User talk:Ram-Man

   

   

Archives: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7    [perform archive]

_

_

User:Ram-Man/Licensing Guide

Hi Ram-Man,
I'm fairly sure no. 3 and 4 are not correct - what do you base those points on? --Fir0002 09:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Number 3 is quite obvious because the text of the license says so. You must include a copy of the license along with the image. It can be either in physical or digital form, but it cannot be a link to some web address (with the exception of a web page, where you have to also host the copy, but can link to that copy, as Wikipedia does). You cannot link back to gnu.org or just provide the web address like you can with a Creative Commons license because that is not a copy.

Number 4 is just a rephrasing of the legal definition of a derivative work. Now it is possible for an image to be used in a "collective work", but this is unusual and not the normal usage. I could have just quoted the U.S. statute governing these terms, but then that wouldn't be as easy for everyone to understand either. It is simply not true that you can use any GFDL image with any text and not have that be a resulting derivative work. The rules for images are the same as the rules for text. If you copy text verbatim and add it to your document, that's exactly the same as copying a picture and adding it to your document. If either are GFDL, the entire document must be GFDL. Please see copyleft. I have this notice especially, because most people do not understand copyleft or the GFDL, so this has to be explicitly stated or people will violate my copyright. I have had infringers images taken down for this copyright violation in the past. When other users choose to ignore this type of violation when their own pictures are used, that is totally their business, but I won't allow it if they don't ask for the permission that I'm legally entitled to. The note on fairness is just plain common sense: people frequently try to rip off my work without properly licensing an image and without giving back their derivative works. They want something for nothing, but this isn't public domain, and that needs to be made very clear.

-- RM 12:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

OK fair enough - I can readily understand your concern with regards to copyright violations (it's something dear to my heart also); however I think you're stretching the terms of the GFDL on a technicality with regards to the GFDL link. I'm fairly sure that you wouldn't be able to do anything about it if someone merely linked back to the gnu.org copy or even the image description page on Wikipedia/commons - this has happened to me before. Number 4 I'm not sure on (hopefully I might be in a better position in six and half years when I finish my double degree!) - to me it wouldn't make sense to demand an entire 48 page book be released under the GFDL just because it includes a 8x5cm picture! Anyway I think what this really illustrates is the need for Wikipedia/commons to adopt a NC license! --Fir0002 10:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The requirement for a copy to be included is one of the criticisms of the GFDL, something the CC license do not require. In copying large quantities in a printed medium, the license also requires that they provide a web link to the original or a digital copy, something I should probably add to my list of requirements. #4 is something most people do not like, but it is the purpose of copyleft. The point is that you can't normally use any part of a copyleft work in a non-copyleft work. The two are incompatible. In the case of an encyclopedia, however, each article is considered a separate work, so the license in one does not automatically become the license in the other. However, within an article, the images and text should all be the same license. I don't know how Wikipedia gets away with using CC licenses in a GFDL document, because such usage is supposed to be forbidden. I know that Wales and others are working on a new GFDL version that eliminates this problem. I suppose people just don't object or maybe there is a legal loophole somewhere. I avoid that issue entirely for my works, so I don't pay much attention to it. -- RM 15:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Rambot city coordinate format

At WT:GEO I was wondering about the origin of city articles' DMS (decimal) coordinate format. I see Rambot created it in one article. Because clicking on a coordinate now shows both DMS and decimal coordinates, I was wondering why both formats were being used. Can you join the discussion there? -- SEWilco (talk) 05:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

There also are plans over there to convert the various coordinate formats to {{coord}}, which I see conflicts which Rambot's Mapit. -- SEWilco (talk) 05:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

FPC

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus on Echinacea purpurea 2800px.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Dengero (talk) 00:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Request to edit Template:DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Future

Hi. There's a request to edit the template above, which you edit protected in 2005. It seems harmless to me, as a request to optionally add logos to the template, and unlikely to conflict with your stated reason for protecting the template, but my strengths are definitely not in template making, and I thought to ask you. :) Is it all right to implement this requested change? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The page was protected to prevent the legal text from changing. Adding logos shouldn't be a problem. If you are worried about messing it up, make a copy in a personal sandbox to test it out. -- RM 00:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll give it a try. :) The person who is requesting the edit requested the last one, implemented in April of 2007 evidently without problems. I've tested it out at my sandbox, and it seems to be okay. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Yellow Coneflower

