Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Hk1946typhoonsignal.jpg

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Image:Hk1946typhoonsignal.jpg

The is no proof that the said image was created in 1946, hence no basis to claim PUBLIC DOMAIN --Gisling 21:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC).

• Keep No proof to the contrary either. This is a former featured picture at zh.wiki, a lot of people have seen it and nobody has raised an objection till now. -Nard 20:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
  •  Comment No, it's the other way around. It's the responsibility of the uploader to prove that the image is free. Being featured or not is irrelevant for the purposes of commons (moreover, people at wikipedias choosing a featured images should carefully assess the licensing information of the image before featuring it). --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 22:08, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This image can be found under the domain of the Hong Kong Observatory[1] and quite possibly in its other publications. But the original uploader claimed that the source of the image was from Ming Pao, instead of HKO. I think it is far not rigorous enough for him to assume that the authorship of the image is unknown. Before having verified that this image is really in PD, deletion is the safe solution.--Quarty 04:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This image can be found in many other publications (Ming Pao is just one of the examples) in Hong Kong, so at least it is a de-facto PD image. Also, there is also no evidence that it was created within the past 50 years. -- Hargau 15:17, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, quite dangerous to keep this. HKO has claimed that the images in the website (including this image originally from the offical site) is copyrighted. Unless the image is proved to be created in 1946. --CDIP No.150 repair meter 18:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment http://www.weather.gov.hk/wservice/tsheet/pms/his_tc_station_e.htm There is no evidence that this photo has been taken over 50 years ago --✉Hello World! 02:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • yep, the actual time is not mentioned in the description. --CDIP No.150 repair meter 10:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment Did anyone tried to contact HKO to ask for a permission to use this photo? --H12345679hk 12:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. It is hard to decide the photo is PD or not.Since the photo is both used in English and Chinese Wiki. If the final decision is delete, I suggest that load back the photo to the servers of these two wikis to instead of deleting the photo.--J.Wong 23:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment: As I have suggested in zh wikipedia, I strongly recommend someone to contact HKO to check the history of the photo. If HKO declares that the photo was taken more than 50 years ago, we can keep it in commons. If it can be kept in commons, the photo can get back the featured status in zh wikipedia. On the other hand, if HKO declares that the photo was taken less than 50 years ago, the photo should be uploaded to zh wikipedia for fairuse only, and lose its featured status. -- Kevinhksouth 06:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - It's pretty clear that the picture was taken in action i.e. under real cyclone conditions. The first time Sign No. 10 was hoised after 1946 was in 1957 (see HKO website). Neither the quality of the photograph nor the look of the people's dresses make it probably that the photograph was taken in 1957 or later. --Matthiasb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep－Tszkin(Call Me) 10:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep-蘇州宇文宙武 16:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep--MM21 04:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Clear case of coyright violation. This picture was taken after 1973, hence still copyrighted The HK government weather service website stated that "Since 1973, the current system comprising 1, 3, 8 NW, 8 SW, 8 NE, 8 SE, 9 and 10 has been in use Figure 2。 This picture 2 is exactly the picture in question. It is clearly NOT PD. Further, the said website

claimed "Copyright Notice The content available on this website, including but not limited to all text, graphics, drawings, diagrams, photographs and compilation of data or other materials are protected by copyright. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is the owner of all copyright works contained in this website. Any reproduction, adaptation, distribution, dissemination or making available of such copyright works to the public is strictly prohibited unless prior written authorization is obtained from the Hong Kong Observatory." --Gisling 10:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Not correct. "Since 1973, the current system comprising 1, 3, 8 NW, 8 SW, 8 NE, 8 SE, 9 and 10 has been in use refers to the change within the numbers 8. The sign in question - number 10 - wasn't changed sicne the 1930s. Hence the statement does not state anything. --213.155.231.26 20:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Deleted by ABF: Deleted because "Copyright violation". using TW

• Objection: The reason provided by Gisling is not correct. He has misunderstood the text wrriten on that page. The truth is explained by 213.155.231.26 already: "After year 1973" is refered to the system comprising 8 NW, 8 SW, 8 NE & 8 SE, NOT the photo itself nor typhoon signal No. 10. I don't know why the admin in Wikicommons just listen to one person without listening to others' opinion. -- Hargau 10:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

