk. If you have further questions feel free to ask me. --Majora (talk) 03:50, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Facebook ToS argument"

Hello, I saw your discussion at File talk:Grace Akinlemibola.jpg. This is not the first time I've seen new users make the Facebook ToS argument for why media is released under a free license. To someone new not knowing anything more than "Wikipedia requires anyone to be able to use the image for any purpose", it would seem to be acceptable. Perhaps you or someone who knows the detailed reasoning behind it should write an essay/page explaining the issue with it, so those of us who patrol files have an explanation to give other than "that's not how it works". — Train2104 (t • c) 06:20, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Train2104: Standard disclaimer: This is not legal advice.

Now that that is out of the way, I'll try to put together a project page explaining this but it will be easier to just do it here first. Whenever this situation arises it is generally a result of one of three errors on the part of the uploader.

  1. The most common type of error with any photograph on the Internet. "It is publicly posted so it must be public domain." This very common misconception flies in the face of one of the cornerstones of current copyright law. Just because you publicly publish something that does not mean that your copyright claim over that item is voided. You still maintain completely control over it unless you explicitly release that item under a different copyright license. I bring this misconception up, even though I assume you know it, because it will be important later.
  2. There was a simple misunderstanding of the Terms of Service. Even in the best of times, and even if you know what you are doing, legalese is hard. This is usually cleared up pretty easily.
  3. The uploader deliberately cherry picks passages from the ToS that seem to support their view even though the entire document, if taken in totality, does not. This is what appears to be happening in this particular situation.

So, lets take a look at the actual, total, passage from the Facebook ToS that is in play here. From https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms:

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

So what does that mean? By uploading to Facebook is your copyright claim over an item voided? No. Not at all. Your copyright claim is completely intact. What does change, however, is that Facebook adds a "sub-license" onto your item. What that sub-license allows is for Facebook to use your work however Facebook sees fit without compensating you. This is actually a very common clause in a lot of image hosting websites. It is essentially a quid pro quo clause. Since they are allowing you to use their server space that they paid for to host your files you are allowing them to use those images however they want in the future.

"But wait!" an uploader might say. That clause says that that license is subject to "your privacy and application settings". This was brought up in this situation by also mentioning another clause further down the page that states, "When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture)." This is what I meant by cherry picking. If you only took that clause you could reasonably guess that images posted publicly means the image is in the public domain. But now we circle back to one of the cornerstones of copyright law mentioned in #1 above. That is simply not how copyright law works.

So does Facebook's ToS make some changes to the copyright of images uploaded to their site? Yes they do. But only so far as allowing Facebook to use those images how Facebook wants. It does not void copyright, it does not change the original copyright license to public domain or even creative commons. All protections are still intact for additional use by other parties. Claiming otherwise is simply a misconception with copyright law. --Majora (talk) 21:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It makes a lot more sense once you look at the ToS as a whole. Not to mention, the revocability of the licence goes against our policies. — Train2104 (t • c) 05:12, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04:34:28, 25 March 2017 review of submission by Shilpanilesh


Hey, this is a new ebook published by Storymirror publication. I have also added the link from Storymirror website. Please let me know if still it doesn't qualifies to be added to wikipedia.

@Shilpanilesh: Unfortunately, a new book that was just published doesn't generally have the necessary references we require for a standalone article. A link to an online store just makes it look like you are trying to sell the thing. A big no-no on Wikipedia (we have a lot of people trying to use us for advertisement purposes). What we are looking for is independent sources that have nothing whatsoever to do with the book, the publisher, the author, or anyone connected with that thing. A store, whose primary purpose is to make money, is certainly not independent and anything they say would be worthless to us.

Since the book was just published, I would recommend waiting a little bit. If it gains some reviews from mainstream sources (as mentioned in my comment on the draft) you can use those reviews to build a start of an article. All you would do is summarize them in your own words (don't copy and paste them). So at this point in time I would say wait and see. It is probable that the book would merit an article sometime in the future. Just not right now. --Majora (talk) 04:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Majora, Thanks for correcting the copyright infringement issues following my upload to the Uma Ukpai biography. However, I noticed you've banned me from future uploads unto Wiki? Please remove the restriction as your advice was well understood. For the biography page - Uma Ukpai, I am working on uploading acceptable image soon that does not brige the policy. Moreover, there are other works of mine that require updates with my own photos and images. Thanks. Morg4kele (talk)

@Morg4kele: I did not ban you from anything. You still have the ability to upload images. But please ensure that the copyright status of those images is acceptable here. If you have any questions about a particular image please don't hesitate to let me know. Thank you for your understanding. --Majora (talk) 17:43, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Majora&oldid=772461348"