John Reaves (talk | contribs) |
Socal gal at heart (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
Hi there. You handled an OTRS request with [[Betty Tancock]], so perhaps you can help with this issue. An editor had inserted a death date for the previously-thought-to-be-alive [[Godtfred Holmvang]]. When I confronted him about it [[User talk:Jrenwick|on his talk page]], he claimed to be Holmvang's son-in-law and that he did not know of any death notice printed in a newspaper. Would it be possible to use OTRS to confirm his identity and thus verify the information, or would this fall too deep into [[WP:OR]] territory? Cheers, [[User:Canadian Paul|CP]] 16:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC) |
Hi there. You handled an OTRS request with [[Betty Tancock]], so perhaps you can help with this issue. An editor had inserted a death date for the previously-thought-to-be-alive [[Godtfred Holmvang]]. When I confronted him about it [[User talk:Jrenwick|on his talk page]], he claimed to be Holmvang's son-in-law and that he did not know of any death notice printed in a newspaper. Would it be possible to use OTRS to confirm his identity and thus verify the information, or would this fall too deep into [[WP:OR]] territory? Cheers, [[User:Canadian Paul|CP]] 16:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC) |
||
:Ask him to find some sort of proof and e-mail to OTRS. I think it'd be kind of hard to confirm his identity since he is a son-in-law. [[User talk:John Reaves|John Reaves]] 20:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC) |
:Ask him to find some sort of proof and e-mail to OTRS. I think it'd be kind of hard to confirm his identity since he is a son-in-law. [[User talk:John Reaves|John Reaves]] 20:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC) |
||
==Wikiquote== |
|||
Thanks for standing up to me on Wikiquote. I just don't understand why some admins think they can just go ahead and block me without warning just because I made a simple delete request. [[User:Socal gal at heart|Socal gal at heart]] ([[User talk:Socal gal at heart|talk]]) 06:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:34, 20 October 2008
Sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end and use a section header .
• OTRS • commons • irc:JohnReaves •
Dear Sir,
Please kindly restore Overseas Marine Certification Services (OMCS). I would like to edit its content.
Thank you,
Raul De Saint Malo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rstmalo (talk • contribs) 03:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
- Done. John Reaves 04:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank You!
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
For your assistance in keeping USS New Jersey (BB-62) vandal free while the article was up on the mainpage I herby award you The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Keep up the good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 00:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC) |
- Thanks also for protecting the article, I am gratful to you for that even if it is frowned on. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, IAR at its best. John Reaves 02:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Image:Ferrocactus cylindraceus.jpeg Permissions
John, thanks for your email.
You note, quite correctly, that the website states "This photo and associated text may not be used except with express written permission from Heath McAllister." That is exactly what is contained in the email exchange I forwarded to you. Just to break it down:
25 Aug 2005 08:48:18 +0100: I emailed Mr McAllister requesting use of his photographs under the terms of the GFDL, explicitly stating in the request:
For Wikipedia to use your material, you must agree to the GNU Free Documentation License (often referred to as the GNU-FDL, or GFDL). In essence, the GFDL allows you to retain the copyright and authorship of your work, but grants permission for others to use, copy, and share your materials freely, and even potentially use them commercially, so long as they do not try to claim the copyright themselves, or try to prevent others from using or copying them freely (e.g., "share-alike"). You can read the complete license at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GFDL.
27 Aug 2005 23:04:28 -0700 (PDT): Mr McAllister emailed me back confirming that he is happy for Wikipedia to use his photographs, but expressing reservations about possible commercial re-use. Clearly not GFDL compliant, so I didn't upload the image.
23 Sep 2005 13:03:36 -0700 (PDT): Mr McAllister emailed me again withdrawing his concerns about possible commercial re-use
... after looking at your Wikipedia site quite abit in the last few weeks, I've decided that Wikipdia is a truly incredible site and I would be proud to be a part of it. So I retract any previous reservations I had about letting people use the pictures from the site for profit, etc. If they do, they do, and if they don't great. But in any case I would just like to extend to you an all around green light to use any of my pictures on CalPhotos ...