 Comment: Picture taken from [2] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Objection:Same as Hargau. And I would like to send a condemn to ABF that deleted the photo without any considerations.--華德禹 11:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
• Objection per Hargau. It is unwisely to delete the photo so quickly without verifying the evidence claimed by anyone. -- 218.103.134.40 14:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

 Comment: Verifiable FACT :Picture taken from [3] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Objection:Same as Hargau.--218.102.204.130 14:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

 Comment: Verifiable FACT :Picture taken from [4] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Objection: Same as above. --Minghong 15:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
• Objection: From the above comments, the "evidence" of deletion has been proofed false by the Wikipedians from Hong Kong. That "evidence" was provided on 11 March, and the deletion was only one day later. I deeply doubt whether the deletion was done too quickly, and not enough time was provided for discussion. -- Kevinhksouth 01:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

 Comment: Verifiable FACT :Picture taken from [5] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Objection: Same as above. -- Yuying 05:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• Objection: Same as above. --Moddlyg 07:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• Objection: Same as above.--Orangemoon 08:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
  • None of the above have proof beyong doubt that the said picture was not from the copyrighted HK www.weather.gov.hk website, an outright act of copyright violation, in direct violation of wikepedia rule "Note! Copyright violations will be deleted! . To this day, the original uploader still cannot provide proof of the the picture was obtained from Ming Bao with a the year month date of the said paper on which this picture was supposedly published, or show us a written permission from HK weather service station. That is the key violation. As to whethere the picture post 1973 or not, that is only my opinion, not evidence. My evidenece is that the picture was under copyright protection, one hundred "objections" cannot change this FACT -- Gisling 09:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC).
    • Comments: From WiseNews search, according to the date of the photo (23-9-2006), there is a news article in Ming Pao titled "百年前丙午風災釀1.5萬人死 珍貴圖片下周海事博物館展出" ("Typhoon in 1906 caused 15,000 people dead; Precious pictures will be exhibited in Maritime Museum next week" in English), which is about an exhibition about photos of the effect of various typhoons in Hong Kong in the past. There is a section called "懸掛10號風球" ("Hoisting typhoon signal No. 10" in English) talking about how to hoist typhoon signal No.10 from a long time ago. Although the article in WiseNews is in text-only format, it can be believed that the text in that section is a description of this photo. Therefore, this picture should be obtained from Ming Pao. (Unforunately, WiseNews database can be only accessed through the public libraries and universities in Hong Kong.) -- 158.182.99.167 10:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• Objection: Same as above. Photos which have been taken more than 50 years ago by unknown authors should be considered as PD. See Template:PD-HK for further details. Many people do not know that, so they wrongly claim the copyright. Such copyright claim should be invalid. - Wikikids 11:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC): Comment: Verifiable FACT :Picture taken from [6] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Objection: Same as above. --Ky2029 12:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

 Comment: Verifiable FACT :Picture taken from [7] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Objection for both deleting this photo and the maladministration shown here.--Clithering 14:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
• Objection! What a shame for the deletion.--219.79.216.104 14:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

 Comment: Verifiable FACT :Picture taken from [8] clear violation of copyright notice]--Gisling 08:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Note: Pls refer to this page for undeletion request. Thanks. Stewart~惡龍 15:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
  • The above discussion has been copied to that page for reference. --202.40.137.199 06:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Image:Hk1946typhoonsignal.jpg

should be discussed by the whole comunity, see also here abf /talk to me/ 18:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete unless GOOD sourcing for date of picture is found. -Nard 18:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
• I've sent off email to the HKO asking for more information. This image is borderline useless if we don't know when it was, never mind the licensing considerations - so even if we get "proof" that its PD I'd stay delete unless we get the date.--Nilfanion 21:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
• Besides the date that the picture was taken, the date that the picture was first published is also important because according to [9], Government copyright in a work continues to subsist- (a) until the end of the period of 125 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was made; or (b) if the work is published commercially before the end of the period of 75 years from the end of the calendar year in which it was made, until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which it was first so published.--Quarty 06:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Still no proof as to date, deleting. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)