Talk:Battle of Westerplatte/GA1
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Nikkimaria in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs) 16:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- I'll start this in a day or two. auntieruth (talk) 16:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- I am around. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- very interesting. I've made a few minor tweaks here for clarity. Please check. Also, please check for duplicate links. And you've got a broken ref (#31) It would probably be clearer if you refer to Outpost One, etc., rather than outpost 1. Etc. :) `auntieruth (talk) 19:47, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntieruth55: I did a c/e, but ref #31 ([1]) works, can you link the one that's broken? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Piotrus: Parameter error in Parameter error in {{issn}}: Missing ISSN.: Invalid ISSN.. auntieruth (talk) 15:10, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntieruth55: Not much I can do - this is the ISSN as provided by Google Books for this publication ([2]). Maybe our template is not accepting old ISSNs? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:40, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntieruth55: I did a c/e, but ref #31 ([1]) works, can you link the one that's broken? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- very interesting. I've made a few minor tweaks here for clarity. Please check. Also, please check for duplicate links. And you've got a broken ref (#31) It would probably be clearer if you refer to Outpost One, etc., rather than outpost 1. Etc. :) `auntieruth (talk) 19:47, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- I am around. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Saw this in the GA queue and was interested in the article - there are problems with the licensing of a number of the images:
- File:Обстрел Вестерплятте.1939.jpg - no author, so date of death cannot be determined, and no evidence that the photo is PD in the US is presented.
- File:Schleswig Holstein ostrzeliwuje Westerplatte 39 09 01 b.jpg - German photograph, Polish copyright law is irrelevant, ditto as for US copyright status (not to mention the conflict between the license tags and the fair use claim that needs to be resolved).
- File:Westerplatte Sucharski sabre.jpg - same as above, clearly a German propaganda photograph, no evidence as to status in the US. Parsecboy (talk) 00:26, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Parsecboy: The copyright is it's usual mess. You didn't point to File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-2008-0513-500, Danzig, Westerplatte, Wald.jpg (nor File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-1989-516-505, Westerplatte, hissen der Reichskriegsflagge.jpg), but really, can we say that the German national archive (Bundesarchiv) has the right to release such images (no different from others you linked) under CC? That said, if you want to discuss Bundesarchive licencing, I recommend a dedicated thread at Commons, since we have thens of thousands of them, all donated through some GLAM partnership which I'd hope had worked the licencing already. Anyway, for the images you pointed out: you are right that commons:template:Poland-PD does not apply since we are dealing with photos by German, not Polish photographers (that said, consider the provision "published for the first time in Poland or simultaneously in Poland and abroad" and think how it may apply to photos that might have been published during WWII, considering that Polish territory was either occupied or annexed outright to Germany...); in either case, those images simply fall under commons:template:PD-anon-70-EU and commons:template:PD-1996 (through the Bundesarchiv ones seems to have IDed the photographer by surname...). I fixed the licenses (the chosen ones are per commons:User:Piotrus/PolishCopyright - I've created this guide years ago, nobody ever noted it was incorrect, so...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, the Bundesarchiv photos are perfectly fine. As for the others, no, PD-anon-70-EU is not sufficient. There's a common misconception that us not knowing who took the photo in 2018 is the same as the photo having been published anonymously in 1939 or whenever. That is certainly not the case, and the latter does not meet the requirement of the copyright law. To use it, you need to have the definitive first publication (which obviously must not disclose the author's name). And even if the photo was published anonymously, it would have only entered the PD in the EU in, at the very earliest, 2009, which means it's copyright in the US would have been extended by the URAA until at least 2034.
