User talk:Jameslwoodward
Add topicThis is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikimedia Commons, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Commons itself. The original talk page is located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jameslwoodward
My formal name is James L. Woodward, but I prefer to be called "Jim"
Commons:Deletion requests/File:John Nilson in Lumonics booth at a New York laser conference showing the first commercially available high energy TEA laser (002).jpg
[edit]Hi Jim,
Not sure why, considering I've always been setup for being notified by email of changes to Wikipedia/Wikimedia pages I've worked on, but, for some reason, I never received one for the 19 Feb 2024 deletion request for (and subsequent 9 Apr 2024 actual deletion of) the above file. So it is only because I happened to check on the history of the (sole) article that referenced it (Lumonics), that I noticed this deletion had taken place.
Although I was the one to originally add the reference to this photo to the article back on 9 Nov 2022, it was actually the wife, Lenore Nilson, of the photo's subject, John Nilson, who uploaded and added the photo itself to Wikimedia. Although she's otherwise not at all a Wikipedia or Wikimedia editor, since she was the copyright holder, I nevertheless got her to create an account solely for the purposes of uploading the photo and, as far as I know, she did what she understood was necessary to detail the source and date for the photo, claim its copyright and grant permission for its usage (since I obviously had no right myself to be able to do so).
As a result, neither of understand why it would warrant being deleted. Is there no change history for deleted photos that would allow she and I to confirm what exactly she originally entered for its details back then, so we can sort out and add whatever was missing and get the photo of her husband restored?
Let me know.
Thanks,
Robert Presto — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Presto (talk • contribs) 18:35, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.
The page history is:
- 18:50, 13 February 2024 . . Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk | contribs | block) 4,146 bytes (→Summary)
- 16:11, 13 February 2024 . . P199 (A) (talk | contribs | block) 4,157 bytes (Nominating for deletion)
- 17:27, 23 December 2022 . . P199 (A) (talk | contribs | block) 3,812 bytes (Kept per Commons:Deletion requests/File:John Nilson in Lumonics booth at a New York laser conference showing the first commercially available high energy TEA laser (002).jpg)
- 01:58, 14 November 2022 . . SchlurcherBot (talk | contribs | block) 4,155 bytes (Changed an entity: automatically modify structured data based on file information: date meta copyright license source creator)
- 15:08, 6 November 2022 . . Robert Presto (talk | contribs | block) 736 bytes (Nominating for deletion)
- 17:42, 27 October 2022 . . Lacbernard (talk | contribs | block) 393 bytes (Uploaded own work with UploadWizard)
For the first five edits (the bottom five of those listed above), the file page read (with special characters removed):
- date=15 sept 1971
- source=Own work
- author=Lacbernard
- permission=
- ==Licensing==
- {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}
The last editor, Richard Arthur Norton, for some unknown reason, changed the author to {{Anonymous}} and the source to {{Scan}} which doesn't seem right to me, but is the reason I deleted it as copyrighted lacking a license. If User:Lacbernard is his wife and if she was the actual photographer, then it can be restored. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
Yes, User:Lacbernard is his wife and was the actual photographer. Robert Presto (talk) 14:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
See File:John Nilson in Lumonics booth at a New York laser conference showing the first commercially available high energy TEA laser (002).jpg -- Robert, please add appropriate categories. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Thanks James. Should I pursue why Richard Arthur Norton changed the author to Anonymous or could you possibly do that? (I only became a Wikipedia edtior to do the Lumonics article (and possibly one other one sometime in the future). Robert Presto (talk) 23:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
File:K.B. Hallen 02.jpg
[edit]Regarding your deletion of File:K.B. Hallen 02.jpg, please note that according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Denmark#Freedom of panorama, the file should be deleted only if the sculpture is the chief motive (which it wasn't here). Hjart (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
- The sculpture is not de minimis in my opinion. Abzeronow (talk) 18:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
As I noted in the deletion comment, it was in use in two lists of public sculptures, so it appears that others share my opinion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
File:Head rugops reconstructiun musem.JPG
[edit]
Hello, While looking at some old DRs, I saw Commons:Deletion requests/File:Head rugops reconstructiun musem.JPG, where you judged the case as deleted, but marked the file as kept. I guess you probably meant to delete it? -- Asclepias (talk) 18:05, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Yes, I did, thank you. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Stop deleting images without authorization immediately.
[edit]"Despite there being no counterargument, Jameslwoodward went ahead and deleted it unilaterally. It was an extremely one-sided decision, made by someone who clearly has no understanding of Japan’s independent administrative institutions. Restore it immediately."It goes against Wikipedia’s principle of not resolving issues by force.
