User talk:Bensecs

2

Fair use rationale for File:Audubon's Long-eared Owl Plate 383 - Birds of America.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Audubon's Long-eared Owl Plate 383 - Birds of America.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Audubon's sharp-tailed Grous(e) Plate 382 Birds of America.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Audubon's sharp-tailed Grous(e) Plate 382 Birds of America.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peregrine Falcon

Please stop edit warring on this article. it is a featured Article and has to meet the criteria for such

Your restored comment about the swift is unsourced. It needs independent verifiable sources
Images must be correctly described. You claim Restored and color-corrected image author and copyright holder: RestoredPrints.com

If that is true, you need a link to the original image on the site so that we can verify that it says that the restored images are GFDL or public domain, since they are not just faithful photographic reproductions, as required by public domain licence ((PD-Art}}.

If the site is not claiming to own copyright despite the images having been restored, the images need to be described as public domain {{PD-Art}} as the originals undoubtedly are - and still need a source.

The heading is incorrectly formatted, and the positioning of the images contravenes MoS. The fact that images exist, does not mean that they have to be used. The section appears to exist just to show the images.
The section lacks full formatted references - see the rest of the article

jimfbleak (talk) 07:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RestoredPrints.com says All restored images and this website are copyright. All rights reserved. The images are copyright, no wonder you didn't give a link. jimfbleak (talk) 07:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also As a result of the vast amount of effort and intellectual input used in their production, all the restored prints are the international copyright of the restorer. Any unauthorised copying of one of the restored prints is a breach of that copyright. See the Important Copyright Notice (also accessed from the button at the foot of the Home Page). jimfbleak (talk) 07:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the images now to protect RestoredPrints.com's copyright. jimfbleak (talk) 16:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main page and FAQ at restoredprints.com still say all rights reserved and http://www.restoredprints.com/copyright.html does not exist. if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details on the article's talk page and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at the talk page with a link to where we can find that note.
You will still need a url to the original picture on each image's description page

If the images had been released under the GFDL, there would have been different problems with Peregrine Falcon and Osprey. Featured and Good Articles such as these require higher standards, and your additions did not meet the criteria in terms of text, referencing or image placement. Some articles (see Northern Bald Ibis do have cultural sections, but they have to be up to the criteria. jimfbleak (talk) 07:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]