User talk:Drswik

Hey, cool guy ... (Welcome to my talk page, talk it up) Drswik (talk) 03:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless[edit]

Please read this.— RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific? Which picture are you talking about, and on which site (Wikipedia or Commons?)

Sorry. As you can tell, I'm new to editing, and was (am) having trouble figuring out the details, especially with licensing and photos. I tried a few things, and was, for the moment, mostly trying to get actual display formatting working. I believe the images I'll be working with for this topic (NARIT) are all PD, at least for now. (Images will stay PD, of course - I mean that I might later add other images, which won't necessarily be as free - I'll deal with those then). I do need to confirm that, since the description in the existing template doesn't fit precisely. (Although if the images in question aren't PD, they are still permissively licensed - I'll just need to figure out exactly which license). One of the images (NARIT logo) should also be PD-textlogo ... Thanks. Drswik (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you scan slowly through your upload logs on Wikipedia and Commons and take an educated guess as to which image I might be referring to. I cannot see how {{PD-TH-exempt}} could possibly apply to the image and I do not see why it was not uploaded to Commons (that is a big hint as to which image!). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:41, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes. OK, thanks for linking the logs. I actually did look for those; now I see the link in my sidebar, don't know how I missed it before. And yes, now I see which picture you mean. So, OK, fair point that it could go on Commons instead of Wikipedia.

"Could possibly"? Well ... works of the government / a government agency - or Category 3 of the list on the PD-TH-exempt page (or, at a slightly greater stretch, Cat 1). Seems to me like that fits, although as I've expressed I'm not at all sure that's the best fit. I was/am going to try to confirm that (or find something better) before putting it in mainspace; of course, any suggestions would be welcome.

I don't remember tagging it as 'F3'. Did I do that, or did you put that when you removed it?

Also - maybe I'm going about this the wrong way. I was trying to play in my sandbox and get everything lined up before 'going live'. Is there somewhere else I should've uploaded these images as a temporary scratch space? Thanks Drswik (talk) 04:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat {{PD-TH-exempt}} simply does not apply. File:TNObsv insideDome 0.png does not fit Cat 3 at all and as for Cat 1, that specifically excludes "work in the scientific or artistic domain" which this image obviously is. You did (indirectly) specify F3 when you uploaded it: you selected "the copyright holder gave me permission to use this work only in Wikipedia articles" from MediaWiki:Licenses when you uploaded. This causes {{permission from license selector}} to used in the image description. That template in turn includes {{db-noncom}} which is a redirect to {{db-f3}}. Simple really!

There is no special provision for temporary uploading of images. An image such as File:TNObsv insideDome 0.png should be uploaded with the proper licence terms right from the start. Fair-use image: upload anyway - you should have seven days before it gets deleted with {{db-f5}}.

Incidentally File:TNObsv insideDome 0.png is a photograph. Please obtain the original, high resolution version and upload it as a JPG. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]