User talk:Huntster/Archive 10

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Admin work request

Hi Huntster, you seem to use sometimes the script. May be you know that Perhelion is not longer contributing, so somebody had to adopt his tool. I did it in the last year and was able to correct different bugs and to include a lot of amendments. The script has now reached a mature and stable state, its benefits should be made usable by others.
Only an admin can transfer User:Sarang/simpleSVGcheck.js to User:Perhelion/simpleSVGcheck.js from where the other users are accessing it. I am sure enough that no inconveniences will occur, that I ask you for that transfer. ✓ Done in the meantime -- sarang♥사랑 16:34, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Sarang, I apologize profusely. I've been busy IRL and simply did not see the request. I'm glad this was sorted for you. — Huntster (t @ c) 20:09, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
When you are using again the script, you may see other behavior. When something is not so good, pls let me know -- sarang♥사랑 04:49, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Is Transformational Solar Array A Experiment Under ROSA or is a separate entity?

Is Transformational Solar Array A Experiment Under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll_Out_Solar_Array or is a separate entity? https://dart.jhuapl.edu/Mission/Impactor-Spacecraft.php i cannot know if they are different or not please assist me. if different do we need a separate page. though both are different, they are made by JHAPL only. Chinakpradhan (talk) 16:52, 13 August, 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, as I understand it, the Transformational Solar Array is merely a test that will be flown on Dart, using a small section on its ROSA. I do not believe this warrants a separate article. Remember, ROSA is the structure and deployment technology (built by Deployable Space Systems, now Redline after the company was purchased). The solar cells are integrated by other companies...for iROSA it is Spectrolab, and for Dart it is JHUAPL. I would suggest that TSA should not be mentioned in the ROSA article, but included instead on the Dart article. Redirects (such as iROSA, ISS Roll Out Solar Array, and Transformational Solar Array) can be created or modified to point to the specific subsections within an article.
Some links of potential interest:
— Huntster (t @ c) 20:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Is that just a experiment only or in future it has possibilities of having implemented on the whole rosa panel or as a new type of solar panel. If it's just a experiment then you are right it must be then kept only on dart not even on rosa article Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, while it is entirely possible the test will be successful and spin off into a whole solar array, this is not guaranteed. This test involves a tiny section of one of the Dart solar arrays. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:05, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

questions on media files rules

hi i am chinakpradhan, could you please tell which my edits were deleted so quickly, i am in india not usa or uk so i was sleeping at that time thats why i cant react, i might have resolved the problem of some of them as you might see in my earlier deletion edits. that was unfair done to me. please give a reason why you deleted them so quickly. see how brutally you deleted them. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AChinakpradhan&type=revision&diff=575514413&oldid=574354677

