Wikipedia:Image sleuthing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This Wikipedia page is currently inactive and is retained primarily for historical interest. Per Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines: "A historical page is any proposal for which consensus is unclear, where discussion has died out for whatever reason. Historical pages also include any process no longer in use, or any non-recent log of any process. Historical pages can be revived by advertising them. " If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you should seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] What is image sleuthing?
There are many thousands of images on Wikipedia. Most are tagged so that we know where they come from and how they are licensed, but some are mysteries, tagged {{unverified}}, {{no source}}, {{unknown}} {{no license}} or not tagged at all, with no obvious way to tell whether we can legally use them or not. Eventually, if we can't find out the source and copyright status of an image, we'll have to delete it. But some of these images are useful or attractive, and are begging to be rescued. That's where the image sleuths come in. The sleuths use any methods they have—from Google Image Search to uploader e-mails to secret informants met at midnight—to discover the source and copyright status of an image.
[edit] So how does this work?
Below, you will see up to 15 images with comments to the left of each. Sleuths set to work tracking down the origin, copyright and licence terms associated with each image. If there's general agreement that an image is acceptable – available under free licences, in the public domain, or legitimately a fair use – then you can move all discussion to the image's description page and remove the image from the list below. If the image can't be certified acceptable even after a week of searching, then image should be moved into the deletion process. (Sleuths often try to find suitable free or public domain replacements.)
If an image has been listed for over a week, or if the status of the image has been determined beyond reasonable doubt, then anyone can remove the image from the list and either tag it or list it on ifd. If there are fewer than 15 images below, anyone can add a new one. Some good places to look are Wikipedia:Untagged images and Category:Images with unknown source.
If you do move an image to the deletion process, please always contact the uploader of each image, on their talk page: do not make the assumption that they are not contactable. More generally, contacting users does sometimes elicit the information and so is considered a good thing.
[edit] Contributors
| The following Wikipedians have signed up to be image sleuths. | ||
|---|---|---|
[edit] The assignments
[edit] Image:Kajol.jpg... etc
The above two images and possible other images for articles in Category:Indian actors use images from http://www.bollywood4u.com/ and their disclaimer is here which the uploaders have interpreted as public domain. But I have my suspicion about to what extent is this public domain. Because in the same disclaimer it says The copyright (if any) of these pictures belongs to their orginal publisher / photographer / copyright holder as the case may be. So before I upload these images to commons, I wanted to be verify this with the experts over here, on whether this passes the PD litmus test. --Spundun 06:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Wouldn't the images then fall under
 |
This work has been (or is hereby) released into the public domain by the copyright holder. This applies worldwide.
In case this is not legally possible: |
? --Gaurav Arora Talk 11:01, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
- That website ASSUMES the images are PD without saying why. Just because they are making a mistake doesn't mean we should. I see no reason to assume from that website that the images are PD. pfctdayelise 17:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- I've got a good feeling these are not PD, tag as fair use. Ashibaka tock 04:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Gbvelluti.jpg
Found this on Category:Disputed fair use images. The person portraied died in 1861 so I'm fairly sure it would qualify as {{PD-old}}, however without knowing who the author is or just when it was first published I can't be sure, so I retagged it as {{fairold}} for the time beeing. I removed the disputed tag in the process too (feel free to re-add it if I think that was wrong). Hopefully you guys have better luck than me finding the origins of the picture. --Sherool 10:17, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- I found that image here. There is a copyright notice at the bottom of the page too. EDIT: All that trouble and the source is right on the image page... - Lucky13pjn 02:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
