User talk:Rubin16

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day. The latest archive is located at Archive/2024.

Rubin16 is taking a long wikibreak and will be back on Commons when things are back to normal in Russia

Archives /2008-2010 /2011 /2012 /2013 /2014 /2015 /2016 /2017 /2018 /2019 /2020 /2021 /2022

Commons:Deletion requests/Files related to the Bangkok Gold Line uploaded by User:Nord794ub

Comments after final resolution. I cannot agree with your decision. I clearly understand your opinion. In real life in Thailand many governmental agencies, scientists etc. uses copyrighted materials like Google Map images. I understand that GMap Images are not free worldwide. And we cannot use this images here. I saw works of thai scientists with clear copyright - near zero illustrations. We are not real specialists in copyright rules here in Commons. That is why we use national copyright law. (Thai law with our case) After that we delegate responsibility to the author of the document. We do not need to make investigation about every sentence and every image, If Thai law suppose its data free to use. Otherwise we need to check every image published under this license. And the second point: you use "inductive reasoning". I think it is prohibited in Wikipedia, and may be prohibied in Commons. Let me illustrate: "the report obviously includes copyrighted material, so, we can't be sure that other images in the report are free, too". Let me continue. This report uses copyrighted material, then we cannot be sure about other reports. We delete media in Commons from all thai reports. Let me continue. Thai gavernmental reports uses copyrighted materials, then we cannot be sure about reports from other countries. We delete media in Commons from all governmental reports. When should we stop? If Thai law suppose this images to be free, let believe it, шт default. If we have particular claim about one image (for example with google map image on background) let discuss exactly it. I still think that it is not good idea to delete image made by order of thai government, and published free by thai government according thai law. Nord794ub (talk) 09:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for writing and for understanding. Unfortunately, the basic principle is the opposite: we don't trust the author who claims that their media is free when we see the direct evidence to contradict that. And it leads to different levels of disbelief: sometimes, some agencies/websites erroneously include some protected material and we just delete it on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes, they post so many copyrighted materials that we start to complete deny their contributions and block all their materials without spending time to find out some free and valuable copies. This happens, for example with Flickr users (for example, see blacklisted accounts - Commons:Questionable Flickr images), with various license templates for the whole content of the website, when we delete the whole bunch of files when we see an intolerable portion of copyvios in it. rubin16 (talk) 14:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

• I do not like this idea. I think sometime benefits from file more important than questionable cleanliness of its copyright. If Commons policy so strict, you can delete these files also:
• ThaiParliamentDusitComplex aerial view.jpg
• ThaiParliamentDusitComplex second stage.jpg
• ThaiParliamentDusitComplex main building front view.jpg
• ThaiParliamentDusitComplex second stage corner view.jpg
• I really do not remember the source of it. I am sure - from governmental agencies of Thailand. But do not remember exact adress. Nord794ub (talk) 03:53, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Sound Logo

Hello,

I am messaging you because a contest for a sound logo for Wikimedia is being developed and your opinion as a Wikimedia Commons admin is appreciated. My team would like to know if it is possible for the top finalist sound logos in the contest to have attribution temporarily hidden from public view until all the votes are final? The idea is to let the public judge the sound logo contestants based on the merit of the logo, not the person or people who made it. Again, any feedback is appreciated.

Thank you,

VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)