Talk:Svinesund Bridge

message: I see the images got tagged as possibly unfree so you may want to try to work with whoever tagged them to clarify the license status, they're great images and it would be a shame to lose them. See Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images. It sounds like some clarification (maybe a different tag? there are a lot of them) might be in order because I gather the agency is OK with them being republished? ++Lar: t/c 14:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your help managing the updates, I'm rather new at this as you might have understood. According the the copyright information at the image bank, the pictures are free to publish but not for "campaigns". But I'm not really sure which copyright category I should select, any idea? --Anlo 15:58, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was looking at all the licenses and I honestly don't know what one to use. People who fork Wikipedia may do so for parody or propaganda so images used here have to be available for any use, even bad uses like changing them into other things. That is why the GFDL is a good license for images if you can get it. This agency perhaps doesn't want that (I could not find image license text in english on the site) so maybe they can't be used here. I think maybe you should ask for advice in the discussion of the image in Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images... tell people in greater detail what the site says about usage and ask what tag is the right one. Other than that I don't know. ++Lar: t/c 16:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on what was said at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images, it looks like the permission situation got worse, not better, after the road authorities were asked for clarification/permission. So some of those images may need to be linked in rather than embedded, which is too bad because the article will not look nearly as good without them. ++Lar: t/c 12:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images tagged

message: The bridge was categorised under Bridges in Norway, via :Category:Bridges in Østfold. Bridges that link the USA to Canada aren't listed under their national cat just because they are international bridges; they remain only in their State category. So I think, analagously, it's justifiable to leave it under :Category:Bridges in Østfold alone. TheGrappler 18:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nod. I can see that view. But it IS half in one country and half in another. Many US/Canada bridges are in both cats I think (michigan and ontario for example...) Maybe talk about this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bridges? ++Lar: t/c 22:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I just realised how badly I expressed myself! What I meant was, it should be sufficient to leave it in :Category:Bridges in Østfold (a subcat of :Category:Bridges in Norway) and (of course!) :Category:Bridges in Sweden. There actually isn't a single bridge (at the moment I am writing) in :Category:Bridges in the United States - they are all subcategorised by State (like Australian bridges are), and analagously, as Norwegian and English bridges are subcategorised by county. Please look at Lewiston-Queenston Bridge, Whirlpool Rapids Bridge and Rainbow Bridge (Niagara Falls), all of which straddle the U.S.-Canadian border. They are categorised under :Category:Bridges in Canada and :Category:Bridges in New York. The analagous situation here would be to categorise Svinesund Bridge under :Category:Bridges in Sweden and :Category:Bridges in Østfold (the Norwegian county). Would that be sensible? TheGrappler 17:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your explanation clears things up nicely. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 18:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries :) Sorry my first explanation came out so badly! TheGrappler 18:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Categorisation