User talk:Schwede66
Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump. |
|
|
Background of photos[edit]
Hello, I have a question, and since you suggested one of my pictures to be deleted, I assume that you have experience and can explain it to me. I take photos of the some football organizations logos on the buildings and I was wondering if I can use the program to remove the background and then upload them? It looks much better without the background, that's why I ask. Vux33 (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- You need to let me know which country you are taking photos in, Vux33. Schwede66 19:45, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Montenegro. -- Vux33 (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Vux33. The reason I was asking is because there are two separate issues at play here. The first of those is country-specific regarding freedom of panorama (FoP). Montenegro does not have FoP, meaning that you cannot take photos of architectural works. So if you want to show something that is part of a building, and the photo contains architecture, it cannot be uploaded to Commons. Removing the background, i.e. the copyrighted design, is required in Montenegro.
- The second issue is the logo itself, as logos may be subject to copyright. It requires judgement and simple text logos don't have copyright, whilst some logos are under the protection of trademarks. This paragraph and its various links explain what you need to know. Unlike FoP, this is not straightforward at all. Schwede66 09:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I hope you don't mind me asking more questions about this. I took a picture of the building of the Football Association of Montenegro in order to present it in the article, then I got closer and took a picture of the association's logo on that building. So if I made that picture, which is otherwise protected by copyright when searched on Google, I can upload it because it's my work, right? And I wouldn't remove the background. Is the Football Association building a work of architecture and can a photo be uploaded? Also, various pictures of temples and monasteries were previously set in commons, how does that not represent a work of architecture? Thanks. -- Vux33 (talk) 05:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- No, not at all, Vux33. The Football Association building would be a work of architecture and thus cannot be uploaded. Temples and monasteries may be ok if they are old enough as copyright sits with the architect but it does expire a few decades after the architect's death (I haven't looked up the term of expiry, but I assume you aren't interested in the number rather than the principle). And here's an example of a simple text logo that is simple enough that copyright does not apply. Schwede66 19:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- OK, I understend about buildings, but I saw that there are already logos of some football clubs from Montenegro, so I uploaded two that I took pictures of the association, just to see if they meet the criteria. If not, delete them. It's a little harder to connect it all when it's not as simple as taking a picture to be able to upload it. File:Logo udruženja klubova Centar, Crna Gora.jpg, File:Logo Fudbalskog saveza Crne Gore.jpg. Thanks for the explanation and patience. -- Vux33 (talk) 05:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't really patrol Commons for license breaches. I deal with things as I come across them. There will be loads of photos on Commons that are incorrectly shown as having a free license. Category:Association football logos of Montenegro may all be beyond simple logos. Podzemnik, which Commons admins would be specifically interested in licensing? Schwede66 05:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- OK, I understend about buildings, but I saw that there are already logos of some football clubs from Montenegro, so I uploaded two that I took pictures of the association, just to see if they meet the criteria. If not, delete them. It's a little harder to connect it all when it's not as simple as taking a picture to be able to upload it. File:Logo udruženja klubova Centar, Crna Gora.jpg, File:Logo Fudbalskog saveza Crne Gore.jpg. Thanks for the explanation and patience. -- Vux33 (talk) 05:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- No, not at all, Vux33. The Football Association building would be a work of architecture and thus cannot be uploaded. Temples and monasteries may be ok if they are old enough as copyright sits with the architect but it does expire a few decades after the architect's death (I haven't looked up the term of expiry, but I assume you aren't interested in the number rather than the principle). And here's an example of a simple text logo that is simple enough that copyright does not apply. Schwede66 19:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- I hope you don't mind me asking more questions about this. I took a picture of the building of the Football Association of Montenegro in order to present it in the article, then I got closer and took a picture of the association's logo on that building. So if I made that picture, which is otherwise protected by copyright when searched on Google, I can upload it because it's my work, right? And I wouldn't remove the background. Is the Football Association building a work of architecture and can a photo be uploaded? Also, various pictures of temples and monasteries were previously set in commons, how does that not represent a work of architecture? Thanks. -- Vux33 (talk) 05:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Montenegro. -- Vux33 (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open![edit]
Read this message in your language
Dear Wikimedian,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2022 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the seventeenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2022) to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the two most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.
Round 1 will end on 1 May 2023, 23:59:59 UTC.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2021 Picture of the Year contest.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion[edit]
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Affected:
And also:
- File:Danny Broughton 0102 (cropped).jpg
- File:Dr Peter Hurly 0109 (cropped).jpg
- File:2019 03 29 MT 0058.jpg
- File:Dame Cindy congratulating Dame Robin White.jpg
- File:Dr Peter Hurly 0109.jpg
- File:Major General Peter Kelly 0034.jpg
- File:Dame Cindy acknowledging recipients.jpg
- File:National Remembrance Ceremony in Christchurch 0459.jpg
- File:Farid Ahmed, a survivor of the terrorist attack 0823.jpg
- File:Farid Ahmed, a survivor of the terrorist attack 0823 (cropped).jpg
- File:Danny Broughton 0102.jpg
- File:Whakamana Hiranga Icon Awards 2022.jpg
- File:2019 09 17 MTP 0132.jpg
- File:2019 09 17 MTP 0126.jpg
- File:2019 03 29 MT 0177.jpg
- File:01 Sir Paul Adams (cropped).jpg
- File:Major General Peter Kelly 0034 (cropped).jpg
- File:National Remembrance Ceremony in Christchurch 0214.jpg
- File:Andrew Clark 0132 (cropped).jpg
- File:Dame Cindy congratulating Papali'i Fatu Feu'u.jpg
- File:Kevin Short 0132 (cropped).jpg
- File:Sir Paul Adams 2.jpg
- File:Margaret Swinburn QSM.jpg
- File:Margaret Swinburn QSM (cropped).jpg
- File:Fatu Feu'u in 2022 (cropped).jpg
- File:Robin White in 2022.jpg
- File:Dame Cindy with the official party.jpg
Yours sincerely, A1Cafel (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
File:CHCH Metrocard.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:23, 28 May 2023 (UTC)