Chinakpradhan (talk) 07:23, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, I'm sorry, but based on your uploads you do not understand copyright and what makes an image acceptable for upload to Commons. Let me try to identify several issues. First, NASA publishing an image on their website does not mean it is automatically without copyright and okay to upload. As a rule of thumb, unless the credit line starts with "NASA/" (for example, NASA/JPL or NASA/Tony Landis), do not upload it. You uploaded several images from private organisations like Boeing. The copyright belongs to that private organisation. Second, SpaceX is not NASA. Images belonging to them are not automatically free from copyright, and images of their property are not automatically free from copyright. We have a SpaceX license template because special permission was obtained years ago to upload images from their website's image gallery and from their Flickr account. They no longer allow images from their Flickr account to be used unless specifically marked, and they no longer have a proper image gallery to upload from. Images taken from before their changes are okay, but nothing afterward. So, do not upload SpaceX-created images. Third, images created by Roscosmos are copyrighted. {{PD-RU-exempt}} only applies to the types of Russian federal government works specifically mentioned in that template: official legal documents, state symbols and flags, traditional folk art, news reports, and "facts" (data that is purely informational, like databases and figures). Photographs and creative works are not acceptable.
To specific actions you've taken: Do not upload different images under the same file name, even to "fix" a copyrighted or otherwise unacceptable file. There are nuances, like minor cropping and such, but rule of thumb is to always upload different images under different filenames, and request bad uploads to be deleted. That said, images like this, this, and this, which are works of NASA and intended to be kept up to date, are okay to be overwritten. Also, simply because an unacceptable image exists on Commons does not necessarily mean it is correct. It may have simply not been caught yet by another editor.
To specific cases. File:Side View of ASOG (left) and 2nd JRTI (right) docked to Cape Canaveral in July 2021.jpg is a work by a private news organisation, NASASpaceFlight.com. It is not a work by NASA. File:A ShortFall Of Gravitas (ASOG) Droneship.gif was an image by Trevor Mahlmann, a private citizen, which means the copyright belongs to him. Now it is an image by SpaceX (and I guarantee you not photographed by Elon Musk himself, and even if it was it would still be a copyright violation), which as mentioned above is not mean it is free from copyright. File:Spacecraft 2 in preparation for OFT-2.jpg is a work by Boeing, and it does not identify its source. Not only that, but you've given it a Creative Commons license out of nowhere...what made you do that? File:Just Read The Instructions (Marmac 303) before Jason-3 mission.jpg is another work by SpaceX.
Does any of this make sense? Please let me know if you have any questions. Copyright is a very nuanced and tricky thing. And the above notes don't even take into consideration things like derivative works, freedom of panorama, threshold of originality, copyright of works of art, and a host of other considerations. You should read Commons:Licensing, Commons:Copyright rules by territory, and the sub-links on those pages for a somewhat better understanding. — Huntster (t @ c) 11:38, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for all these advices and firstly thank you for replying. I will keep these in mind. Just I had a question that is English Wikipedia media fair use policy following these same laws or not applicable if I upload a image of roscosmos like any of the nauka images under non free image rationale. As if allowed then I may think to upload some of these images that are much useful (not all or less valued ones) to just be used on English wiki. The fair use policy was useful for me in some cases. Please help if you know about rules in fair use and especially on the some important topics from the ones mentioned above. Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, fair use has its own challenges, but may be an option. In particular, Fair Use is only permitted if no free alternative is available or possible to obtain. So, if it could be photographed freely, then Fair Use is not permitted. Fair Use is also not permitted if the image is merely decorative. It must serve to further the encyclopedic discussion of the topic. Another point is that a non-free image on Wikipedia must use the smallest possible portion of the work possible, both in resolution and portion. The standard is no more than 100,000 pixels total. Check out en:Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information on how the English Wikipedia deals with this, but keep in mind that different language Wikis may have slightly different rules.
Given what I wrote earlier, would you mind if I went ahead and removed the non-free images you've uploaded, or would you prefer I put them through the normal deletion processes? — Huntster (t @ c) 03:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
For me the highly priortized ones are nauka mission logo(of immense important), the main asog pic and jrti before Jason mission pic (no problem if it remains on Wikimedia) and crs 22 roll out(my self created page). Others may be useless or get a free form by nasa in any form. If others are deleted I have no problem but these images I like to be published in fair use on wikipedia Chinakpradhan (talk) 03:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Go forward to delete others. I understand their need to be deleted due to copyright rules so delete them Chinakpradhan (talk) 03:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, so let's look at each image in turn.
File:Spacecraft 2 in preparation for OFT-2.jpg: easily replaceable by a free version, like File:Boe OFT-2 in preparation.jpg.
File:A ShortFall Of Gravitas (ASOG) Droneship.gif: non-free and potentially replaceable by a freely licensed image. Doesn't matter that one might not yet exist.
File:Side View of ASOG (left) and 2nd JRTI (right) docked to Cape Canaveral in July 2021.jpg: same as above.
