Wikipedia talk:Untagged images/Archive 2

message: I've been on wikipedia for two years but I'm a words guy, not a pictures guy, so I've never done a thing with images ... so here's my stupid question: How do you tag an image? Where do you put the notice - do you edit the image page and just plonk it down at the bottom? - DavidWBrooks 15:25, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Baicaly, yes, all you have to do is to go to that images image page (click on link on list, or on image itself if in artical), and then hit edit. it brings up the normal edit pain, just like any other artical, where you add the tag(s). hope that helps tooto 19:12, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  My incredibly stupid question 

message: How to  handle images that don't have a Wikipedia description page, but are on http://commons.wikimedia.org/, such as :Image:Potala Palace.jpg?  It's properly licensed there, but I assume it's showing up in the lists here because the scan didn't find a tag on a Wikipedia description page.  Just delete it from the list?  Create a description page?  - Kbh3rd 19:33, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikimedia Commons? 

message: Hello all,
Recently a user added a  tag to :Image:Wikipedia.vim.  This file is not an image (it's a syntax file for the vim text editor), and it wasn't specified anywhere that the file was GFDL—if anything, the comment "published on Wikipedia and declared authorless" would seem to make it more of a public domain file.  Is there any set standard for files which aren't images?  I added a  tag, but I just thought people should be a little more careful about tagging files without any specific license attached. --bdesham 15:09, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-image files 

message: At what point does a mathematical formula become a picture?
Formulae are not copyrightable (but IANAL) even if they are original. but how about :Image:PartitionLattice.jpg or commutative diagrams? 
Zeimusu 02:58, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)
:Dunno.  There are some easy cases, like old images of formulas from before the days of TeX markup support, which can be listed for deletion.  One rule of thumb is, are the ideas expressed in the image/diagram part of common knowledge?  How much artistic freedom did the creator of the image have?  If the diagram is derived from common knowledge and can only be expressed meaningfully in a handful of ways, it's probably ineligilbe for copyright, i.e. .  For :Image:PartitionLattice.jpg one could argue that there aren't many ways the same information could be depicted; however, if you consider all permutations of the intermediary nodes, there are more than 3 million ways to arrange them. Perhaps it's best to wait what the person who originally uploaded it has to say. --MarkSweep 03:16, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathematical images 

message: The image :Image:Spessard Holland 2.jpg is according to the appropriate article the official governor's portrait of Spessard Holland, and appear to be the same image as here, , which seems to agree with that.  I wondered if there is a particular copyright status to such paintings, and photos of them.  I've tried contacting the uploader Neutrality, to upload the appropriate tags, but so far, he's just put up a  tag, which would imply the painter died more than 100 years ago, in 1904, when Spessard Holland was only 12.  Also, this might apply to other paintings of Governor's, and other public figures. Silverfish 13:25, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  official governor's portraits 

message: Dunno what to do with :Image:Cgisf-tgg.png as there's no original uploader given, just "automated conversion".  What's with that?  - Kbh3rd 06:11, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:   Automated conversion  

message: I have only been working on Wikipedia for 2 months, so bear with me. I saw the "Mysterious Redirects" section where for some reason, there are images that are being redirected to various wiki main pages. I have a question. How the hell do you fix that? :) I know there has to be a way and I'd like to learn. --Woohookitty 06:18, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Those images have been made that way specifically for use on the Main Page or such I think, so before 'fixing' it you'd probably want to check talk. But, get the URL by right-clicking on the thumbnail image, and then paste it in your address bar and append &redirect=no to it. 119 06:38, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No I wasn't going to touch it. I just wanted to know how because I've seen before where a page is linked to another page and there is no visible redirect. So I was just wondering how that's fixed. Thanks. :) --Woohookitty 08:37, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dumb Question

message: I just (oh, well it's been a while since I started typing this message, got on to other stuff & got back to finishing this ;) ) noticed User:Deansfa tagged :Image:J and K.jpg as  but it is from , and it is very unlikely that the copyright owner allowed wikipedia to distribute it under GFDL. Also there is no mention of why it is GFDL in the image description page and there has been no communication in the talk page of the original uploader of the image User:Ackulkarni as well as that of User:Deansfa. I've added a copyvio notice and listed the image in WP:CP, but it just occured to me that there could be a lot of images tagged wrongly. In fact there could be vandals who tag a lot of images wrongly (I'm not calling Deansfa a vandal). Is anything being done to counter that? -- Paddu 00:58, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that neither the uploader nor the "tagger" stated the source. I found that since I remembered seeing the image earlier (in a different site) and hence images.googled. BTW I've anyway left a message for the uploader, who hasn't contributed for a while. -- Paddu 07:40, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrongly tagged images 

