User talk:LPfi/Archive 2021-2022

Files uploaded by Orlando Paride

My photos are pretty good but I have worse ones only out of dislike ... for example they prefer this to this File:Cupola della Cappella Albani in San Sebastiano.jpg or this to this File:Salvator Mundi (Bernini, Rome).jpg to say the least .... see you .... Regards --5.90.88.17 19:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

When one has a conflict of interest, one should leave to others to decide what version to use on the pages. The one example I had in mind when talking about worse images was an image of a garden, where the other image was much better in the given context (not necessarily otherwise). –LPfi (talk) 12:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

In fact I'm not telling you that they are all perfect or better but most of them do and they do it either to put their own or just because they dislike me. --78.13.193.212 14:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I know nothing about the original conflict, and I don't know what images where in the articles first, but you should leave it to regular editors with no conflict of interest to defend your images if they choose to. It is not a battle for you to fight. If you leave the articles alone, the conflict will probably be forgotten and new editors will choose your images on their own merits. If you don't, others will join in the reverting. –LPfi (talk) 16:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The images had been put but systematically remove them ..... you think some were even without images. I'm not doing anything ..... here on the wiki there is a way of doing that is very sympathetic and not on merit. Anyway ok thanks. Sorry to bother you. Thank you--176.200.45.247 18:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Ruska-luokka

Hei. No ei oikein ole kunnollista luokkaa. Suomenkielisen Wikipedia artikkeli Ruska on Wikidatassa käännetty fall foliage, fall colors, autumn colours, autumn foliage. Huomasin (!), että olen laittanut viime vuoden ruskakuvat kategoriaan Category:Autumn 2021 in Finland ja jokusen myös Category:Leaves in autumn in Finland(kuvia Pallastunturista, Kittilän Kaukosesta ja Särkitunturin lammesta). Kai luokka:Fall foliage voisi olla lähinnä, seillä on maakohtaisetkin luokat (mutta ei taida olla yhtään Suomi- tai Ruotsikuvaa). Wikidatassa ei ole yhdistettyä luokkaa, hassua sinänsä, koska ruskaa on muuallakin kuin Pohjoismaissa. Kuvasin pääasiassa laajempia maisemia enkä niinkään yksittäisiä lehtiä. Kiva että löytyi noille kuville käyttöä! Terveisin Htm (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Kiitos, yritän jossakin välissä katsella saisinko noista iw-linkeistä ja luokista tolkkua. Viimeksi kun yritin en tainut löytää niitä kaikkia. –LPfi (talk) 14:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Phabricator

Thanks for your comments on upload problems, but where do I find Phabricator? Sardaka (talk) 08:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sardaka: Oh, there wasn't a link? Sorry. Here: phabricator.wikimedia.org. –LPfi (talk) 08:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sardaka: Wrong link text at first try, now it should be OK. –LPfi (talk) 08:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Ålands sjöfartsmuseum 2022 knopar.jpg

File:Ålands sjöfartsmuseum 2022 knopar.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. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Zaripov999 (talk) 04:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Nominated as duplicate. Commented there: the other image much better, so this could go. –LPfi (talk) 10:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Examples mentioned in Commons:Village pump/Archive/2022/04#Questioning when the personality rights tag is relevant...

In that discussion, you gave the following examples:

• Over here, a tourist bureau took a photo of a person ice-fishing on a lake and published it in their brochure. Distance was long enough that the person wasn't directly identifiable, but the court decided that people who know him would recognise him from the context, and judged they had used his image for promotion without his permission. They had to pay damages. The photo could equally well have been found at Commons. –LPfi (talk) 06:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
• There was another case (I don't remember whether the idea was dismissed or whether it went to court), where a party in their campaign was to use an image of a crowd, to illustrate something innocent, like togetherness or whatever. That was also deemed illegal. –LPfi (talk) 06:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

These examples are interesting, both for the endorsement issues raised there and for concept of identifiability more generally. Identifiability is poorly understood on Commons; I have collected some examples at User:Brianjd/Old#Identifiability. But this is the first time I have heard of a court expressing such opinions.

Unfortunately, I don’t recognise these examples and don’t know how to find more information about them. Can you help? Brianjd (talk) 04:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

See also: #Another redraft of Photographs of identifiable people. Brianjd (talk) 04:46, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Brianjd: Unfortunately I don't have much time to put in the issue before Christmas. At least the first case was Finnish and I assume the other one was too. I think I read about the case in Finnish, perhaps in a folder with advice for professional photographers. I didn't read the court's decision and argumentation itself. It should be findable though, and certainly public although not necessarily published. –LPfi (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)