- The tl;dr: We can't use those images. Parsecboy (talk) 09:43, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- I disagree with this interpretation. If those photos are not in public domain, then Bundesarchive has no right to release them under CC. Anyway, all three files list the publication. In good faith, I will assume this is the first publication of said photos. If you can find an older publication using the same image (and that they were not anonymous) then we can consider removing them, fair enough. If you want to play such a detective game and try to find if we are infringing the rights of some Nazi photographer, go ahead. I, for one, believe that the current photographs are properly attributed in their desriptions. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:32, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Frankly, your interpretation is wrong. The Bundesarchiv holds the copyright for those images in its collection that are not in the public domain, so it can do with the photos what it wishes. And as for good faith, that's not how Commons operates - we go by what we can prove, and the idea that a wartime photo taken by a German soldier was first published in Poland a few decades later stretches one's imagination. As for whether they were published anonymously or not, that's irrelevant, since they would've still been under copyright in Germany in 1996 either way. Parsecboy (talk) 23:09, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think what you did (three separate deletion debates for these pictures) is best. The community will hear our arguments and in few days/week the pics will either be kept or removed. The discussion should be continued there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Frankly, your interpretation is wrong. The Bundesarchiv holds the copyright for those images in its collection that are not in the public domain, so it can do with the photos what it wishes. And as for good faith, that's not how Commons operates - we go by what we can prove, and the idea that a wartime photo taken by a German soldier was first published in Poland a few decades later stretches one's imagination. As for whether they were published anonymously or not, that's irrelevant, since they would've still been under copyright in Germany in 1996 either way. Parsecboy (talk) 23:09, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- I disagree with this interpretation. If those photos are not in public domain, then Bundesarchive has no right to release them under CC. Anyway, all three files list the publication. In good faith, I will assume this is the first publication of said photos. If you can find an older publication using the same image (and that they were not anonymous) then we can consider removing them, fair enough. If you want to play such a detective game and try to find if we are infringing the rights of some Nazi photographer, go ahead. I, for one, believe that the current photographs are properly attributed in their desriptions. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:32, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Parsecboy: The copyright is it's usual mess. You didn't point to File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-2008-0513-500, Danzig, Westerplatte, Wald.jpg (nor File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-1989-516-505, Westerplatte, hissen der Reichskriegsflagge.jpg), but really, can we say that the German national archive (Bundesarchiv) has the right to release such images (no different from others you linked) under CC? That said, if you want to discuss Bundesarchive licencing, I recommend a dedicated thread at Commons, since we have thens of thousands of them, all donated through some GLAM partnership which I'd hope had worked the licencing already. Anyway, for the images you pointed out: you are right that commons:template:Poland-PD does not apply since we are dealing with photos by German, not Polish photographers (that said, consider the provision "published for the first time in Poland or simultaneously in Poland and abroad" and think how it may apply to photos that might have been published during WWII, considering that Polish territory was either occupied or annexed outright to Germany...); in either case, those images simply fall under commons:template:PD-anon-70-EU and commons:template:PD-1996 (through the Bundesarchiv ones seems to have IDed the photographer by surname...). I fixed the licenses (the chosen ones are per commons:User:Piotrus/PolishCopyright - I've created this guide years ago, nobody ever noted it was incorrect, so...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Piotrus I've made a few minor tweaks to language, removed a couple of so-called weasel words (extremely, very, etc). See [here]. I suggest moving the first paragraph of the "Battle" section to Remembrance....I found myself trying to skip it and get to the actual battle. let me know when you have a chance to look at this. I'm leaving the fuss over the photos to a later evaluation. I think they are okay. It's been 80 years since those photos were taken, so...auntieruth (talk) 16:20, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntieruth55: Fair enough, para moved. Good idea. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{rto|Piotrus]]...okay, it looks good other than images,and if Nikkimaria cannot sort it by the weekend, I'll pass it. auntieruth (talk) 15:03, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntieruth55: I've commented out/replaced disputed images. Can we pass this now? Probably too late for 1st Sept DYK but I'd like to try for the 7th. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{rto|Piotrus]]...okay, it looks good other than images,and if Nikkimaria cannot sort it by the weekend, I'll pass it. auntieruth (talk) 15:03, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
image issues
editNikkimaria, would you have a look at the images here and advise on what we can do? I'm ready to pass this, but the copyright info is in its usual confusion, and I am unable to sort it. auntieruth (talk) 15:03, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- In general I agree with the issues raised by Parsecboy above. Without more details on the publication history of File:Обстрел_Вестерплятте.1939.jpg, it's assumed to be copyrighted in the US - the given publication is too late to meet the requirements of the given US tag, and the anonEU tag would have copyright in effect after URAA date even if it was published at creation. Similarly, even creation+70 would take us past the URAA date for File:Schleswig_Holstein_ostrzeliwuje_Westerplatte_39_09_01_b.jpg File:Westerplatte_Sucharski_sabre.jpg. The latter also has a Poland tag, but the image being taken on Polish territory is not a sufficient condition for that to apply - do we have any support for the supposition that either the photographer was Polish or that it was first published in Poland? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- We don't have any support to the other side, either. Anyway, I am curious: assuming URAA extended those copyrights in the US, how long is the extension for? I.e. when will those photographs become PD in US, assuming they are not? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:17, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- If first published before 1978, 95 years after publication. Otherwise it varies. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:44, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: What if the date of first publication is unknown? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- If first published before 1978, 95 years after publication. Otherwise it varies. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:44, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Typically then you would assess based on first known publication, and look for sources that refer to earlier publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2018 (UTC)