message: There are a lot of flag images that have been categorised under this label. The user who created it was incorrect in their interpretation of copyright law so far as I can tell. Images of national flags are often not straight slavish copies, there is creativity involved in their making and thus they are eligible for copyright in the US. Images categorised with this tag need to be looked at and tagged appropriately. If they are CIA World Factbook as many of them are, then they are indeed public domain anyway. If not, then other avenues need to be looked at. David Newton 23:12, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  PD-flag images 

message: I've uploaded a list of blank image description pages from the 23 June 2005 database dump.  Sorry these are all in one page, but I didn't have much time.  Of course there are non-blank pages that aren't tagged either, but I guess this list will keep people busy until the next database dump. -- Beland 21:26, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update - blanks from 23 June 2005 

message: It would be quite an advantage to have the untagged image list be a gallery. You could them pick out images of the same type to do mass editting. --None-of-the-Above 12:46, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untagged image list. 

message: As you probably know, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason has added a licensing selector drop-down box to the Special:Upload page -- please come to MediaWiki talk:Licenses to discuss what should and shouldn't be on the list, what to do with people who don't select an option, and ways to use this tool to make post-upload tagging easier on everyone.  Thanks!  — Catherine\talk 04:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this will make dodgy image indentification worse.. Discussion to continue on that page.. Secretlondon 13:31, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing selector on upload page 

message: Once again, these are just blanks and need to be separated into subpages.  It's certainly easy enough to make this into a gallery (as suggested above) though with 11,000 images, you'd want to make a very large number of subpages, so too many images don't try to load all at once.  Also, you'd probably want to make the links into thumbnail links, so you don't try to load full-size images. -- Beland 23:34, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Update 9 Sep 2005

message: I've found uploaded images with no tag from 31 August that aren't on these lists. An example is :Image:Crusha chocolate.jpg. Just thought I'd flag this up somewhere. Secretlondon 11:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Image:Derek and Clive come again sleeve.jpg - untagged since February 05. Secretlondon 12:13, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually I'm convinced we are just picking up images with empty pages. All the untagged, unflagged images I find have text in the description page. Secretlondon 13:48, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Are we missing some?

message: I'd like to see a similar project on the Commons.  The number of untagged images there is probably a lot less, but still not zero.  How is the data generated here?  What would it take to make a list for the Commons?
On a related note, I wonder if the static Wikipedia included in Mandriva Linux will be smart about Commons images, pulling the descriptions from there correctly.  dbenbenn | talk 23:58, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh.  And actually I just found Commons:Commons:Untagged images.  So never mind.  dbenbenn | talk 19:30, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Someone with a copy of the database needs to run the commons query on en. Theirs picks up pages without templates, ours picks up pages without text. An untagged image with text is picked up by theirs but not by ours. Secretlondon 19:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We used to detect all of them, but there were so many somebody just decided to do the blanks first.  I agree that we're ready to do the others. Superm401 | Talk 01:36, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untagged images on the Commons 

message: Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this... I tried at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and haven't gotten a response so I'll see if anyone here by chance knows. Am I correct that this image of Sembawang Naval Base, taken in 1945, would fall under Template:PD-BritishGov (Crown copyright)? I'm not sure if I'm reading the photo credit right but I think it's been taken by a member of the IX MONAB stationed there, which would seem to qualify... just wanting to make sure before I upload, if anyone can advise I'd appreciate it! — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 09:15, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seeking confirmation on Crown Copyright  

message: I'm concerned about this template - which states that works produced by the State of California are in the Public Domain. I have not been able to identify any such statute; and have found various statutes to the contrary(some of which I mention in the link above). We need to review this tag, and decide what should be done with it. Please publisize this notice wherever you think it should be known. JesseW, the juggling janitor 17:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats also slightly confusing because CA is also the abbreviation for canada (in some iso contry code standardard). Bawolff 06:34, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template_talk:PD-CAGov#Public_domain.3F|PD-CAGov]]