Talk:Diving the Cape Peninsula and False Bay/SAS Fleur

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search


A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

This has been resolved. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 03:29, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Resolved how? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
commons:special:diff/335787824 ARR8 (talk | contribs) 05:32, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
But like Commons, this site doesn't use watermarked images. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
The watermark wasn't the issue, but the perceived lack of permission. They'll keep a watermarked image around as long as a project is using it. If we were to remove it, they may, also. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 17:34, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
But I'm saying the watermark is an issue on Wikivoyage. See Wikivoyage talk:Image policy#Policy against using images with watermarks, etc. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:01, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, remove it if you want, or take some action. I didn't add the image, User:Pbsouthwood did. All I know is that Commons thought we were using a copyrighted image, and I (and User:Mx. Granger, on the other one) linked them the permissions page. Anything beyond that is another matter entirely, but the images are no longer up for speedy deletion on Commons. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 02:16, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
I don't want to act unilaterally. User:Pbsouthwood, is there any possibility of substituting images without watermarks, or of removing the watermarks with the photographer's permission? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks User:ARR8, Can I assume that other images that were uploaded in the same batch from the same photographer with the same permission that were deleted for the same reason will also be restored?
User:Ikan Kekek, I am not aware of other images of that quality available for those sites. They are quite deep and not all camera housings are rated for those depths. Also the visibility is usually poor, so what we have is as good as it is likely to get unless we get lucky. If anyone insists, they can be removed, but it will not improve the article. The photographer is not a professional, just quite good and able to afford good equipment. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:10, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
I don't think so. The bot only notified us about two, and the Commons community probably didn't make the connection between those and the rest. Presumably an undeletion request would have to be put in to restore them. I count three removed this month from the edit history at your gallery, are there more? ARR8 (talk | contribs) 06:30, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
I think that while watermarks are disturbing, excluding photos with watermarks is not a core Wikivoyage principle, so in a special case, if they're really important and taking them out would really remove crucial information for divers, I won't insist. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)