Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 90 days.
VRT Noticeboard
Welcome to the VRT noticeboard

This page is where users can communicate with Commons Volunteers Response Team members, or VRT agents with one another. You can request permissions verification here, or anything else that needs an agent's assistance. This page is multilingual — when discussing tickets in languages other than English, please make a note of this and consider asking your question in the same language.

Please read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting your question here.

The current backlog of the (English) permissions-commons queue is: 3 days (graph)  update

Start a new discussion

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
VRT Noticeboard
VRT Noticeboard
Main VRT-related pages

Shortcuts: Commons:VRT/N • Commons:VRTN

Is there a ticket associated with the file? --Geohakkeri (talk) 22:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source site, which certainly appears to be the photographer, says "I release the copyright of the following images and release them into the Public Domain". Why would we need a ticket? - Jmabel ! talk 02:21, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Geohakkeri & @Jmabel: in ticket:2024070110006407, they say CC BY-SA 4.0. My belief has always been that where explicit permissions are clear, a permission release is not necessary. Regards, Aafi (talk) 05:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel and Aafi: See my question on the file talk page. The Twitter source page indeed looked good to me until I saw that it was sort of disregarded in Special:Diff/891544873. But maybe that was just a simple mistake by Krd? --Geohakkeri (talk) 07:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The file was uploaded on 17:56, 11 May 2024‎, and the X URL says “2:50 p. m. · 11 may. 2024”. Be careful with the Flickrwashing. Besides, it says Public Domain. Version? And ticket:2024070110006407 says CC BY SA 4.0. Very confusing. --Ganímedes (talk) 02:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Twitter account had already posted the same photo earlier: https://x.com/GeorgeMicro1/status/1769031711478686156 --Geohakkeri (talk) 09:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ganímedes: I assume you are using "Flickrwashing" very loosely, since Flickr is in no way involved. Are you saying you have some reason to doubt that the Twitter/X account in question belongs to the person who took the photo? Can you give any evidence for why we should doubt that? - Jmabel ! talk 21:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm just saying that we must verify all the dates, sources, and licenses. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone check what/how Ticket:2009063010002351 plays into File:Radar image of the 2011 Joplin tornado May 22, 2011 2248Z.png? Several discussions on radar images have occurred, which has lead to {{PD-NEXRAD}} becoming a thing. Per the ticket, it says attribution is required for a NEXRAD radar screenshot. Just wanting to check if that ticket is actually for that specific radar screenshot, since this seems to be the sole exception to PD-NEXRAD. WeatherWriter (talk) 23:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, WeatherWriter . Three permissions were merged under this one, and include:
Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 22:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An accurate quotation from the email in the VRT system? - (Ticket Number = 2020112910005534)

[edit]

Is the text located under this file license an accurate quotation from the email in the VRT system?

  • Ticket Number = 2020112910005534

Is this quotation in French accurate (see below):

  • « Il me faut vous indiquer que nos archives de 1934 à 1991 sont désormais propriété du Ministère de la Culture, conservées par une entité appelée Médiathèque de l'architecture et du patrimoine et diffusées par l'agence photographique RMN-Grand Palais. Ce fonds photographique n'est pas soumis à un droit patrimonial donc quiconque possède un portrait de l'époque 1934-1991 peut l'utiliser librement et vous pouvez réutiliser un portrait trouvé sur internet. »

Agnes BROUARD Chargée de la valorisation des collections Studio Harcourt Paris'

Translation to English (see below):

  • "I must inform you that our archives from 1934 to 1991 are now owned by the Ministry of Culture, kept by an entity called Médiathèque de l'architecture et du patrimoine and disseminated by the photographic agency RMN-Grand Palais. This photographic collection is not subject to a property right so anyone who has a portrait of the 1934-1991 period can use it freely and you can reuse a portrait found on the internet. ”

Agnes BROUARD

In charge of the enhancement of collections Studio Harcourt Paris'

Thank you for verifying this possible VRT text, -- Ooligan (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns have been raised at pl:Wikiprojekt:Czy wiesz/propozycje/2024-08/Niesamowite przygody dziesięciu skarpetek (czterech prawych i sześciu lewych). The book illustrator is pl:Daniel de Latour, notable artist, but the file was uploaded with the claim "Own work / Author Rysiek lolowsky" yet it was accepted? (The book is notable, I was improving it article on pl wiki at pl:Niesamowite przygody dziesięciu skarpetek (czterech prawych i sześciu lewych)). I'd nom the file for deletion as obvious copyvio with false ownership/author claim, except supposeldy someone reviewed the private correspondence and concluded it is ok? Can more details be shared here? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Ping uploader @Ryziek and editor who spotted the issue at pl wiki @Sidevar Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sugababes images

[edit]

I have concerns about File:Sugababes performing at O2 Arena 2023.jpg and File:Sugababes in August 2022.jpg. Despite a ticket being received (and accepted) by the VRT for these images, I have reason to believe that the uploader is not who they say they are and/or do not have appropriate permissions. Ben Birchall is not the photographer of the latter image, as evidenced by [1] and [2]. A previously uploaded and since deleted Girls Aloud image by this user was also sourced from a fan's Twitter account. Breaktheicees (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]