File:Just Read The Instructions (Marmac 303) before Jason-3 mission.jpg: can be replaced by anything in Category:ASDS Just Read the Instructions (2015). No, they aren't of the same composition, but for Fair Use purposes that doesn't really matter.
Nauka logo: unless some kind of critical commentary can be made in the article prose about the logo itself, it would be considered decorative and thus not eligible for Fair Use.
I'm not sure what the CRS-22 Roll Out image is referring to.
— Huntster (t @ c) 05:13, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Katlinegrey#Nauka_module_mission_logo for nauka mission logo may a response can come and also i told ericsoares 3 to ask her
File:Side View of ASOG (left) and 2nd JRTI (right) docked to Cape Canaveral in July 2021.jpg this is useless
crs 22 roll out is cargo dragon c209Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, um, why would you ask others to upload a logo to Commons which I just got through saying was not acceptable here? Which specific image are you referring to with "CRS-22 Roll Out"? — Huntster (t @ c) 09:28, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I told them because they are Russian media reporters and media knows everything they only posted nauka updates and nauka module roll out images Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Erick_Soares3?markasread=39867671&markasreadwiki=commonswiki Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Eric Soares 3 told me that if I was wrong then all soyuz mission patches are wrong Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
How are they on Wikimedia Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_MS-20#/media/File%3ASoyuz_MS-20_Mission_Patch.png
Take this example you placed all my efforts in graves. See this patch has a link similar to the one I gave for nauka logo Chinakpradhan (talk) 15:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Make attempts to revive all the image lost under this thing. Image addition to Wikimedia or Wikipedia is harder than just blame that image under a deletion tag and later being just deleted by a user Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
All was just to create more chaos in the already too elongated nauka English Wikipedia page Chinakpradhan (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan: yes, I would suggest that the existing patches are not permissible under {{PD-RU-exempt}}. That said, given the population of Category:PD-RU-exempt, editors have taken an overly liberal view of what the law permits, and I do not have the energy to fight it. So, do whatever you want regarding the Nauka logo. As for what else you wrote, I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say. — Huntster (t @ c) 22:37, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
my point of view is that first blame must be given to soyuz patches and a all wikipedia or wikimedia discussion must be held on soyuz patches whether they also must be on wikimedia or not. since my thinking says that all soyuz patches resemble equal meaning as given by nauka patch that is to be a mission to iss. soyuz send crew and nauka is sendig a module
if you like, the thing i said in the first line of must be done. as per the last line you said i mean all thing i said is in reference to the patch only. i am presently focused on it.
all other things are not to be discussed now.
and as per crs 22, i will think on it since though it is on flickr but it is non commercially liscenced. here's the link https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/51225271661/
or else i have abetter solution to end up wikimedia conflicts
Chinakpradhan (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, ah, thank you, that link for CRS-22 was what I was wondering about. Unfortunately no, it cannot be uploaded to Commons because of its license.
As for the patches, like I said, I am not going to fight a battle to delete so many of them. I have too much real life stuff to deal with that I cannot devote time to it. If you would like the Nauka patch restored, please file a request at Commons:Undeletion requests. Present your argument as to why it should be kept on Commons. I cannot unilaterally restore it as I was not the one who deleted it. Filing there also allows others to comment on the situation, and that may also encourage a larger conversation about the Soyuz patches as well. If you need any help, just ask. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
ya thats why i dont much about CRS-22 much. Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
what to do i never filed a undeletion request so dont know how to do that. but is it good to re-upload the file i have all the resources needed to upload that file. which is good as per your thoughts.
i filed one but dont how much effective it isencouraging administartors to restore the file.
Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Nauka_Module_Launch_Mission_Patch.jpg Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, it's quite easy. Click on the "Gadget" button, fill in "File:Nauka Module Launch Mission Patch.jpg" in the "File name or URL" field, click add, then write out your detailed reason in that field, and then click the "Request Undeletion" button to finish. — Huntster (t @ c) 05:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, it would be far better if you explained, in summary and on that page, your reasoning for wanting the file restored. Make points, provide explanations, rather than directing reviewers to read through a lot of unrelated material. — Huntster (t @ c) 05:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thanksChinakpradhan (talk) 05:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
just one question i want to add this image https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ozo7xzn5WK2nNP4AWBYoCi.jpg that is 4th image https://www.space.com/space-station-pirs-module-deorbit-photos but thing is, is this inapplicable to wikimedia commons since image credit says ESA/NASA–T. Pesquet. i want to confirm first. Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, oh that's a nice photo. Unfortunately, the rule for ESA is that it has to explicitly be released under a free license. See, for example, this image link, where it specifically is released under a CC-by-sa-3.0 license. Without that explicit release, it cannot be uploaded to Commons. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
ok i will follow this ruleChinakpradhan (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