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Yellow Coneflower Echinacea paradoxa Twisted Pair Bee 2000px.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 05:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus on Echinacea purpurea 2800px.jpg

I hope that you can give me permission to use your image in my userpace as the featured picture of the month for May of 2008. I would also be humbled if you could send me the original high quality picture for personal reasons (I will not redistribute it). — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 05:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

HI,

I'd like to know how to get some info I know is out ther I just dont know how.

I somehow got to your page because you edited the page for the township where I live and got some info.

I am new here but will look tomorrow to see if you get htis. Thanks tomjimcosky@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomj59 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Permission of use of monarch butterfly photos

Hi,

I am a butterfly enthusiast that is currently preparing a blog/website on butterflies and moths. I have came across this photo of monarch butterfly that is really gorgeous. As I am writing an general article on differences between moths and butterflies, I wanted to show the scales of the monarch butterfly taken by you using your photo. I will edit the photo for the explanation purpose but I will definitely include your name in the photo as well. I wonder is it ok? Sorry, I am not very good in this. I apologize if I sounded abrupt. Thank you very much —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avin316 (talk • contribs) 09:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Bot for es:wiki

Hi, Ram-Man!

I am Racso, from the spanish Wikipedia. There we have aproved a policy that allows users (under certain [¡lot of!] conditions) to run articles-creating bots. I have created a bot that translates your Rambot articles into spanish. I know the bot works because I have used it for improving articles (Counties articles) that some people had already created (it has a problem: some of the articles have changed their text, so the bots has problems some times when translating; I corrected those translation bugs by hand). BUT... it cannot be used for creating articles because the policy states that a database shall be used, and I am using en:wiki as database, but I i think that is not valid because the data could be changed/vandalized.

That is why I am here. We are interested in making articles for all the counties, and for cities with more pop than X people (We are not sure about X; maybe 30K, 50K, don't know).

1. ¿Have you released the source code of the bot? If you have, ¿where can I get it? If you have not, ¿is there any way you can share it?
2. Or well, there is another solution: I can make another bot that takes the data directly from the source, but I don't know where is that. ¿Where does the bot takes the data for making the articles? I saw the U.S. census page, but all the data is really dispersed in lot of pages. ¿Is there any file containing all the data I can use?

That is all. Thank you very much for your atention, and sorry for my bad english ;). --200.114.40.62 (talk) 17:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC) (Racso)

Permission to use Image:Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus on Echinacea purpurea 2800px.jpg

Hi, I would like your permission to use this image once again. I would really appreciate it if you actually responded. :) Cuyler91093 (Contribs) 07:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Using it in your userspace is perfectly compatible with the license. As per the request above, this is the highest resolution I have. -- RM 12:43, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much! おべんとう むすび (Contributions) 19:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

possible issue with attribution of PD material in articles on towns

Hi Ram-Man -- In a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities#Public domain text style again, user SEWilco has suggested that two articles, for Bartlett, Illinois and Ephrata, Pennsylvania, and perhaps many more, are deficient for their failure to attribute use of public domain text. He asked me to contact you. Honestly, I believe he is trying to egg me on into making some too-broad criticism, and honestly I am unclear what are his true complaints about these articles that he singles out. But, if your "rambot" grabs information out of some census database or other public domain source, and generates an article about a town, then I probably would think it should include some attribution to the source. By the way, output from the Elkman NRHP infobox generator, includes a footnote to the National Park Service NRIS database that is its fundamental source. That generator has been very helpful in many thousands of wikipedia articles on NRHP sites, and I expect that your rambot has provided an equally valuable contribution in its domain. I don't know anything about your rambot though, and whether it can be improved in any way or not. Anyhow, could you please take a look at the discussion which has opened up? I'll look for your response there. Thanks! Sincerely, doncram (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Bot activity

