Commons:Deletion requests/Files of User:Лавров95 2

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

Files of User:Лавров95 2

[edit]

1. Not own work, no source and copyright information for the original images:

See also previous request: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Лавров95. --sasha (krassotkin) 10:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Исправлено и добавлен источник откуда сделаны все фотографии - это копия из книги «Революционный подвиг сибиряков» - Иркутск,Вост.-Сиб. Кн. изд-во, 1972. --Лавров95 (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Лавров95: В этом и ответ - правообладателем этих фотографий является автор (фотограф) и/или издатель книги. --sasha (krassotkin) 11:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Но Восточно-Сибирское книжное издательство прекратило свое существование лет 15 назад. Кто теперь может быть правообладателем? --Лавров95 (talk) 08:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • Фотографы. --sasha (krassotkin) 08:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • Вот оно что, я уже наверно и не смогу узнать, кто делал фотографии для книги. Скорее всего это копии из архива области. Это я просто отсканировал из книги. Если найду информацию о фотографах, то добавлю о них информацию.--Лавров95 (talk) 09:11, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
            • Анонимные фотографии, особенно если не известна дата, когда они созданы, - самая большая головная боль, у них самые большие сроки охраны. --sasha (krassotkin) 09:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2. No FOP in Ukraine, No FOP for sculptures in Russia:

--sasha (krassotkin) 10:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Не понимаю, в чем проблема. Это мои личные фото. --Лавров95 (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Лавров95: Это производная работа защищённого авторским правом оригинала (барельефов, скульптур). Ни в России ни в Украине нет "свободы панорамы" на скульптуры. Поэтому необходимо разрешение от скульптора. --sasha (krassotkin) 11:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Письменное разрешение нужно? Если найду Астраханцеву и Клейменова, то получу, если нет, тогда проблема останется.--Лавров95 (talk) 08:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Лавров95: Можно на электронную почту от них разрешение прислать, или распечатать, подписать и отсканировать, как тут описано: Commons:OTRS/ru. Как показала практика, они идут на контакт и заинтересованы в распространении своего творчества. --sasha (krassotkin) 08:54, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3. No proof of the license (maybe requires COM:OTRS-permission):

--sasha (krassotkin) 10:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From my understanding, this photo is OK for Commons with {{De minimis}}. --A.Savin 08:28, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from the WLM organizers

[edit]

These files were uploaded as part of WLM 2016 in Russia. They depict cultural heritage moments and are very important for Wikipedia, Wikivoyage and other projects that can host content under fair use. Similar to last year, these files will be transferred to other projects in due course and, similar to last year, I request that these files are not deleted until October 31 when the contest is over, and its results are announced. Ideally, this deletion request should be closed for the time being, or at least put on hold. Likewise, we kindly ask that no further requests related to "no FOP in Russia" are submitted before October 31, because such requests are not motivating for WLM participants and they put a lot of extra work load on the WLM organizers, who are busy enough with other things. We do perform systematic tracking of no-FOP images and organize their transfer, but this requires time and should be done systematically.