This user named Jim misinterpreted Japanese copyright law. Even though he admitted,
- “Apologies — I misread the Japanese law. Jim... (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:28, 3 June 2025 (UTC),”
he continues deleting numerous images as if it were a religion. He even deleted my own works... Is this person some kind of dictator? Is he the law on Wikimedia Commons? Unable to provide a valid, convincing, and law-based rebuttal, he unilaterally ends discussions and deletes images at will. Does this person have no respect for the law?[1]
カトーポッポー (talk) 13:59, 4 June 2025 (UTC)-修正カトーポッポー (talk) 14:14, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
I applied the law as Commons sees it. As noted, both images have clear and explicit copyright notices at the source. The DR had been open for ten days, which is three days longer than required. I did not delete any of your own works.
I also note that you continue to make false statements -- "Despite there being no counterargument" -- there were, in fact two other editors who believe that the files are copyright violations and no one that believes that somehow they are PD.
If you continue with the tone of your invalid arguments, breaking of Commons rules, and false accusations, you will probably be fully blocked from editing here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 4 June 2025 (UTC) . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
- Actually, it is Jim who continues to make false claims. He says that “two other editors” supported the deletion, but let’s be honest: one of them, Netora, is well-known for past disruptive behavior on Wikipedia talk pages and has even been warned for it. As for the rest — well, no matter how many friends or loyal followers agree with you, Japanese law doesn’t change to suit your convenience.
- You say, “I did not delete any of your own works,” as if that somehow addresses the point. It doesn’t. That’s a red herring — it dodges the real issue. Your actions violate the principle of resolving disputes through discussion, not force, and there was no valid counterargument provided.
- Moreover, the “copyright notice” you refer to did not exist in the original PDF files — a small but critical detail you seem to have missed. Jim appears to have confused the source documents with unrelated pages on the university's website. That’s a pretty serious mistake for someone making such definitive claims.
- And of course, let’s not forget: none of you seem to understand how Independent Administrative Institutions function in Japan. It’s astonishing that people so uninformed about the legal and institutional systems of the country in question are even in positions of authority here. It only exposes your lack of knowledge.
- Let’s be clear — you're not lawyers, and it’s painfully obvious that you don’t understand Japanese law. Perhaps, at the very least, you could try reading the actual Japanese copyright law as cited on Wikipedia — in its original form, not just vague summaries. And as homework, I strongly recommend you take a close look at Article 13 of the Japanese Copyright Act. It might be... illuminating.
- 静岡文化芸術大学は独立行政法人です。やはり、日本語が読めない時点で、削除依頼を出すのは荒らし行為なんですよね。
- この著作物は、日本国著作権法第十三条により、パブリックドメインの状態にあります。同条は、同法第二章の規定による著作の権利の目的となることができない著作物として、次の著作物を列挙しています。
- 一 憲法その他の法令
- 二 国若しくは地方公共団体の機関、独立行政法人（独立行政法人通則法（平成十一年法律第百三号）第二条第一項に規定する独立行政法人をいう。以下同じ。）又は地方独立行政法人（地方独立行政法人法（平成十五年法律第百十八号）第二条第一項に規定する地方独立行政法人をいう。以下同じ。）が発する告示、訓令、通達その他これらに類するもの
- 三 裁判所の判決、決定、命令及び審判並びに行政庁の裁決及び決定で裁判に準ずる手続により行われるもの
- 四 前三号に掲げるものの翻訳物及び編集物で、国若しくは地方公共団体の機関、独立行政法人又は地方独立行政法人が作成するもの
- カトーポッポー (talk) 00:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
Arbitrary deletion of DiePartei posters
[edit]It is completely unclear why around 30 posters have been deleted https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Die_Partei_(Reutlingen)#c-ToBeFree-20250308203000-Dulliman-20250225191100 Dulliman (talk) 02:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
As noted in the DR, we do not keep personal art from non-notable artists. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:46, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
I do not disagree with the substance of the close here since there was apparently a second architect who was not mentioned at the start of the discussion. I just wanted to point out that URAA does not apply since buildings of this era are not copyrightable in the US. Thus, there is no copyright which can be restored. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:43, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Right you are, thank you. I need to nail that into my brain. URAA does not apply before 95 years ago and before December 1, 1990 for architecture. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:38, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Logo del Movimiento Al Socialismo (Venezuela)
[edit]@Jameslwoodward:Buenas se puede publicar el logo de MAS (fundo en 1971),yo pienso que pasó al Dominio Público en EEUU como {{PD-US-no notice}} fue publicado en Venezuela en 1973 antes de que el Congreso en Venezuela derogó la ley de Derechos de Autor de 1963 en 1993 (ley actual),el logo fue expirado en Venezuela por leyes anteriores en 2023 (osea 2024) como {{PD-Venezuela-old}},el logo fue publicado en 1973 (https://www.pinterest.com/pin/100697741639038316/) sin noticia del copyright o simbolo como este ("©️"). AbchyZa22 (talk) 16:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
If you can show that it was published in the USA before 1989 with the permission of the copyright holder, then it can be kept on Commons. If that does not apply, then it will be under USA copyright until 1/1/2069. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:57, 15 June 2025 (UTC)