Jump to content

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Calanchi valle del Sillaro.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

According to the image description and source website it is licensed under a CC-by-nc-nd license. NC and ND licenses are not allowed on Commons. -- Kam Solusar (talk) 16:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but further down it is licensed under {{Cc-by-2.5-it}}, wich is o.k., isn’t it? The original uploader, Tizianozep, is pretty clearly the actual photographer: i.e. is the same person as the author of the tiziozep photoblog from which the picture came. In June 2007 he had a conversation (here and here) with it:User:Trixt about licensing. Trixt pointed out that he had been uploading images with a non-free license, and that that wasn’t acceptable under Wikipdedia rules. I imagine the upshot was that Tiziano fixed things by adding the {{Cc-by-2.5-it}} banner to this and other images, without removing the earlier mention of CC-by-nc-nd. Unfortunately, since page histories are lost when images are transwikied (a rather serious bug, I think), we can’t check that for certain, but I would have thought that was a reasonable conclusion to draw. After all, he had been informed that his images would have to be deleted if the license wasn’t modified, and it seems unlikely that he would have allowed someone else to add the {{Cc-by-2.5-it}} without his consent.
(Best thing would be to ask Tizianozep, of course, except that he doesn’t appear to have edited since last November.)
What does seem to be a copyright problem, however is this identical version of the image.
Hope that helps. Ian Spackman (talk) 17:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept - free image (non-admin closure). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]