BTW, I needed to ask if images shown in nasa live stream for nauka docking free lisenced by nasa or is under that logo controversial {{PD-RU-exempt}} I want to end the topic with its images after docking. If it is under that lisence, please tell. Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ISS-65_Pirs_docking_compartment_separates_from_the_Space_Station.jpg#mw-jump-to-license Take this file as example Chinakpradhan (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, based on the camera angle of File:ISS-65 Pirs docking compartment separates from the Space Station.jpg, it appears to be taken from a Truss segment. So, {{PD-USGov-NASA}} would be the correct license template since it is a NASA-owned camera. There is the possibility the camera was located on the JEM Exposed Facility, but I'm almost certain those cams are also owned by NASA. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

hi Huntster just asking do we have times magazine lisence.Chinakpradhan (talk) 08:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, sorry, this literally just popped up for me. A license to use Time Magazine images? Definitely no. All work by Time is copyrighted non-free. — Huntster (t @ c) 10:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

can you teach me how to insert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:9TeamBracket into a page, that is the coding.Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:10, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, I've never seen nor used that template before, so I couldn't tell you. Apparently it uses Module:Team bracket, so you might look there for clues to its usage. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
hi Huntster, i made the infobox i thought of putting the structure diagram while doing that i found out the links that hold external images which i have put below infobox as you can see at the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prichal_(ISS_module) . i want to ask can they not be by a non free fair use images till free images are published. i had read that whenever you upload a non free image they ask that is the non free image not available in text version. does this rule comes into play here. i want to know.Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Chinakpradhan, honestly, I think the link you added to russianspaceweb.com is probably sufficient to provide illustrations on Prichal until free images are available. The ones added in the External Media template likely fail the criteria for inclusion since they do not credit their original source. Not only are they non-free, but they are not properly attributed since nasaspaceflight.com did not create them. I think they should be removed. — Huntster (t @ c) 20:02, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Then why the same happens in Russian orbital service station. I saw that and did it. So then is that also wrong Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

And can you voice in this discussion Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah sorry this one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2021_August_14#File:Nauka_Module_Launch_Mission_Patch.jpg Chinakpradhan (talk) 03:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, I expressed an opinion based on how it was implemented in the Prichal article. If the ROS article similarly fails, then yes, it should be removed as well.
As for the discussion, I will not be convinced that non-free logos should be permitted in any way on Wikipedia, because they do not add anything substantive nor do they provide any discussion within the article, so they automatically fail the Fair Use criteria. I'm a hard-core believer in only using freely licensed material. I do not believe Fair Use should be allowed, period, but I recognize that others do not share this opinion. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:16, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

i was reading roscosmos site but i got confused in this page http://en.roscosmos.ru/20744/ can you explain. i was finding points that can help my protest against nomination of nauka logo for deletion.Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, which part specifically were you not understanding? If it is this part, "are available for free use and distribution for purposes, that do not mean a direct or indirect commercial and political benefit-sharing", that means that Roscosmos materials are free to use if the application is not commercial or political in nature, and that if the application is commercial or political then the user must obtain explicit permission from Roscosmos before use. Essentially, Roscosmos is claiming full copyright and All Rights Reserved on their work. In other words, by a strict reading of that page, Roscosmos material is not Commons-compatible, since we require unrestricted licensing. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Yah you got the right point, that I wanted to know. Thanks for explaining. By understanding this, I got to find that many are breaking the law and possibly me too. I will not break this law again. Thank you Chinakpradhan (talk) 02:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Maxar is a public agency so can i upload it's satellite imagery to commons Chinakpradhan (talk) 16:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

© was seen in this link https://www.space.com/amp/spacex-starship-super-heavy-satellite-photo , the link from where I want to put the images. Is that free creative Commons license logo Chinakpradhan (talk) 16:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, I'm not sure where you got that idea. Maxar is a private company that sells satellite images to customers. Nothing they produce is licensed in a way that can be uploaded to Commons. Please again read Commons:Licensing for examples of what Creative Commons licenses are acceptable here and what their icons look like. © simply means "copyrighted", and is not an indication of an image's license. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:34, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Maxar Technologies tells in type section of infobox that it's a public agency. That's where I thought about taking it's imagery Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Chinakpradhan, read the link next time. It means it is a publicly traded company on the stock market. — Huntster (t @ c) 05:04, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh I see. Thank you Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:30, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Huntster/Archive_10&oldid=592375891"