![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
A photo posted on September 13, 2019, and removed September 15, 2019, was clearly a copyright violation, as it was taken on private property far from public sight and without owner's permission.
We have rules here. You've broken WP:3RR. Your pseudo legal claim doesn't have any basis that I can see. I doubt it would have any basis if you were the landowner, which I doubt that you are. What you can do is a) ask an admin to review your case - they'll likely turn you down flat, b) ask at WP:ANI to remove the photo - they'll debate this for a week and then likely decide that there's nothing they can do about it, c) ask an admin at Commons to delete the photo - ditto, e) ask Wikimedia Legal to remove the photo - they'll turn you down flat.
Now there are good reasons why Wikipedia and Commons cannot police claims of trespassing here (see the comment I left at the photo's talk page on Commons). There are also good reasons why people would not want to remove one of this photographers photos. If I recall correctly he is an older gentleman - a true gentleman - who has uploaded about 6,000 photos and would never knowingly trespass or break the law in any way. I hope this helps. Smallbones( smalltalk) 01:03, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:21, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
(?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$)
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—
cyberbot II
NotifyOnline
01:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I have removed essentially all of the "threats" material, because it appears to be WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. There's no indication any of the sources (except the single one I left) mentions any relationship between the reservoir project and the farm. It appears one editor has been reading maps and reports to infer how the project might affect the farm. Even if there's something tying the two together, all the stuff about the decision-making process for the project is grossly WP:UNDUE. If any of this material is going to be restored, I'm going to insist on quotations from sources establishing a link to the subject of this article. E Eng 14:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
A photo posted on September 13, 2019, and removed September 15, 2019, was clearly a copyright violation, as it was taken on private property far from public sight and without owner's permission.
We have rules here. You've broken WP:3RR. Your pseudo legal claim doesn't have any basis that I can see. I doubt it would have any basis if you were the landowner, which I doubt that you are. What you can do is a) ask an admin to review your case - they'll likely turn you down flat, b) ask at WP:ANI to remove the photo - they'll debate this for a week and then likely decide that there's nothing they can do about it, c) ask an admin at Commons to delete the photo - ditto, e) ask Wikimedia Legal to remove the photo - they'll turn you down flat.
Now there are good reasons why Wikipedia and Commons cannot police claims of trespassing here (see the comment I left at the photo's talk page on Commons). There are also good reasons why people would not want to remove one of this photographers photos. If I recall correctly he is an older gentleman - a true gentleman - who has uploaded about 6,000 photos and would never knowingly trespass or break the law in any way. I hope this helps. Smallbones( smalltalk) 01:03, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:21, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
(?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$)
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—
cyberbot II
NotifyOnline
01:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I have removed essentially all of the "threats" material, because it appears to be WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. There's no indication any of the sources (except the single one I left) mentions any relationship between the reservoir project and the farm. It appears one editor has been reading maps and reports to infer how the project might affect the farm. Even if there's something tying the two together, all the stuff about the decision-making process for the project is grossly WP:UNDUE. If any of this material is going to be restored, I'm going to insist on quotations from sources establishing a link to the subject of this article. E Eng 14:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)