Ping: Ymblanter, Hedwig in Washington, Romaine, Jean-Fred. --Alexander (talk) 13:40, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm sorry, but I don't understand how photos of modern plates with portraits and other files in this topic connected with WLM... or why you chose this topic for your statement. --sasha (krassotkin) 15:42, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Most of these photos depict cultural heritage monuments in Bratsk and in a few cities of Crimea. Each relevant file has the template of cultural heritage. --Alexander (talk) 15:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • For example this (and almost any from list before) is not a house, but modern sculpture (or bas-relief, or image etc). And keeping of such pictures is an obvious violation of the law. This is a serious violation of our policies and the risk for the project. Anyway this should be decided by general consensus, at least on Commons:Village pump, but not privately. --sasha (krassotkin) 16:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
These objects are cultural heritage, and their photos are absolutely needed for the projects that we are working on. These photos will not stay on Commons forever, but they should stay intact until October 31, as mentioned above. Last year it was not a problem at all, so why should it be a problem this year?
If this request is not fulfilled and the photos are deleted before October 31, this will be blatant ignorance of us as volunteers bringing new content to Commons, and of our efforts in organizing WLM. It will also trigger an adequate response from our side. There will be no automatic categorization and, eventually, future WLM-Russia contests will be organized outside Commons. --Alexander (talk) 16:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You are kindly asked to check carefully all links in my original posting before asking any further questions here. The Commons admins involved in that agreement were notified above and may add their comments. --Alexander (talk) 16:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree we should proceed like next year and freeze this request until November.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree with this proposal after reviewing the last year situation.
    1. We should not massively violate copyrights on Commons, even "temporarily" (two months is temporary for deliberate violation of the law?). Furthermore as you can see "temporary" means "permanently" in this case.
      Last year Alexander said: "The organizers track potentially non-FOP images and put them into a special category. They will take care of proper image transfer and eventual file deletion from Commons (all at once) as soon as WLM ends". And there: "I have written in the deletion request and I confirm it here that all non-FoP images will be presented to Commons admins for deletion as soon as WLM ends on October 31 <2015> and images are transferred to other projects". OK, but these images are still on Commons: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Images for transfer from WLM-2015 in Russia, Участник:Atsirlin/transfer, etc.
      Besides I looked Category:Images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2015 in Russia there are thousands of files violating the law, on each page, without any mark or "special category".
      Here I want to quote a last year message of Andrey Korzun to Hedwig in Washington: "Unfortunately, the organizers previous WLM negligently attitude to NO-FOP-files. I've seen dozens of such files years later, I directed them to the DR's. I am sure that in Commons there are still many files previous competitions. Forgot about them. But they are dangerous for Commons, is a serious problem. The recent blocking of Wikipedia in Russian gives alarming signal. I am skeptical to the ability of the organizers to solve this problem, or maybe they do not have the intention. Some WLM-activists directly declare that Russian laws to comply is not necessary. How they can be trusted to the job?"
    2. "Fair use" is impossible without a use.
      Most of these images are not used (not now, not after a year, two, and so on), and the majority of the remaining small part is used incorrectly in violation of our rules Критерии добросовестного использования (Non-free content criteria in Russian). Transfer these images to the local project is the continuation of violations of the law and creates the same risks for the Wikimedia Foundation.
    3. We should not provoke contestants to violation of the law. We have to show them how to work within the existing framework and we must lobby for changes in the law.
      For example, yesterday I approved OTRS-permission from Ukrainian sculptor for his public work. But it would never have appeared if we violate the law. Or other. Two years ago, we in Wikimedia Russia changed the Russian legislation on FOP. But we do not have an incentive to make it better if all would violate the law.
    4. Returning to the subject of this request.
      There are modern portraits of contemporaries in the section 2. How is this different from section 1? I do not see any reason why these artworks are better than other sources (photographs, paintings, videos and the like). In fact the reason for their preservation is far-fetched.
    5. In conclusion, I remind you our COM:Project scope: "Wikimedia Commons is a media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed ... content can be used by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose".
So we need to delete all of these files, as well as all similar files in previous years without any delay. --sasha (krassotkin) 08:31, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Last year the organizers selected about 1900 images with potential no-FOP issues. 1280 images have been transferred to Russian Wikivoyage and Russian Wikipedia under fair use, and of course all these images are really used there. The transfer procedure was organized in such a way that we first linked the images and then transferred them. If krassotkin believes that any of these images do not have proper fair-use justification, he is welcome to discuss each of these cases separately.
About 620 images were not transferred. 209 of them were deemed useless because of poor quality or multiple instances of the same monument. Some other images are possibly free. 402 images that stay in Category:Images for transfer from WLM-2015 in Russia did not find their place either and can be deleted, although it may be worth reviewing them once again.
What happened then is that no Commons user ever bothered to look at these images or nominate them for deletion over the last 10 months. Of course, no legal problems occurred so far, and of course no legal problems will arise if the images uploaded this year will stay on Commons until October 31, 2016.
As WLM organizers we did our best to identify no-FOP photos and we spent not hours but days of our time on doing this. What we get in return are blatant lies by krassotkin who seems to have a general problem with Russian WLM. Last year he was chasing us for some other reason and went as far as publishing defamatory articles in his pet project Russian Wikinews, where he accused Russian WLM organizers in working for the Russian government and getting paid by the Russian government.
So guys, if you want to separate real copyright concerns from using deletion requests as personal attacks, let's stick to the last year's procedure and put this deletion request on hold until October 31. Otherwise, I am absolutely serious that we will not do anything on Commons ever, and we will consider diverting file uploads to a different place already this year. --Alexander (talk) 09:29, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Last year sysops obeyed your blackmail and believed your promises. And you cheated: all discussed images on the site. Today you continue the same, blackmailing and come up with new unrelated reasons, down to personal harassment. I no longer believe your assurances and I'm sure violation of the law does not benefit our project. I'm sorry. --sasha (krassotkin) 09:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have no sysop rights to delete images on Commons. The only thing we could do was placing these images into relevant categories, and making Commons admins aware of this fact. What's the problem? --Alexander (talk) 10:03, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are your words: "all non-FoP images will be presented to Commons admins for deletion as soon as WLM ends on October 31 <2015>". Please show us these public or personal deletion requests. --sasha (krassotkin) 10:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
According to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, "to present" means
to give something to someone in a formal way or in a ceremony
to formally talk about (something you have written, studied, etc.) to a group of people
to make (something) available to be used or considered
We have made the list of files available to Commons admins and to Commons users, including yourself. The rest is not our business. We did not promise to submit deletion requests or run after Commons admins and remind them. --Alexander (talk) 13:06, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, we should. I nominated some of them, but did not have time to do more. I will start doing it again.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment
First of all, Krassotkin doing a request for so different matters is really really not a good idea ; it's messy and disruptive. You should have split it in 3 requests. for each parts:
  • For the first one, it's seems to be obvious copyvio and should be detelete right now.
  • For the second one, it's seems to be copyright violations too but as it's part of WLM, as Nemo_bis said we can Keep on hold. Maybe the process wasn't perfect last year but it can still be approved and it's certainly not a raison for rough deletions.
  • For the third one, I don't know, it's unclear to me.
@Krassotkin and Atsirlin: please do bare in mind that we have policies regarding behaviour, in particular Commons:Assume good faith.
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:13, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was an ordinary request for the wrong uploads of one editor. We even found a common language with him. He had no objection to the deletion. And I did not expect to cross with this global problem and heard about it for the first time. But I'm sorry. --sasha (krassotkin) 14:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: most and kept some per discussion - a WLM project can never be a justification for violation of policy. --Jcb (talk) 16:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcb: I'm a bit surprised by this decision. The argument is not that policy should be violated, but that deletion is delayed to allow a small group of admins to find the time to determine their status (for ruwiki) and potentially transfer them. When I read through this page, only the nominator and yourself seem to be in agreement that immediate deletion is necessary. Couldn't a more pragmatic solution be found? A good compromise (imho) would be that you make the decision that they will be deleted, but only stall the execution. That should give the local admins the time to execute their processes properly.
Now for this particular batch undeleting and then going through the process is probably doable. But there's more of these images coming in. Immediate deletion is at odds with collegiality and the whole goal of trying to get people energized about contributing to our projects. Don't let this be a sad precedent for shoot first, ask questions later behaviour. Effeietsanders (talk) 18:32, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_of_User:Лавров95_2&oldid=559526917"