I was going over the list of bots and noticed that rambot (talk · contribs) has not edited in a very long time. Is this bot still active and if not, would you object to it being de-flagged? Please post your comments to Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#Dead_bots since this is a rather widely-posted message. MBisanz ^talk 01:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. Nothing will be done to Rambot flag status. I just was trying to clear out the automated list of accounts with the Bot flag, so its easier to keep track of whats going on. But of course, once your approved for a task, that approval doesn't expire due to inactivity. And back when I was an IP editor, what drew me to the Meta part of the site was all the discussion of Rambot's activities, which I thought were really cool and couldn't see why others objected to them. Happy editing. MBisanz ^talk 23:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Web reference simple

Template:Web reference simple has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ctempleton3 (talk) 03:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

==

You're invited!

You're invited to the
Sixth Philadelphia-area Wikipedia Meetup
April 5, 2008
Time: 5:00 PM
Location: The Marathon Grill, 10th and Walnut

RSVP

(view/edit this template)

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

pipeline phot0

permission to use you photo in a powerpoint presentation discussing a balnaced energy plan for the state of ALaska?

Chris Rennau 907.339.3904 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.193.48.104 (talk) 22:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Planning for the 7th Wikipedia Meetup

The planning for the summer Philadelphia meetup has begun. We would appreciate your input.
You're getting this invitation because you're on Wikipedia:WikiProject Philadelphia/Philadelphia meet-up invite list. BrownBot (talk) 21:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

I would like to tell you that I´m using your gorgeous Golden Conure´s photo in my project for portuguese wikijunior book [[1]]. So, thank you and I would be very proud if you could go to see it RêBretz (talk) 21:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I forgot...

my name in wiki portuguese is Alustriel RêBretz (talk) 22:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Funhouse info is relevant

The information about the fun house is relevant to the site, as it certainly one of the exceptional things about Orcas Island. It is a lot like the Exploratorium in San Francisco and for something like that to exist in a small rural community is worthy of note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Presspot (talk • contribs) 17:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

How to request protection on Commons

I am curious as to how protection can be requested on subpages of a specific user...specifically, a page, such as subpage on the User profile that should only be modified by the user or an admin. If you could let me know, that would be appreciated. The specific pages are based on the Licensing Guide and License Terms on your subpages. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 13:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Derek,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Lily Lilium 'Citronella' Flower 2578px.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on June 22, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-06-22. howcheng {chat} 23:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Your Watermelon Leaf Photo

Dear Derek,

I found your watermelon leaf photo through the Mayflower image search on Wikimedia, and used it (crediting you) in a report on my environmental blog, "Wild Orchids for Trotsky." Here is the link:

http://trostomaten.blogspot.com/2008/06/good-watermelons-make-good-neighbors.html

I hope this is OK with you. Congratulations on a very nice image.

Best, Rachel Idempotent (talk) 11:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

U.S. city articles

Hi, I'm an administrator of Polish Wiki. I'd like to add U.S. cities and counties to our Wiki and have question for you: do you still have data for this task, and if so could you share it with me? Mathel (talk) 15:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

May I please post your image on my garden blog. I saw a blue poppy today at the US FolkLife festival. THe event featured Bhutan.

Of course, I will credit you AND can link to your garden site, if you wish.

www.minxterbloom.squarespace.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.232.133 (talk) 00:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Lion photo

Hello,

I was wondering if I could please have your permission to display one of your photographs on my userpage on Wikipedia? It's this one: African Lion Panthera leo Male Pittsburgh 2800px adjusted.jpg (the lion in the snow) Alphard08 (talk) 02:52, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. -- RM 03:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Alphard08 (talk) 03:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Leucanthemum vulgare

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Leucanthemum vulgare 'Filigran' Flower 2200px edit1.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 06:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Maple Leaf Red Rings 2000px.jpg

Hi!

We really like your picutre and wish to use it as background of roll-up representing a biomas project in Alberta, Canada. We are working as summerstudent at StatoilHydro in Norway and this roll-up will show our results. Can we use your picture? Please contact us as soon as possible.

Best Regards,

Anna Elofsson elofssoa@student.chalmers.se —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.97.2.35 (talk) 13:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

picture use

Hi!