In essence, per the terms of my original email request, full permission is granted by Mr McAllister to use any of his photographs on Wikipedia under the terms of the GFDL. I then uploaded the image and forwarded the emails to Permissions. I think that was in the days before the OTRS ticket system was in place, so a ticket number never materialised. I just updated the image source location a couple of days ago and thought it prudent to resubmit the permission emails. This image has been in place, with the correct permission, for over three years. I am therefore at a loss to understand why you think Mr Mcallister has not granted permission for use under the terms of the GFDL. The email exchange demonstrates that this image is officially and explicitly released by Mr McAllister for use on Wikipedia under the terms of a free license.
I'd be grateful if you'd kindly restore the image and allocate an OTRS ticket. Many thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 09:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- If you could reply to the e-mail I sent you via OTRS and get him to change it at the source it could be undeleted. We can't have contradictory information such as "This photo and associated text may not be used except with express written permission from Heath McAllister." John Reaves 09:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's the whole point. He has given express written permission. It's not reasonable or even possible to expect external websites to remove copyright disclaimers so that all and sundry can pillage their copyright material at will. Besides, Mr McAllister is just one of hundreds of contributors to that site and it is not under his control. The website is controlled by University of California, Berkeley,CalPhotos, Berkeley Digital Library Project, and that is a standard copyright boilerplate applied to all the image pages. All the necessary permissions are in place. Please undelete the image and apply the necessary OTRS ticket. Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well forward that e-mail to OTRS. How is it not reasonable to want the copyright notice to not conflict with the essence of Wikipedia, i.e. the fact that it is free? John Reaves 10:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's precisely what I forwarded, the email exchange as described above, granting explicit permission for use under the terms of the GFDL. Did you even read the email exchange I forwarded?
- Well forward that e-mail to OTRS. How is it not reasonable to want the copyright notice to not conflict with the essence of Wikipedia, i.e. the fact that it is free? John Reaves 10:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's the whole point. He has given express written permission. It's not reasonable or even possible to expect external websites to remove copyright disclaimers so that all and sundry can pillage their copyright material at will. Besides, Mr McAllister is just one of hundreds of contributors to that site and it is not under his control. The website is controlled by University of California, Berkeley,CalPhotos, Berkeley Digital Library Project, and that is a standard copyright boilerplate applied to all the image pages. All the necessary permissions are in place. Please undelete the image and apply the necessary OTRS ticket. Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's the whole point of the Permissions system, that individual copyright holders do not need to void their protections on their own websites, but permit specific use on Wikipedia. User A sees the copyright disclaimer at the source website, but the OTRS ticket verifies that this is specifically exempted for use on Wikipedia under an appropriate free license - no problem. The copyright holder retains his protection, grants Wikipedia free use, Permissions records this, passerby users are satisfied that all is in order. We do not need to insist on external sites modifying their copyright disclaimers. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:17, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Alright, I was confused, but have had the issue clarified now. Essentially, releasing the image as GFDL negates any other claims as the GFDL is irrevocable. All get the template on this image and stat working on your other tickets. John Reaves 16:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I see you've added tickets to the other images from the same source, so many thanks for that also. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Alright, I was confused, but have had the issue clarified now. Essentially, releasing the image as GFDL negates any other claims as the GFDL is irrevocable. All get the template on this image and stat working on your other tickets. John Reaves 16:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's the whole point of the Permissions system, that individual copyright holders do not need to void their protections on their own websites, but permit specific use on Wikipedia. User A sees the copyright disclaimer at the source website, but the OTRS ticket verifies that this is specifically exempted for use on Wikipedia under an appropriate free license - no problem. The copyright holder retains his protection, grants Wikipedia free use, Permissions records this, passerby users are satisfied that all is in order. We do not need to insist on external sites modifying their copyright disclaimers. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:17, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Could OTRS help?
Hi there. You handled an OTRS request with Betty Tancock, so perhaps you can help with this issue. An editor had inserted a death date for the previously-thought-to-be-alive Godtfred Holmvang. When I confronted him about it on his talk page, he claimed to be Holmvang's son-in-law and that he did not know of any death notice printed in a newspaper. Would it be possible to use OTRS to confirm his identity and thus verify the information, or would this fall too deep into WP:OR territory? Cheers, CP 16:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ask him to find some sort of proof and e-mail to OTRS. I think it'd be kind of hard to confirm his identity since he is a son-in-law. John Reaves 20:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikiquote
Thanks for standing up to me on Wikiquote. I just don't understand why some admins think they can just go ahead and block me without warning just because I made a simple delete request. Socal gal at heart (talk) 06:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)