Brukerdiskusjon:A.Savin
Samleside for hjelpsidene
Stilmanualen for utformingen av Wikipedia-artikler
Wikipedias offisielle regler og retningslinjer er basert på fem søyler, og innholdet skal oppfylle kravene om nøytralt ståsted, verifiserbarhet og ingen original forskning.
Sentrale wikipediaprinsipper: Opphavsrett, objektivitet, konsensus, wikikette og hva Wikipedia ikke er
Andre lenker som kan være nyttige: Navnekonvensjoner, oppsettsveiledning og bildeveiledning
Vi håper du vil like ditt opphold på Wikipedia. Ikke vær redd for å gjøre noe feil, det blir sannsynligvis rettet opp raskt. Du kan eventuelt begynne å kladde på personlig kladd. Og still gjerne spørsmål på nybegynnerforumet om du lurer på noe.
Mvh Geanixx 16. aug 2011 kl. 22:57 (CEST)
Non-free images
[rediger kilde]Stop edit-warring! Your instructions (in the template of yours) on commons says that when re-using the image elsewhere, a copyright-mark should be added. This NOT compatible with commons policies as fare as I am concerned, since share-alike requires unchanged license when re-using the image (copyleft). --- Aldebaran (diskusjon) 16. mar. 2018 kl. 17:04 (CET)
- @Aldebaran: You are wrong. All my images on Commons are released under a free license (FAL) and a free license does by no means prohibit the author to require attribution by the re-user in the form of a copyright remark. Anyway, if you still have a problem with the license of my images on Commons, you are free to raise this issue on administrator's noticeboard on Commons, but as long as you have no evidence of your claimed copyright problems, please stop your edit-warring here. Thanks. --A.Savin (diskusjon) 16. mar. 2018 kl. 17:12 (CET)
- Qouting the license text:
- USER GUIDE
- - How to use the Free Art License?
- To benefit from the Free Art License, you only need to mention the following elements on your work:
- [Name of the author, title, date of the work. When applicable, names of authors of the common work and, if possible, where to find the originals].
- Copyleft: This is a free work, you can copy, distribute, and modify it under the terms of the Free Art License
- The copyright-mark is NOT required according to the license you have given the image. When stating that a copyright-mark is required for re-use, you are breaking the license-conditions given. A copyright-mark means that it's not free to copy, but the license you have chosen says its free to copy. If you retain copyright on the image, then it's not free. Maybe you should modify that template of yours with a copyleft-mark instead of a copyright-mark? I will revert back to the original image (which was perfectly OK). --- Aldebaran (diskusjon) 16. mar. 2018 kl. 17:47 (CET)
- Qouting the license text:
- @Aldebaran: If you say so, then you don't understand an essential thing about Free licensing. That is: if you release a work under a Free license, it does NOT mean that you as author loose your copyright over this work. You as author are still free, for example, to sell your work otherwise under an exclusive, non-free license. As you mentioned, the FAL also requires attribution of the author. It is completely irrelevant for me, if they mention me as "(c) A.Savin" or "photo by A.Savin" (if you ask me that). The essence is the same. Still, if you have a problem with the way how my pictures are licensed, you are free to raise this issue on administrator's noticeboard on Commons. Should they say that the copyright sign is a problem, I'll remove it, but what you are claiming here is untrue and irrelevant. And it's quite a serious allegation that I would upload non-free material. Please raise your concerns on Commons, otherwise withdraw your allegations. --A.Savin (diskusjon) 16. mar. 2018 kl. 18:04 (CET)
- @A.Savin: Info: As you requested, the question is raised on the (Commons) noticeboard mentioned in your earlier post. --- Aldebaran (diskusjon) 16. mar. 2018 kl. 18:52 (CET)
- @A.Savin: Hi again. The Credit line page on Commons has been updated with info on Free Art License.
The Free Art Licence considers it vital to announce the image is free and under a copyleft licence, which is linked to (or the URL spelled out in print). This is in addition to information on the author, the title of the work, the date of the work, any other authors contributing to the work and the location of the original work(s). The following format is required: Name of the author, title, date of the work. When applicable, names of authors of the common work and, if possible, where to find the originals.
Copyleft: This is a free work, you can copy, distribute, and modify it under the terms of the Free Art License
Hope this helps you to understand that i never accused you of copyvio. I repeat my recommendation to (at least) replace the copyright-mark with a copyleft-mark in the license-requirements claimed in your commons-template. Hope you can fix this, so we don't have to revert all of your image-replacements, since many of your images are quite good. --- Aldebaran (diskusjon) 17. mar. 2018 kl. 22:44 (CET)
- @Aldebaran: You recommend me to add the copyleft remark, but at the same time, you are threatening to remove all of my photos? Seriously? My photos are perfectly free licensed, and what they said on Commons is only confirming what I previously wrote -- the FAL license does not remove my copyright. Well, if you wish that Norwegian wikipedia only allows Public Domain material, you are free to start a proposal here, but as long as there is no such policy, I kindly request you to leave me alone with your threatments. --A.Savin (diskusjon) 18. mar. 2018 kl. 06:01 (CET)
- I'm not threatening you, please stop these accusations! It is the instructions you give to those who wishes to re-use the image that doesn't make it clear that it can be freely copied and re-used. You only require the attribution to say "copyright" without linking to the license or mention that it is a free image. Quoting from the license itself:
To benefit from the Free Art License, you only need to mention the following elements on your work: [Name of the author, title, date of the work. When applicable, names of authors of the common work and, if possible, where to find the originals]. Copyleft: This is a free work, you can copy, distribute, and modify it under the terms of the Free Art License http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/
Pay attention to the last line. By omitting the mention of the image being Copyleft and free to copy and distribute, the license demand seems unfulfilled to me. A third party who sees your image re-used outside Wikimedia will - unless it links back to the image's Commons-page - have no way to know that it is in fact FAL-licensed. --- Aldebaran (diskusjon) 18. mar. 2018 kl. 10:41 (CET)
- All my photos have the FAL template with the copyleft remark. To add the same remark to the user template, would be redundant, and complicated for users outside Commons who are not familiar with our policies. As I already said, if you have any problem with my template, you may start a discussion on Commons. If they force me to change something on my template, it's OK and I'll do it, but the current status is OK for me and I see no reason to change anything just because an unknown user from Norwegian wikipedia demands it. And do not write here anymore -- if you have to say me something, use my user talk on Commons. Thanks --A.Savin (diskusjon) 18. mar. 2018 kl. 16:23 (CET)