We really like your picture (maple leaf) and wish to use it as background of roll-up representing a biomass project in Alberta, Canada. We are working as summerstudent at StatoilHydro in Norway and this roll-up will show our results. Can we use your picture? Please contact us as soon as possible.

Best Regards,

Anna Elofsson elofssoa@student.chalmers.se —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.97.2.35 (talk) 06:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please credit me as the author: (C)2008 Derek Ramsey. License: GFDL v1.2 -- RM 00:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Derek,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Yellow Coneflower Echinacea paradoxa Twisted Pair Bee 2000px.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 31, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-07-31. howcheng {chat} 18:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Rambot

Can you email me the source code for rambot, at mailDeborah1@gmail.com --Deborah1155 (talk) 06:06, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

It is not available, sorry. -- RM 01:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Use of the image?

I am currently trying to find pictures of daylilies to use as inspiration for a tattoo. I wouldn't be using your exact image, but I was wondering if you would mind if I brought in your picture to my tattoo artist. I will wait to do anything until I have gotten a response from you, because I certainly don't want to offend you or use your copywritten image illegally.

Thank you! 24.121.94.39 (talk) 00:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Emma

You are just using it for inspiration. Even if it is technically a "copy" of sorts, that's fine. Go ahead and use it. -- RM 01:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Swamp Milkweed Asclepias incarnata Flowers Closeup 2800px.jpg

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Swamp Milkweed Asclepias incarnata Flowers Closeup 2800px.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 09:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

And it's gorgeous, but isn't it a pod, not a leaf? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not a pod or a leaf. It's a flower. -- RM 00:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Derek,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus on Echinacea purpurea 2800px.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 27, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-08-27. howcheng {chat} 21:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Monarch Butterfly figure

Hi,

I do research in image processing, and I would like permission to use this image in my research.

Thanks, Antonio

Is it commercial? -- RM 03:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello Derek Ramsey

Hello Derek Ramsey!

We want to use one of your fabulous picutres by Elephant Beetle on Wikipedia- for a literature project in Germany. It will be a low budget readers anthology CD with only 50 Copies. We would write your name and all facts about the picture, as you like it, on the backside of the cover and in the booklet of our CD. If you give us an postale code and an adress we send you an deposit copy of our product. Please give us the acceptence for using the picture.

Please write us back to the following E-Mail Adress: marry.a.mueller@web.de.

With kind regards!

Golem123 (talk) 11:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC) M. marry.a.mueller@web.de

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Green Frog Rana clamitans Facing Left 3008px.jpg

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Green Frog Rana clamitans Facing Left 3008px.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 07:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Data for US towns

Dear Ram-Man, I noticed that you were the first contributor for Addison, Alabama: do you know, please, if all the data for US towns are available elsewhere in a compact form? This would help me with translations. Many thanks. Best regards --Lombard2008 (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Boat Orchid

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Cymbidium Clarisse Austin 'Best Pink' Flowers 2000px.JPG, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 04:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

use of photo

I would like to use one of your photos in an exhibit I am working on with the Raptor Center at the University of Minnesota. It would be used as an example of citizen scientists who are monnitoring animals to gauge the heath of their environment. I would used it along with a wolf,bird,bee,butterfly,frog. I am interested in the brook trout image. Let me know if I may used the image and how the credit line should read. thanks. Lonnie Broden lbroden@brspaint.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.42.164.33 (talk) 12:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cedar Grove, Florida

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Cedar Grove, Florida, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Danorton (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ekalaka, Montana

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ekalaka, Montana, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Danorton (talk) 04:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

your red lionfish photo

I am making a movie about the red lionfish in my marine biology class as part of a research project and i was wondering if i could use your photo in my movie? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylor rose baby (talk • contribs) 20:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• yes. -- RM 16:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

FP nomination

I have nominated one of the images you have uploaded as a Featured picture candidate at WP:FP. Thought you might like to know.
Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} _{Ici pour humor} 14:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Valued/Encyclopedic image proposal

