Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2008 May 30

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] 2008-05-30

edit

Articles

edit

Images

  • All pictures of user:Mike Babic need to be deleted because of copyright problem and WP:DUCK rule. "His first pictures" has been deleted because of missing information on its copyright status [6] . Maybe I am mistaking but after this first deletings he has learned how to write false copyright information so new pictures has survived (example:image Cuvari Hristova groba has been deleted on 20 March, but he has recreated picture on 24 and because of new "OK writen copyright information" picture has survived [7]). Now we are having evidence that user:Mike Babic is writing false copyright information because image manastiri is copy of image on site www.kosovo.net (first and second picture). Similar thing he has done with Croatian historical map (Mike Babic, www.croatia-in-english.com)and Picture of Hotel Lapad which he has taken from National newspaper site (wikipedia, National ) and I can find many other examples but this is enough.--Rjecina (talk) 02:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I have started similar action on WP:ANI and until now there has been 1 interesting comment--Rjecina (talk) 05:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Okay, continuing this discussion on ANI then. (note that the observation below by AMAPO is about an unrelated case.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • uploader has had pictures deleted already for copyright violations. uploader claims he created Image:Monterrey at night.jpg (history · last edit) but it was taken from [8] which states it is copyrighted. AMAPO (talk) 04:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


  • Image:Noronic49.jpg (history · last edit) has a notice saying that it is fair use in the US and public domain in Canada. The fair use rationale makes sense, so it is logical for the image to remain on Wikipedia and therefore I have not placed a copyvio tag on the image talk page or the contributor's page. But the justification for saying that it is public domain in Canada is that it is a "Canadian image" made before 1949. Yet the description says that it shows the ship in Detroit (not in Canada), and according to the article on the Noronic, the ship was in Detroit in 1949, so the image could date from that year even though the ship was destroyed later that year. So while the use of the image is legitimate based on US fair use, the Canadian status is suspicious. Incidentally, I see that the same contributor has uploaded other images of the Noronic which have been deleted. 207.176.159.90 (talk) 23:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)