Commons:Volunteer Response Team/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: 14 days (graph) update

Start a new discussion

Shortcuts: Commons:VRT/N • Commons:VRTN

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Releasing rights more efficiently.[edit]

Well done everyone. As I know, if anyone uploads an movie poster they have rights to, they would need to use the VRTS generator to release rights there after.

Is there a way users can release permissions simultaneously as they upload in order for the files not to be deleted? Danidamiobi (talk) 10:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Danidamiobi: How to streamline your licensing depends on whether or not you previously published your work. If you did previously publish, please see VRT#The image was first published on my website, or on my own space of a shared website. If you did not previously publish, please see VRT/CONSENT, especially the part about using {{subst:PP}}. You may also want to consider blanket licensing for all your work or a clearly defined subset of your work. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Ganímedes (talk) 23:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ticket: 2021021210004144[edit]

Uploader is a serial copyright violator. the picture in the link here has been deleted several times, I would like to ask the respected admins in general, how can this be if the author of the image and the person in the picture are the same person? it doesn't look like a picture taken with a tripod. What do you think is the difference between a photo taken with a tripod? how to determine if this photo was taken with a tripod or not? 89.219.181.65 23:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, and welcome. Onyeddi has three blocks for uploading copyvios. The file will continue to be deleted unless the uploader acknowledges the name of the actual photographer in the "author" field of {{Information}}. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 15:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

{{Delete}}The uploader did not validate the name of the actual photographer in the "author" {{Information}} field.--85.132.29.163 09:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear krd I deleted the template as you said.--85.132.29.163 09:24, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done, uploader Onyeddi (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user has been indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry thanks to Эlcobbola! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Jeff G., are you in favor of deleting the image? User blocked but picture not deleted?--89.219.181.65 18:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The question is moot. File:NamiqQaraçuxurlu.jpg has been uploaded three times and deleted three times. Note the redlink. Please use internal links. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 13:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear admin, File:NamiqQaracuxurlu.jpg the author of the photo and the person in the photo can be the same person, but if it is taken from a tripod, then how can this issue be clarified? for some reason it seems to me that this picture does not look like a picture taken from a tripod.--89.219.181.65 17:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That is technically a different filename, the difference being the cedilla on "ç". This one was kept at Commons:Deletion requests/File:NamiqQaracuxurlu.jpg. I see no information about a self-timer in the metadata for this one from a Canon EOS 5D Mark III, but I will ping the Admins and fellow Agents who have dealt with this file and uploader anyway: AntiCompositeNumber, Túrelio, Elcobbola, Krd, and Wdwd. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 02:14, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forwarded permissions?[edit]

Hi, I have been told that there is not unanimous agreement about whether forwarded permissions can be accepted. A few months ago, I forwarded an image, with an attempted permission to use it, from the official representatives of an actress - this wasn't accepted as it wasn't from the photographer, which I have understand. Subsequently (after some too-ing and fro-ing), the representative forwarded (from their agency email address) a CC release from the photographer to the VRTS volunteer. Unfortunately, the photographer did not reply to a couple of requests to email VTRS directly. Is there any way this can be reviewed to see if the CC permission forwarded by the agency to the photographer can be accepted? (I haven't put the case reference here in case there's no hope; and this isn't a complaint.) Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:06, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Between the volunteers of the dutch section we agreed that in forwarded mails the headers of the mail should be included so we can be convinced the permission originates from the photographer. Nothing on VRTS is 100% guaranteed. We do not ask for a proof of identity for instance. Sometimes I feel the uploader is not telling the truth and in such cases I would ask for more evidence. Sometimes I even suggest celebrities to make another professional photo and ask the photographer to sign a contract with CCBYSA beforehand.Ellywa (talk) 08:41, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. In this case the header of the email from the photographer was included in the email that was sent to VTRS from the actresses' agency. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BennyOnTheLoose, If you want one of the volunteers to look into this in more detail, please provide the ticket#. Ellywa (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Ellywa, the ticket number is ticket:2022052410008807. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:34, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As far as I can see, the forwarded mail does not include the header, it is a simple forward. In addition, each queue of VRT can have their own policies. Best is to ask the photographer to send permission directly to VRT. Ask them to include the ticket no in the subject. Thanks for you efforts. Ellywa (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, thank you. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BennyOnTheLoose, Ellywa, King of Hearts, and Ganímedes: I have combined all the tickets to Ticket:2022051710010791 and have emailed the photographer for direct permission. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 01:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My view on forwarding is this: VRTS is sometimes used to supply permission, and sometimes used to supply proof of identity, and sometimes both. Proof of permission is required when the uploader is not the copyright holder, and thus no legal contract was formed at the time they clicked "Upload". Proof of identity is required when the image has been previously published, regardless of whether the uploader is the copyright holder. When proof of permission is required but not proof of identity (e.g. someone uploads a new high-res photo with EXIF and indicates a different person as the author), then I accept forwarded permissions, since someone who really wanted to fool us could do so much more easily by just claiming "own work" when uploading. In all other cases, I do not allow forwarded permissions, and require the email to come from an address which has been publicly connected to the image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BennyOnTheLoose: The headers I like to see are the full Internet headers as specified in Internet Standard #11 and RFC 822 "Standard for the format of ARPA Internet text messages". — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 02:25, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks @Jeff G. for take care of the ticket. I've told the customer several times to not forward the permission, but not answer was received. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 12:30, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ticket #2019082010004668[edit]

I have a question regarding File:Okjökull glacier commemorative plaque.jpg. It's stated that the copyright holder is Rice University. But on https://news2.rice.edu/2019/07/18/lost-glacier-to-be-honored-with-memorial-monument/ it sais that Grétar Thorvaldsson is the copyright holder. I suspect that Grétar was never notified of the image being used on Wikimedia, though I have no proof of that. Steinn inn ♨ 20:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pinging @Nsaa as fellow Agent. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Le Peuple du Bois.jpg[edit]

Hi, This file contains a ticket, but it was tagged for deletion as derivative work by 1Veertje. Now Yasminkaa says there is another ticket. Any idea? Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It sounds like you got the order of events backwards? I had tagged it as a DW and then it got a VRT ticket. Vera ^(talk) 14:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not really. @1Veertje: It doesn't matter now, but ticket was added by Jarekt on 16 May 2022‎, and you tagged it on 8 December 2022‎. See the file page edit history. Yann (talk) 22:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. 14:35, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 14:35, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Emails are bouncing back?[edit]

Hey VRT! It seems like the messages to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org are bouncing back. Can you check if there is something wrong with the inbox? Thanks! Señoritaleona (talk) 23:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is nothing obviously wrong. Please provide details. --Krd 07:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 09:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]