I would propose that Wikipedia adopt a 'Valued' or 'Encyclopedic' images department. The images that garner this status on Wikipedia would have to be tagged with a different template to the Valued or Quality image seals, in order to distinguish between them. I suggest that images that receive this status should be highly encyclopedic images, although not necessarily of excellent quality. Images that illustrate a point in an exemplary manner, for example, could be nominated as these 'Encyclopedic Images'. There would obviously be problems, for example: who defines an image as being encyclopedic or the most valuable of a large group of images? What scope should or could an image be nominated within? Thus, a vote of consensus would be required. I think the initiation of such an area would benefit Wikipedia. Diagrams, sounds and various other media could also be included in this. I would be willing to draw up a draft for the page; however, the decision must first be made. I've seen you around WP:FPC, so I thought you'd be interested. See the Village pump for more information. Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} _{Ici pour humor} 08:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, Image:Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus on Milkweed Hybrid 2800px.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! MER-C 05:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

License for Image:Black squirrel.jpg

The image Black squirrel.jpg is a candidate to be copied to the Wikimedia Commons. When you uploaded this image, you licensed it for use under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). On behalf of the Wikipedia and Commons communities, thank you. However, the GFDL requires that reproductions of the image (and any other GFDL-licenced works), must be accompanied by the full text of the GFDL. The GFDL is intended more for documentation and not images, so downstream re-users may be hindered by additional restrictions of the GFDL which may not work well on the use of one image.

Before I copy this image to the Commons, I wanted to ask whether you would be willing to multilicense your work under an additional license, such as a Creative Commons licence. Creative Commons licences, such as the Attribution Share-Alike license provide a similar copyleft permission to the GFDL, but without some of its requirements such as the distribution of the licence text. All you need to do, is place the additional license tag alongside your current license. Users can choose between which one they want to use the image under. There are many free licenses accepted on Wikipedia and Commons which can provide freedoms similar to the GFDL, but without some of its requirements.

You are under no obligation whatsoever to alter the license. Doing so merely cooperates with those members of the community who believe that multilicensing your work can ease the reuse of images outside of Wikipedia.

If you use a GFDL license tag which requires distribution of Wikipedia's general disclaimer (indicated by "Subject to disclamiers" in the template), it is also suggested that you switch it to one which does not apply them.

Whether or not you choose to dual-license your work, thank you for your consideration.

Thanks! --Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to copy it to the commons, but I won't dual license my images because I have a philosophical problem with Creative Commons. They support a very loose interpretation of "derivative work" that I cannot accept. -- RM 12:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Photograph usage permission

Hi,

I would like to use your picture on wikipidia as follows: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Caladium_bicolor_'Florida_Sweetheart'_Plant_2220px.jpg

I intend to include this picture in a textbook that I am preparing for my students as an example of Araceae plants.

Thank you and best regards,

Gonzalo Diaz, PhD Professor gjdiazg@unal.edu.co —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.40.67 (talk) 02:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

GFDL licensing used does not permit later versions - Image:Black squirrel.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Black squirrel.jpg.

However, I note from the file's description page that the file is uploaded under a version of the GFDL that does not permit re-licensing under a later version of that license.

If you are the creator of the image or media in question, please update the license to a version of the GFDL which permits limited re-licensing (such as 1.3 or later, this is due to planned licensing changes across WMF projects.

If you are not the creator of the image/media in question, then please contact the original copyright holder(s) or uploader(s), to request re-licensing.

If you have uploaded other files, under GFDL terms which does not permit re-licensing under a later version, please also consider updating the licensing for those images.

Images with GFDL versions, which do not permit re-licensing under later versions may be considered for deletion owing to planned changes in Wikipedia licensing.

If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The GFDL 1.2 is equally compatible with the GFDL 1.3 in the same way that any of the CC-SA licenses are, but that doesn't stop Wikimedia from using them. Unless we reject the CC-SA licenses, we must equally accept the GFDL-1.2 licenses. Both contain copyleft clauses that only support their own license. If Wikimedia transitions to the GFDL 1.3, I'll consider uploading my licenses, but since I have not reviewed the new license, I will not relicense my work. Blindly licensing my work automatically is reckless. -- RM 18:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)