File talk:Functions in Excel.PNG

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

File:Functions in Excel.PNG

Request at least temporary undeletion so I can see what this file looks like. I was unaware that it was under consideration for deletion, there seems to have been no deletion discussion, and I would like to have the opportunity to discuss this matter. The deletion request was:

06:39, 30 December 2012 Yann (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Functions in Excel.PNG (Copyright violation: Screenshot of Microsoft Excel. It is non-free and not allowed on Commons.) (global usage; delinker log)

This deletion summary strikes me as highly exaggerated, My recollection of my design of the Excel illustrations is that they were stripped of any artwork that might be copyright violations. Brews ohare (talk) 11:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

 Oppose I agree that it is probably not a copyvio, but, as an experienced Excel user, I also think it is out of scope as having little educational value. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

•  Comment Is this identical to http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcThWKacHkdRL5tcD_JRFuUxOuTWf1VPg1tvM5cgc-Cg5KT5RKP6SH4Pf7NU from Google's cache? I'd say that this is in the public domain per w:Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc. Of course, Commons does not only require images to be in use; they must also be in scope. The delinker log tells that the file was in use on multiple Wikipedia projects before being deleted. Per COM:PS#File in use in another Wikimedia project, this seems to make the file in scope for Commons.

Brews ohare: If a file has just been deleted, try searching for the file name (File:Functions in Excel.PNG) using Google Images. In many cases, you will be able to find a thumbnail of the image in Google's cache. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I was able to look at the image and it is a composition of two screenshots of excel. It has the spreadsheet and the function table below it. It also has a few arrows explaining what each element is. I still believe it is a derivative work of a copyrighted computer program. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return fire)} 22:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

It appears that http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcThWKacHkdRL5tcD_JRFuUxOuTWf1VPg1tvM5cgc-Cg5KT5RKP6SH4Pf7NU is the image in question.

There is nothing here that is a copyright violation. It must be born in mind that the discussion is about Microsoft Excel, so naturally it uses the terminology and organization of that application. The listing of the function is standard code, the spreadsheet column labels A, B, C, ... are found in any spreadsheet as are the row labels 1, 2, 3, .... The labels designating the various aspects of using a formula with this spreadsheet are of my construction, and the organization of the parts of the figure are my construction. The columns in the portion of the figure labeled 'Name Manager are those used by the so-called name manger in Excel, but there is no copyright violation in listing four columns with plain alphanumeric entries.

Saying this file should be deleted because it is of "little educational value" is, of course, a different matter than a copyright violation. I would, however, disagree with this assessment; the figure makes clear several features of Microsoft Excel that are very handy in using functions and in showing the reader what is involved in coding their own function for use in Microsoft Excel. These matters are non-obvious to the novice and could affect their interest in using this application.

This file should be reinstated in all the articles that originally used it. Brews ohare (talk) 00:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

---

 Done: Not copyvio. Please start a new COM:DR if you feel that it is out of scope. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

Sorry but why the file was restored ? It's a blatant copyvio of a copyrighted software. No Corel vs Borland does not apply, this ruling was only for software menu! Please read before the ruling before restoring such files. Screenshot of Excel are under fair-use on enwiki for a reason. --PierreSelim (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything particular to Microsoft in that picture. Also, in response to your post on my talk page, there are two admins backing this rationale: Dereckson and Fastily. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

• Hello. I am the original copyvio reporter. Shortly after this image was deleted, I received an email that informed me of the free nature of the image: Although the image is unmistakably that of Microsoft Excel, it does not contain anything of "original authorship", so a mixture of {{PD-text}} and {{PD-simple}} applies here. (I opted for {{PD-ineligible}}.) The problem was that the uploader (User:Brews ohare) had uploaded a lot of such annotated screenshot fragments under the Creative Commons licensing schemes which also did not apply (again, due to the same reason).

I corrected the licensing tags on a handful of those uploads but did not request undeletion for this file. I have one past experience of undeletion in Commons, which I'd rather describe exaggeratedly as "torture". (I have secured an undeletion consensus that is yet to be actioned.) In spite of that, in my book, this image should be  kept.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 05:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)